One of the biggest challenges we face is learning to deal with problems critically. What makes difficult situations even more complex is that we rarely look at them objectively — that is, we don’t ask, “What exactly happened?” Instead, we view them subjectively, focusing on two things: how the situation affected us, and what we think motivated the other person to act in a way that harmed us.
Especially when the impact on us is significantly negative, we tend to assume that the other person wanted to hurt us — that their intent was malicious. This assumption makes reconciliation extremely difficult. However, when we’re able to differentiate between these two dimensions — the reality of the impact and the perceived intent — we lay the foundation for meaningful reconciliation.
With this in mind, let’s look at two incidents in the Ramayana where mistakes occurred, and how the other party responded to them.
Consider the case of Vali and Sugriva. Sugriva felt deeply wronged. He believed Vali had deliberately abandoned him to die and even orchestrated his entrapment. This suspicion led him to break ties and go his own way.
But now let’s look at a more extreme case — that of Lord Rama. Rama, who was supposed to become the king of a powerful and prosperous kingdom, was exiled for 14 years. The sentence felt not only unjust but also degrading — as if he were a common criminal, being punished with a penalty just a step below capital punishment. And this life-altering decision was thrust upon him on the very morning he was to be crowned king.
Exile for Rama meant not just the loss of royal comforts, but also a life full of physical hardship, constant uncertainty, and the ever-present risk of danger and injury — and all this for 14 long years.
Compared to this, while Vali’s suffering was also sudden and unpleasant, Rama’s response to his own suffering was far more composed and exemplary.
Teachers’ Sanga at Gurukula Monday, 9th June – Gurukula – The Hare Krishna Primary School, located near Bhaktivedanta Manor, hosted a special Teachers’ Sanga (gathering) focused on spiritual growth and insight for educators. The highlight of the event was a talk by His Holiness Svayam Bhagavan Keshav Maharaj, who graciously accepted the invitation to speak Read More...
By Hemo Krsna dd On Sunday, 8th June, Nottingham’s Market Square hosted its second annual Ratha Yatra festival. Around 1,000 people came together to celebrate this joyful occasion, as Lord Jagannatha, Lord Baladeva, and Lady Subhadra once again graced the city with Their presence. The chariot, brought from London by HG Parasuram Prabhu, was beautifully Read More...
Imagine waiting your whole life for someone you’re not even sure will come. That was Shabari.
Every day, she cleaned her hermitage. Every day, she gathered berries. And every day, she waited for Rama.
Years passed. No word. No sign. But she never gave up.
When Rama finally arrived, her joy wasn’t in recognition—it was in readiness.
Leadership Lesson: Shabari teaches us that leadership is often built in obscurity. It’s not in headlines, but in habits. Not in grand events, but quiet devotion.
Preparation isn’t glamorous. But it’s sacred.
Takeaway for Today’s Leaders: Success doesn’t always knock with warning. Will you be ready when it does?
So, how should we present the concept of Varna, and how much should we emphasize it—especially when teaching the Bhagavad Gita or introducing Krishna consciousness to newcomers, particularly in the West?
There is always a tension in understanding which parts of the Gita are descriptive—that is, specific to the social and historical context of the time—and which are prescriptive, meant to be universally applied.
For instance, Krishna instructing Arjuna to fight a physical war is a descriptive part of the Gita. It may have been prescriptive for Arjuna, given his role as a Kshatriya in that context, but it’s not prescriptive for us today.
Now, regarding the Varna system—it does appear in various parts of the Gita: Chapter 2, Chapter 4, Chapter 18, and even indirectly in Chapter 16. So it’s certainly not an insignificant theme. But how central is it to the message of the Gita?
One way to look at it is that Varna is mentioned to emphasize Arjuna’s duty within the social order, as part of his service to Krishna. That would make the Varna system a contextual feature, not the core message.
If we examine the Gita more broadly, the message of Bhakti—devotional service—clearly transcends Varna-ashrama. Krishna states that anyone, regardless of Varna, can engage in Bhakti. Even more, Yoga is arguably the most emphasized concept in the Gita. Words like yoga, yogi, yukta, and yunjan appear far more frequently than karma, dharma, Bhagavan, or Brahman.
So, Krishna’s emphasis is on cultivating a transcendental consciousness while acting in the world. From this lens, we could reasonably argue that the Varna system is not central to the Gita’s core message.
Yet, in many traditional commentaries, and even in our modern-day teachings, we often stress Karma Yoga—especially as it relates to Varna-ashrama. This sometimes gives it more prominence than the Gita itself seems to.
Given this, even if we do wish to present the idea of Varna, we need to do so with nuance. There are at least three layers of complexity:
Correlation: There is the traditional Varna categorization, and then there is a person’s psychophysical nature today. Even in classical Dharma Shastra, there is a recognition of both prakriti (nature) and vikriti (distortion or deviation). A person may have a mix of dispositions—say, predominantly Kshatriya with some Brahminical traits.
Genealogy vs Nature: Today, we no longer have pure genealogical lines that align neatly with Varna identities. Many people embody blended qualities, and the categories don’t map cleanly anymore.
Modern Professions vs Traditional Varnas: Professions today rarely correspond directly to ancient Varna roles. I’ve heard strange examples—like calling a doctor a Brahmana because they heal, but a surgeon a Shudra because they work with the body. That’s absurd. Does more study make you fall from Brahmana to Shudra?
This raises a fundamental question: Is Varna determined by one’s nature or by one’s job? Today, many people’s jobs don’t align with their nature at all. It’s a messy picture, and oversimplification only leads to confusion.
So, my take is: don’t overemphasize it. Teach clearly and compassionately, and then move on.
The underlying principle of Varnashrama is to help people engage with the world in a way that is productive materially and supportive spiritually. That’s what matters most. How exactly that plays out today? It will vary case by case.
Therefore, we shouldn’t rigidly label someone as belonging to a particular Varna, or decide if someone is “suitable” for something based solely on this lens.
Ultimately, as Krishna says, everyone is on His path. So let’s focus on nurturing that inclusive, transcendental spirit.
Snana Yatra is one of the most sacred and visually delightful festivals of Lord Jagannatha, celebrated on Purnima (full moon) of the month of Jyestha. On this day, Lord Jagannatha, along with Lord Baladeva and Subhadra Devi, receive a grand ceremonial bathing (abhisheka).
Lord Jagannatha is non-different from Krishna, and His appearance in the wooden form is a divine mystery. The bathing ceremony is not merely symbolic—it’s an act of divine love, purification, and public mercy.
After Snana Yatra, Lord Jagannatha becomes externally unwell and enters a private chamber called Anavasara, during which He is not visible to the public until the Ratha Yatra festival.
Lord Jagannatha rests in seclusion, attended to with herbal preparations. Devotees meditate on the Lord’s transcendental separation from His devotees. It represents the mood of vipralambha (divine separation) that deepens the bhakti of the devotee.
I’ve been traveling across the world for the last ten years, speaking to people from diverse traditions, cultural backgrounds, and even religious backgrounds. While there can be many differences of opinion on various issues, there’s one truth everyone can agree on, a truth that can be summarized in three words: Life is tough.
Isn’t it? Whether we are wealthy or poor, popular or unknown, tall or short, fat or thin, educated or not so educated, life isn’t easy for anyone. Most often, when we consider the toughness of life, we tend to think of external troubles: a struggling economy, bad weather, or people causing us problems. These troubles undoubtedly exist.
However, one factor we often overlook is the significant trouble we bring upon ourselves. There’s something inside us that seems to work against us. I learned this lesson early in life. Since childhood, I’ve had a strong interest in language. One of my hobbies was picking up a dictionary and memorizing words, which helped me develop a fairly good vocabulary.
But as I grew up, I also had a bit of a temper. While having a bad temper is a problem, I discovered that having a bad temper and a good vocabulary is a deadly combination. Most people, when they get angry, become incoherent. They may scream, rant, or shriek, and while we can see they’re angry, they often appear to have lost control. We often don’t take seriously what a person says when they’re angry because they become incoherent. But if someone is articulate and well-spoken—not necessarily sweet-spoken, but someone who uses words precisely—those words can become viciously cutting swords. I noticed I was hurting a lot of people, even though I didn’t want to.
It was almost as if my own strength was being used against me. A good vocabulary is a strength, but I realized that instead of using this strength to connect with others, it was being used to alienate them. Our words can either form bridges that bring us closer to others, or they can become barriers, walls that separate us. I recognized that I was alienating people and needed to address this anger.
When I started reading the Bhagavad Gita in my college days, a particular verse spoke directly to me. I could personally relate to it because anger was genuinely hurting me and causing me to hurt others. This realization—that there’s something inside us that seems to work against us—is one everyone comes to sooner or later. Yes, life presents many problems, and while some problems come from outside, quite often, it’s our reaction that worsens them.
For example, someone might forget to get something important we need. Their forgetfulness is annoying and disturbing. But if we fly into a rage and speak something harsh and hurtful, what would have been a minor inconvenience for a few hours could result in words that scar the person for weeks or even years. In that sense, trouble is both external and internal.
Arjuna’s question in the Bhagavad Gita highlights this: “There is some force inside me which is making me act against my best interests. And it seems to be an extremely strong force.” This idea of an internal opposing force exists across history and geography, not just in ancient cultures but also in popular fiction. In modern society, people speak of “inner demons.” Today, people may not believe in literal demons, but they certainly believe in the idea of inner demons.
In one sense, you could say people may not believe in Krishna, but they have to believe in Maya. By Maya, I don’t necessarily mean a force that creates illusion, but rather something that makes us act against our own interests. These “inner demons” are a universal concept. Even in fictional works like Star Wars, there’s the idea of the “dark side.” In Indian movies or Native American traditions, there’s the concept of the “good dog and the bad dog.” This idea is everywhere: there is some force that seems to work against us.
Krishna is now going to equip Arjuna to deal with this inner force. But before we can deal with it, we need to recognize its presence. What I’m about to discuss will be summarized in a four-quadrant diagram. But before we go to the diagram, let’s read the next paragraph. Would you like to read, please?
Yes. So as I said, we may deny the existence of God. We could say that there is the power of Maya, the force of illusion. So we may accept that there is Maya and there is the power of Maya. Or we may reject its guidance, saying there’s no such thing as Maya, no such force of illusion that makes me act this way. Similarly, there is the power of Krishna. We may accept it—meaning we take the power of Krishna seriously—or reject it—meaning we don’t take it seriously, that it doesn’t matter.
Here’s a corrected and more polished version of the text:
So, broadly, our life story can be understood through these four quadrants, especially when we consider accepting the power of Maya. In many ways, our life story is the story of our encounters with temptation. In the West, “encounter” is quite common, but in India, it often implies confronting and destroying. However, in its general sense, “encounter” simply means to face something. How we deal with temptation fundamentally shapes our entire life.
For example, with the abundance of technology and gadgets available to children today, there’s immense potential for distraction and wasted time. This ultimately stems from the force of illusion. One significant impact of social media is that secondhand experience has become more important than firsthand experience, especially among teenagers. What happens is this: suppose someone attends a party, a festival, an outing, a hike, a trek, or any event, and they genuinely have a good time. But then they take photos, post them on social media—Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, whatever—and even if they had a wonderful time, if their photos don’t get enough likes, or if they get fewer likes than their friends’ photos, that whole experience can become worthless. The lived experience might have been wonderful, but if others don’t acknowledge it as wonderful, then it ceases to be wonderful for them. That’s why the acknowledgment of our experiences by others has become so crucial.
This highlights the idea of illusion. Illusion can manifest in how much we are affected by social media. People get caught in constant comparison, leading to depression in many young individuals due to incessant comparisons. Similarly, young men often get caught up in video gaming. I was completely hooked myself. I saw a cartoon once where a man tells his friend, “Yesterday, my broadband Wi-Fi went down, so I spent some time with my family. They seem like nice people.” It’s as if he doesn’t even know who they are!
Our entire lives, whether as students needing to study or professionals needing to work, can be consumed by social media, Browse ads, and endless consumption. There’s alcoholism, and there’s also “shopaholism,” the urge to “shop till you drop.” Historically, this meant physically going to malls and buying so many things that one would drop from exhaustion. Now, we don’t even have to leave our homes; we can just click on our phones and buy as many things as we want.
The point is, temptation is always present. Broadly speaking, our life story is shaped by how we face temptation. This isn’t just for someone who wants to live a life of devotion and understands that Maya will draw us away from Krishna. Maya will not only take us away from Krishna; it won’t even let us live happily on a material level. To whatever degree happiness is possible materially, even that will be taken away.
If we consider Krishna at the top, below that there is Sattva, then Rajas, and finally Tamas. Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas are like the gears of a car; a car in a particular gear functions in a particular way. Similarly, a mind infected by a particular mood functions distinctly. Maya, if we are at a higher level, will pull us downwards. If we are here, Maya will pull us here. So from Krishna, it will pull us to Sattva; from Sattva, it will pull us to Rajas; and from Rajas, it will pull us to Tamas. Even for people with no spiritual interest, the force of temptation is ever-present. Someone might be living a materially responsible life, then perhaps they get fired, can’t find another job, become depressed, and out of depression, start drinking. Losing a job is a problem, but becoming addicted to alcohol is a far bigger problem, isn’t it? So the force of temptation, the force of illusion—this Maya—is there for everyone, constantly dragging us down.
I mentioned that in this particular diagram, if we are to overcome the force of illusion, we need to take Maya seriously, and we need to take Krishna seriously. What does it mean to take Maya seriously? It means recognizing the need to fight against temptation. And if we understand and accept the power of Krishna, there is hope to fight.
Whatever our temptation might be—short temper, excessive shopping, gossiping—we all have different kinds of temptations that ensnare us. What happens with gossiping? We just keep talking, talking, talking. Generally, talking isn’t bad, but what we talk about can be. When does gossip often happen? The word “gossip” itself. Often, gossip happens when we “go for a sip.” We might be in the office, by the water cooler, drinking some water, and then we hear, “Oh, this happened to this person, this person did like this, this person did like that.” Or we visit our homes with friends, neighbors, relatives, and we’re all perhaps sipping chai, as is common in India. While Indian cuisine hasn’t gained as much traction in the West as Chinese cuisine, chai is very well-known. When I do Western outreach and speak to Westerners, I once took a group of about 25-30 Western yoga students on a tour to India for ten or fifteen days. My name is Chaitanya Charan, which is a very difficult name for most people to pronounce. Finally, one of the young women in the group said, “Chaitanya.” I said, “Okay, wonderful! You got my name. How did you get it?” She said, “I thought of ‘Tanya taking chai.'” In Sanskrit, there’s the idea of sandhi vigraha—separating a word into its constituents. I thought, “No acharya would have thought of this sandhi vigraha!” So now, I introduce myself to Western audiences as “Charan”; it’s much more straightforward for people.
Anyway, my point was that often, when we’re just sitting down to have chai, or herbal tea, or whatever, that’s when we might start gossiping. And sometimes, when we gossip, when does it generally happen? Two things have to align for gossiping to occur: first, we hear something we like (information that isn’t likable or interesting generally isn’t gossiped about), and second, we hear it about someone we don’t like. “Oh, wow! Now, in the public interest, I will tell this to everyone!” Sometimes, we gossip about someone, and that person somehow finds out, “Oh, this person spoke like this about me.” And then a good relationship turns cold. Or even when we are gossiping about someone, the other person might seem to enjoy the gossip, but they might be thinking, “Oh, today you are speaking like that about this person; tomorrow you may speak like that about me.”
What happens because of this is that there can be many different kinds of temptations, but the underlying idea is that there’s a part of us that knows this will cause harm, but we overlook it. So, if our life story is a story of dealing with temptation, I’ll discuss these four quadrants. We need to recognize that there is a force of illusion, and that this force works against us, hence the need to fight against it.
Generally speaking, if we consider these four quadrants, let’s start with quadrant two. If we don’t believe there’s a need to fight, nor do we have any hope in fighting—we don’t believe in Maya, and we don’t believe in Krishna—then what happens is we are simply dragged down. It’s like Srila Prabhupada says, “Some people go to hell, others happily go to hell.” This means they are doing things whose consequences they don’t even recognize or realize. So, we are effortlessly dragged down, meaning we aren’t even fighting against it, and we end up becoming degraded.
Now, if we recognize the power of Maya but don’t recognize the power of Krishna, this is where we often become hopeless. Why hopeless? For example, some people get addicted to something, try to give it up, can’t, try again, can’t, and eventually decide, “I give up the attempt to give up.” It’s like the British playwright Oscar Wilde said, “Giving up smoking is the easiest thing in the world. I’ve done it over a hundred times. And I can do it today, tomorrow, every day. But I give it up, but it does not give me.” It comes back again. So sometimes people just become hopeless, thinking, “You know, this conditioning is so strong, this attachment is so strong; I will never be able to give it up.” So, if we acknowledge that something is strong, that means we may not use the term Maya, but we are acknowledging the power of Maya. Acknowledging the power of Maya, but not acknowledging the power of Krishna, can lead to hopelessness.
It sounds like you’ve provided a transcript of a spiritual discourse. It’s already quite clear and well-structured, conveying a central message about acknowledging both the power of Krishna (divine grace/strength) and the power of Maya (illusion/temptation).
The speaker uses effective analogies (drinking and driving, cliff edge, Swiss cheese, diabetes, cancer) and examples from scripture (Yudhishthir, Ajamil, Ravan) to illustrate their points. The concept of “quadrants” is introduced to categorize different levels of acknowledgment of Krishna and Maya.
Here’s a slightly refined version that maintains the original meaning and conversational tone while enhancing flow and clarity in a few places:
Now, if we acknowledge Krishna’s power—yes, Krishna is all-powerful. Krishna can elevate me, purify me, liberate me; there’s no problem there. But if we don’t acknowledge the power of Maya, then what happens is we become careless.
Carelessness means thinking, “This is no problem.” In much of the Western world, for example, the idea is “drink, but don’t get drunk.” Is that possible? Yes, it’s part of the culture; people do that. But what happens is they may not get drunk for the majority of their lives. However, when something bad happens, and if drinking is their coping mechanism, then at that time, something might just push them over the edge.
It’s like someone who regularly goes to the edge of a cliff where the ground is slippery and there’s a huge fall. They regularly peer over and look down, and some people even like to take dangerous selfies there. They go, “I’ve done it many times; nothing has happened.” But what happens is sometimes they might be there and not notice that the ground is slippery. Suddenly, a sharp gust of wind comes, and they slip.
So, yes, we may think, “Okay, I’m pure enough. I’m strong enough. Krishna is strong enough.” We think that temptation isn’t a big problem. But then what may happen is we will get overcome. There’s this concept called Swiss cheese, where all the bad things that can happen align at the same time. It’s not just one worst-case scenario, but three or four happening simultaneously. Even a well-laid situation can get devastated.
I have a friend in the Indian army, and they’re still investigating what happened in Pahalgam. He was telling me that, at least right now, the understanding is that, like Swiss cheese, everything that could go wrong, went wrong. Sometimes it just happens like that. So, we can become careless to some extent. We may think it’s not going to affect me, but it can affect us.
Now, if we acknowledge the power of Maya AND the power of Krishna, then what happens is that we are careful, but we are also hopeful. There is care and there is hope. And when these two come together, this is where we truly become empowered—empowered to change for the better.
So, from whichever “quadrant” we may be in today, our session will discuss how we can get to this “quadrant four.” Let’s move on to the next paragraph. Who would like to read? Yes, please.
Indeed, almost every day, and sometimes many times within a single day, my own actions serve as evidence of the presence and power of this mighty enemy. Yes. Now, if we are not careful, if we are not alert, then we may not realize the problem.
For example, if somebody has a tendency to get angry, they may get angry several times a day. It might just be one harsh word, a little change of tone in their voice, or one aggressive gesture. When this happens, we may not even remember it at the end of the day, but whoever is affected by it will remember it. However, if we start recognizing that there is this enemy inside me that works against me, then we’ll become more alert. “Okay, what is happening here? How is it happening?”
If we consider there are bad people who do bad things, and there are good people who do good things. But here, what we are talking about is good people who end up doing bad things. So, if we consider Yudhishthir, the question often comes up: “Why did he gamble at all?” Was he so uncontrollable in his senses that he went about and gambled? No, he’s considered Dharma Raj (King of Righteousness). So, what happened to him?
Let’s go back to these four quadrants once again.
Quadrant 1: Neither acknowledges the power of Maya nor the power of Krishna. That means that person is happily and proudly under the clutches of illusion. The example of this would be someone like Ravan. Ravan was proud of his power. He was not fighting against his lust; he was fighting for his lust. He was traveling the world, conquering not just to gain power but to gain pleasure by dominating and exploiting others. He used all his power, cunning, cleverness, and deceptiveness to try to abduct Sita. Even when people warned him not to go against Ram, telling him he would be destroyed, he did not acknowledge that. So, if we don’t acknowledge the power of Maya nor the power of Krishna, we are proudly in illusion, and we just keep going downwards.
Quadrant 2: Acknowledges the power of Maya, but doesn’t acknowledge the power of Krishna. In this case, we are so caught in conditioning that we just keep getting dragged lower and lower. When this happens, a person just thinks, “Okay, this is just the way I am. This is the way I’m going to be.” They may acknowledge at times that the way they are is a bad situation, and it’s something they want to get out of. But they feel they just can’t change. So, they accept that, or they passively resign themselves to a life where they’re again and again just succumbing to illusion. They think, “Okay, this is what life is,” or “This is how whatever is controlling me—whether it is lust, or anger, or greed—is dominating and overpowering me.”
The example for this is Ajamil. If you consider Ajamil, he did not go out deliberately to look for some temptation. He just went out on a routine chore. And there, he saw something which completely agitated his mind. At that time, he tried to remember scriptural wisdom; he tried to recall it, but the attack of temptation was so strong, it just stayed in his mind. And that’s how he got dragged down—to a very, very serious degree. We’ll talk about Ajamil and how the power of Maya works, but let’s look at these examples to understand this point.
Now, I was talking about the example of Yudhishthir. Yudhishthir had great faith in Krishna. If you look at the Mahabharata, especially the commentaries, what exactly happened? Why would a virtuous person gamble like this?
There’s a bit of a background to it. After the Rajasuya Yajna was performed, Yudhishthir Maharaj came to Vyasadev, who had presided over the whole ceremony. He said, “I seek your blessings so that I can rule with peace and prosperity and lead all the citizens to their ultimate well-being.” Naturally, if any ceremony happens and goes well, we are happy. But Vyasadev was very grave. He said, “Oh, King, I see dark clouds in the future. I see that there will be a terrible war. And after that terrible war, then you will have a reign of prosperity.”
Yudhishthir became very grave. He thought, “Okay, I don’t want there to be a war.” So, he thought, “Why would this war occur?” Generally, wars occur not just when there are conflicts, but when there are unresolved conflicts. And why are conflicts unresolved? Because whoever is an authority who might resolve the conflict, that authority is not accepted. It’s like two people have a property dispute; they go to court. The court gives a particular verdict. If either or both sides don’t accept the verdict, what happens then? Then they’ll start fighting. It’s like when there’s a conflict and when the talking stops, the conflict doesn’t go away. When the talking stops, the fighting begins, doesn’t it? Talks may not be pleasant, but fighting is even more unpleasant.
So, he thought that wars occur because of unresolved conflicts. And unresolved conflicts, why do they happen? Because of rejected authority figures—those who might resolve the conflict, if they are not accepted, then it leads to conflict. So, he thought that in order to avoid wars, I will always accept whatever my authority figures tell me. And in his case, the authority figure was Dhritarashtra.
So, when Dhritarashtra called him for a gambling match, and Dhritarashtra called him through Vidura—it’s like two elders, two father figures, were involved—Yudhishthir thought, “I can’t say no.” Now, when they came to the gambling arena, he said to Duryodhana, “Why do you want to steal from me through gambling the wealth with which I want to serve society? I want to serve the government; I want to do good for everyone.” Duryodhana responded, “Who talked about stealing anything? We just want to have a friendly match.”
Then, unexpectedly, Duryodhana said, “Shakuni will play on my behalf.” That’s against the rules of gambling; whoever is taking the money is the person who should be playing. “If you are afraid, then don’t play!” Yudhishthir looked at Dhritarashtra. This was clearly unfair. Yudhishthir expected Dhritarashtra to intervene and point out that it was unfair. Like, normally, what happens is if a game is going on—football or cricket—if one player is doing something unfair, you expect the umpire to intervene. But Dhritarashtra did not intervene.
And he started gambling. He lost one thing, then another, and another. As he was losing things, he realized, “This is terrible.” At one particular point, Arjuna gently touched Yudhishthir’s shoulder. Although they were brothers, Yudhishthir was still the eldest brother, and there is a certain hierarchy in traditional cultures where the eldest brother is like a father figure. So Arjuna gently shook his head, indicating, “It’s enough now, stop gambling.”
Yudhishthir thought, “Yes.” But he said, “You know, I have lost so much. With all the wealth that I have lost, I can do so much service to the sages, to society, to people. So,” he thought, “if I can just get some of it back, then I can do so much service.” And then he kept gambling. He started thinking that as he was staking more and more valuable things, “Surely Krishna will not let me lose this.” When he started staking his brothers, he thought, “Arjuna is so dear to Krishna; surely Krishna will not let Arjuna be lost.” Then he said, “Draupadi is so dear to Krishna; surely, whatever happens, Krishna will not let Draupadi be lost.”
It wasn’t exactly that he had forgotten Krishna or not. His state was that you could say he was in Maya. But his Maya was not like our Maya or like mundane Maya, where you just get caught in it. It was not because of any greed over there; it was not because he thought, “I’ll make some quick money,” that he started gambling. But it was even with a desire to serve.
But what happens is, when we say life is tough, the Mahabharata depicts reality in its brutality. And one brutal truth of life is that good intentions are not a substitute for good intelligence. Good intentions mean that he wanted to do dharma, he wanted to do bhakti, he wanted to do seva—that’s a good intention. But it was a bad judgment call.
So, while he had faith in the power of Krishna, what happened is he underestimated the pull of gambling. He underestimated how much it can drag someone down. Just because we are trying to serve Krishna does not mean that the forces of illusion will no longer work on us.
For example, just because we have some service in the temple and we have to do Aarti for Krishna, and because of that, we go at a dangerously high speed in the car, thinking, “Oh, I am going for Krishna’s service; it’s good enough.” But the material world acts upon certain principles. If somebody has severe diabetes and someone brings them a Tirupati Balaji laddoo, and they say, “This is prasad; how can I say no to prasad?” and they take the laddoo. Now, what will happen is they may get spiritually purified, but they will get materially devastated.
So, the power of Maya is something to be seriously acknowledged. For all of us, we may not neglect Krishna. For most of us, what happens is, “Yeah, Krishna is nice, but Maya is also not all that bad.” So, we do not devalue the power of Krishna, but we often devalue the power of Maya. And then what happens? We end up in self-created trouble.
For all of us, it’s important to acknowledge that both Maya is powerful and Krishna is powerful. So now, I thought I said we’d go towards the quadrant. Let’s look at the last paragraph. Who would like to read in the monthly directory? Yes.
The Lord is our protector. So it’s like if we take a medical metaphor. If we consider a disease, if somebody has a disease, then they need to take the disease seriously, isn’t it? And then after they take the disease, then they have to take the treatment seriously. So, if somebody doesn’t take the disease seriously, suppose somebody nowadays gets some disease—let’s say somebody has cancer. The word “cancer” is such that just hearing that word, people get terrified. Now, of course, many forms of cancer are curable now. But normally, if we hear that diagnosis, “cancer,” we will not take it lightly; we will take it seriously. But somebody has just some swelling on the body, some little pain…
So I say, “Okay, no big deal. I don’t have to worry about it.” If they don’t take a disease seriously, if the doctor says, “You know, you have to get this treated,” they think, “There’s no big deal.” So, if they don’t take the disease seriously, things will become problematic.
But if somebody takes the disease seriously but doesn’t take the treatment seriously, then that will also be a problem. So, for us, recognizing that Maya is powerful is like taking the disease seriously. When we take the disease seriously, we recognize that there is a need to fight against this temptation. And then, when we take Krishna seriously, there is hope that I can be cured. So, I’ll talk about this last part: how to feel the need and how to feel the hope.
Broadly speaking, it’s not that all of us have the same “anartha” (unwanted conditioning) troubling us to the same degree. Each of us may have different anarthas. Some of us may have common anarthas, but the principle is there: Maya will attack all of us in some way or another. So, how do we feel the need? Broadly speaking, the need comes from two things.
The Positive We Are Unable to Do
One is the positive things we are unable to do. For example, if I want to read Bhagavad Gita regularly, but I spend a lot of time on my phone—reading this, watching this, looking at that, responding to that, reacting to this—unless we have some positive that we want to do, we may not even realize how much time we are spending. Like, a student might waste a lot of time on social media, but if the exam is six months away, then, yeah, it doesn’t matter. But if the exam is tomorrow, and I spend six hours on social media today, that would be devastating.
So, unless we have something positive that we want to do and are unable to do it… Most of us say, “Oh, I don’t have time.” And it is true that nowadays, people may be fairly wealthy, but there is one kind of poverty that everyone has. Sociologists call this time poverty. Time poverty is where we all have more things to do than what we have time to do. But we will notice that while there are many things which we don’t have time to do, if you look at the time that we do have, we often spend it on less important things.
So, the way we realize the need to fight against temptation is by having something that we want to do, but we are unable to do. When we start looking at that, for example, “I want to be kind and polite and helpful. But as soon as something goes wrong, I start becoming rude and harsh and just being myself.” So then, “Oh, this is not the kind of way I want to be.”
That need can come from a positive side by recognizing that there are some values, some purposes, some things which I want to do, but I’m unable to do. So, we need to have some positive that is our aspiration. By looking at our aspirations—the good things that we want to do and are unable to do—on one side, we can feel the aspiration to do something.
The Negative We End Up Doing
The other thing is the negative that we end up doing. This is where we have our boundaries. Krishna talks about these two in Bhagavad Gita 6.35 as abhyasa and vairagya.
Abhyasa means repeated practice. Why would we practice something repeatedly? Because you want to learn it; you want to do it. These are aspirations that we have. So, what is it that I want to do that I’m unable to do?
Vairagya (dispassion/renunciation) represents boundaries. What are certain things which we do not want to do, but we end up doing?
If we don’t have any boundaries at all… Say, if somebody has a lot of money and they keep buying lots of things. Some people have basements filled with things which they have barely opened once. If somebody has a lot of money, they may spend a lot of money and not even realize they are spending so much. But if somebody keeps a boundary, “Okay, every month, I’m not going to shop beyond this amount.” Or if some circumstances come in their life and they don’t have that much money, then they have to budget themselves more carefully.
So, if we have certain boundaries… We all may get angry, but generally, we all keep our anger under limits. Normally, when we get angry, we might just yell at someone; we might raise our voice. But most of us, if we are in a civilized culture or society, we may not use swear words; we may not use obscenities. But if you regularly give in to anger, and one day, suddenly, we find that we have spoken some obscenities… “How could you speak something like that?” And, you know, if we just speak it among some people who are okay with it, who are taken aback, but, you know, maybe it’s just family or relatives. But tomorrow, we speak it against somebody who is much more cultured and important for us. And then, “Hey, this is a boundary that I have crossed!”
So, for each one of us, it’s like, “How do I know that I have a disease?” Say, if somebody’s doing some regular workout, that they have muscular atrophy. How do they know it? They try to lift a weight, and they’re not able to. “Something is wrong here.” So, only when we have some aspirations that we are not able to fulfill do we start recognizing, “Maybe this problem/disease is there.”
And say, you know, we’re just walking along and slip and fall. “What happened? How did I slip and fall?” We just say, “This happened. I didn’t see it was slippery ground.” But people don’t just slip and fall normally.
So, unless we have certain aspirations and certain boundaries, we won’t recognize that there is a need for me to fight against temptation.
Cultivating Aspirations and Boundaries
Now, in many ways, aspirations come by satsang (good association). They come by good association. For us, it might be routine to get angry and yell at someone when they do something wrong. But if we meet with saintly-minded people, those who are devotees, and we see how calm and cool they are even in difficult situations, we might think, “Maybe I should also be like this. I get angry with such small things; I should not get angry.” So, it’s satsang, it’s good association, that often gives us aspirations: “I want to become like this.”
Now, how do the boundaries come? The boundaries come by two things: intelligence and experience. We hear scriptures and we understand how the power of Maya can be so great. See, here I’ll talk about the point of Ajamil. When Ajamil saw that particular sight, he saw a man and a woman publicly engaging in sensuality. He saw that, and it captivated him. And he felt a strong desire to be with her. Now, he could have fought that desire, but he didn’t. It captivated him.
Sometimes conditions are very powerful, and you will be captivated. But, “Okay, this is unbearable. I just have to go.” Go. Sometimes, “I’ll go and be with her.” Okay. When he did that, he thought that this was just one time this desire had come.
“I’ll go and gratify it, and that’s all. It’ll be over.” But he probably never thought where it would lead him. After that, what happened? He thought, “Okay, I don’t just want to be a one-time ‘lover’; I want to be a regular one.” What happens then? “You know, I’ll reject my wife.”
Then his parents were there; his parents opposed him. He said, “I’ll reject my parents also.” Now, he was a Brahmana. A Brahmana is supposed to do priestly activities, come and perform Yajnas in people’s houses. If that person has rejected their wife, rejected their parents, and is living so immorally, nobody will ask that person to come and do priestly activities in their home. So then he lost his profession. And what was he going to do now? Then he started robbing. He started stealing. He started threatening people. He started attacking and injuring people to rob them.
So, that one indulgence—he would not have thought it would lead him all this way down. But what happens is, Maya just keeps creeping in, creeping in. So, when we have boundaries, saying, “No, I cannot do this. I’m never going to do this,” what happens is we cross one boundary? “No big deal.” We cross another boundary. We cross another. And it just goes further and further and further.
We have devotees who are trying to do outreach in many different ways. Some devotees have created a program called a Bhakti Recovery Group for people addicted to something, like alcohol or drugs. How can Bhakti help them recover? For most people who haven’t been addicted, Bhakti simply offers a higher taste, and they don’t look in that direction. But for somebody who’s been addicted, they just get caught in things.
I was talking with one person after giving a talk to this group in the UK; many of them were non-Indians. I asked him what inspired him. You see, for somebody who’s an alcoholic, one of the things is that they often deny they’re alcoholics. “No, no, it’s not a big deal at all. I can give up whenever I want.” And what happens is, “I can give up the desire to give up whenever I want also.” So it’s a denial. So then, how do they overcome the denial? When do they feel the need?
He said that once he had drunk alcohol, and he used to regularly drink and just lie down at home. Then his son came and asked him something—his small four or five-year-old boy. He was drinking, and he just banged his fist against the table he was sitting at. His son got completely scared. And he said, “When I saw my son so scared of me, that was what shook me. What kind of person have I become? As a father, I should be protecting my children. Here, my son is shrinking from fear of me, and not because he has done something wrong, but because I have done something wrong. He’s afraid what more I may do.” That’s when he felt, “I need help. I have to change myself.”
This moment of awakening can come when we meet somebody good and we see, “Oh, I want to become like that good person.” Or that moment of awakening can come when we see, “Okay, how bad have I become? How could I become like this? What have I done?” These are times when we realize the power of Maya.
So, for all our conditionings, we might say, “Oh, I’m not able to give up this conditioning.” But do we really have that desire to give it up? This is a key difference. Sometimes we talk about desire and need. And for us, we may have many desires to improve. But like desires, sometimes we fulfill them, sometimes we don’t. But do we feel a need to improve? If something is a need, then we will do it. So, through these two contemplations, the need can arise.
Cultivating Hope
The last part is hope. So, how do we develop hope? Sometimes we may realize that, “Okay, yes, this is a bad thing. But I’ve tried so many times; I never succeeded.” That hope comes by understanding that while Maya is powerful, Krishna is more powerful. Krishna’s power is greater than Maya’s power.
I’ll conclude with one image. If you consider the Earth, and we are on the Earth, there is the Earth’s gravitational pull—that’s the gravity zone of the Earth. So if we try to go up, or if we are a rocket being projected upwards, then what happens is that it goes up, but gravity pulls it down. For all of us, the things we are attached to have a pull. And when we try to move out of that, we just get pulled down. This gravitational pull may be different for different people based on how much they have indulged in that particular activity, how much they’ve been attached to it. But the gravity pull is there, and it pulls us down.
Sometimes we think that Krishna is somewhere over here, and Krishna is far away, and we think that I have to go all the way up to Krishna. One of the key things is that Krishna is far above. Krishna is far above Maya. Krishna is far above the conditions of this world. If you consider the sun or the moon, they are so high up, they cannot be pulled by the gravitational pull of the Earth. So, Krishna is far above.
However, “Krishna is far above” means He’s above the gravitational pull of material objects. However, Krishna is not far away. Krishna is far above but not far away. What this means is that there are certain places in our lives—if this is a sense object and this is the gravitational pull of the sense objects—there are certain areas in our life where Krishna is so close that Krishna’s gravitational pull comes where we are.
For example, consider if somebody is an alcoholic; they’re completely caught in the gravitational pull of alcohol. But while they’re drinking, if they see devotees doing Harinam Sankirtan and they think, “Let me also dance!” When they dance, they experience some joy there. So even when they are in the tamasic state of intoxication, they can still experience the joy of Krishna.
Like that, wherever we are, Krishna’s gravitational pull can reach us. That does not mean that it will be equally the same all the time. That’s why, although Krishna is in our hearts, we do not perceive His presence all the time. When we come in satsang, when we do some Puja, when we go on some Yatra, when we do some serious Seva—at that time, what are we doing by these activities? We are placing ourselves in the gravitational pull of Krishna. And when we put ourselves in the gravitational pull of Krishna, then we start experiencing that: “Hey, this is so amazing! I didn’t feel any agitation. I didn’t feel any temptation. I didn’t feel any distraction. All that just went away.”
You know, today is Ekadashi. Some of us may be fasting on Ekadashi. Now, what happens is some people, when they fast, they decide to fast, and then they give up the determination to fast. Others may hold fast to the determination to fast. Maybe on Janmashtami, we fast till midnight. “See, I cannot fast till midnight!” But we come in the association, maybe we are doing seva, there’s kirtan going on, there’s darshan going on. And just one hour, then a third hour, it just passes, and we’ve fasted till midnight. And in some ways, “I didn’t know I had this capacity to fast like this!”
Have any of you experienced this—that when you are in Krishna consciousness, temptation just doesn’t seem to trouble us? Many of you experienced this? Yes. We all have that experience. There are times when the gravitational pull of Krishna comes to where we are, and then we don’t feel the gravitational pull of Maya, of the sense objects.
So for all of us, it is these experiences that can give us hope. Yes, temptations may come back and trouble me, but there are times when I do not feel tempted. There are times when I remain free from temptation. And if we can bring ourselves into the presence of Krishna more and more, then we will find that Krishna’s gravitational pull will pull us upwards. What will happen eventually?
By the power of Krishna, the sense objects will be there, their gravitational pull will be there, but Krishna’s gravity will pull us upwards. And we will go outside the gravitational pull of the sense objects. For some of us, we might have been eating meat before we came to Bhakti. Then, after we start practicing Bhakti, many of us give it up completely. Now, if we go on a plane or a train and the person sitting next to us is eating meat, most devotees will not feel attracted to the meat at all. We may not know whether Krishna is all-attractive, but Krishna Prasadam is all-attractive. In that, we have experienced a higher taste.
So that’s why, when we are daily dealing with distractions and temptations, we might feel, “Is this Bhakti really working? Is the power of Krishna really there? I’m getting the same anger, the same irritation, the same temptation, the same urges I have to fight against every day.” We may feel, “Where is the power of Krishna?” But to recognize this power of Krishna, we need to remember two things:
Temptation-free moments: We experience them. They may not be permanent, but we have experienced those temporary times. It may be for a few minutes, a few hours, or even a few days. We have experienced it.
Areas of freedom: There are also areas in our life (meaning habits) where we have become free. It might be a minor thing, but we have become free of it.
If we remember these two things, then we will have hope. “Okay, that particular conditioning, that particular unhealthy habit, I was able to give up. This might be more difficult to give up because maybe this conditioning is more deep-rooted. Maybe this will take more time, but I will be able to give it up.” So in this way, when we take the power of Maya seriously and the power of Krishna seriously, then we will experience, sooner or later, a magical transformation in our life.
The Phases of Spiritual Growth
In the journey of Bhakti, quite often what happens is that the spiritual change and growth occur in three phases:
Revolutionary: Initially, when we come to Bhakti, there’s a rapid change. Our lifestyle changes, our habits change. There is a revolutionary change that happens.
Evolutionary: That revolutionary change stays for some time. After that, it becomes a “grind.” We may feel as if no dramatic change is happening, but that change is happening; it’s evolutionary. Like a newborn baby: every week, the baby is growing, and you can actually measure and see it. But once the child becomes three or four or five years old, you measure their height every week, and while the height is always going to increase, you don’t see it day-to-day. Yet, every day the child is being fed well, and the child is growing. So, for most of our spiritual journey, our growth is evolutionary.
Revolutionary (again): But then, at the end, it again becomes a revolution. Towards the end of our life, the example is given: if we are going for a morning walk and it’s still twilight, the sun has not yet risen. We are chanting, maybe, and we are thinking about Krishna. And suddenly, we realize, “Hey, the sun has risen!” Now, the sun didn’t rise at one moment; the sun was rising continuously, but at one particular time, we realized the sun has risen. That is how purification happens.
Every day that we practice Bhakti—we do some Puja, some Japa, some Svadhyaya, some Seva—every single day we are getting purified. Although it may appear, “Oh, this desire is coming, this temptation is coming, I am fighting against it; it’s coming, it’s coming.” But every day we are practicing Bhakti, the sun of Krishna Prema (love for Krishna) is rising in our heart. Prabhupada writes that one day we realize, “Oh, I have become a pure devotee!” What does “pure devotee” mean? That the same temptations that were troubling me earlier—I just don’t feel those temptations. Like the river comes into the ocean, but the ocean is not disturbed. We find that the things that would disturb me earlier no longer disturb me. And that is the stage when our heart becomes fully situated in Krishna. Krishna says that is the stage of Jivan Mukti—even if we are not yet physically liberated, we are essentially liberated. It’s only a matter of time when we’ll be with Him, back with Krishna for a life of eternal love and eternal joy.
Summary of Key Points
So, I’ll summarize what I discussed today. I talked about the broad topic of fighting temptations and fighting the power of Maya. I discussed three main points in this session:
Self-Created Problems: When we all face problems in life, there are external problems, but much more than these are self-created problems. I talked about how my “good vocabulary and bad temper” made things worse. So, the bigger problems in our life are often not external but internal. They can be separate, but the internal often makes the external worse. Sooner or later, we recognize that there are these inner demons which need to be dealt with.
The Four Quadrants: To deal with these demons, the major topic I discussed was about these four quadrants based on whether we take Maya seriously or not, and whether we take Krishna seriously or not.
Don’t take either seriously: We are proudly degraded, happily, blissfully, ignorantly degraded.
Take Maya seriously, but not Krishna: We become hopeless. The example here was Ajamil; he tried to fight, but he felt he couldn’t fight and just gave up.
Take Krishna seriously, but not Maya: We become careless. The example of this was Yudhishthir Maharaj. He had good intentions when he started, wanting to obey his elders. But if the elders are asking us to do something dangerous like gambling, should we do it? And even if we do it, how far? Can we say that because I’m doing it for Krishna, I won’t get in trouble? No. Good intelligence is necessary even when we have good intentions.
Take both seriously (Maya and Krishna): Then we become empowered. We take Krishna seriously and we take Maya seriously. There are many examples of saints and people who got transformed, like Narada Muni, who realized how killing was going to lead to hellish suffering for him in the future, so he took the wrong action seriously. We also have Jagai and Madhai, and the example of Nagari.
Need and Hope to Fight: We talked about developing the need and the hope to fight.
Need to Fight: This means we understand the power of Maya and take it seriously. How do we feel the need to fight? By two things:
Aspirations: Think of things that we want to do in our life, that we would love to do, but we are not able to do. That will make us realize that something inside me is pulling me away from this. It’s our aspirations that we are unable to fulfill.
Boundaries: There are things we do not want to cross, but we keep crossing. We are unable to stay within them.
Sometimes, by good association (satsang), we may realize, “Oh, this is the kind of person I want to become,” and that can inspire us. And by self-observation—what kind of person am I becoming?—we start recognizing. By our intelligence and by our experience, we begin to recognize. By our satsang, we can develop good aspirations; by our self-observation, we understand that this point of understanding can make us feel the need for change and the need to fight.
Hope to Fight: This comes by understanding that there is a gravitational pull of Maya which is keeping us caught, but there is Krishna, and Krishna also has His gravitational pull. And Krishna’s gravitational pull can come where we are, and it can lift us up from where we are. Here, we need to remember two things:
Temptation-free times: Remember the temptation-free times that we may have. There are times, like when we fast on Ekadashi or Janmashtami.
Overcoming Temptation and Cultivating Spiritual Growth
We often find ourselves facing temptations that once seemed impossible to resist. Surprisingly, we can experience these temptations three times over, yet through spiritual practice, we can transcend them. Imagine embarking on a pilgrimage, forgetting all worldly concerns – TV programs, movies, politics – everything fades away.
We can also break free from ingrained habits and “anartas” (unwanted material desires). If we remember these two points, we can have hope that Krishna will help us change. Krishna is there for us, and understanding how spiritual change unfolds is key.
Initially, spiritual change can be revolutionary, rapid, and dramatic. It then becomes evolutionary, a more gradual process, before eventually becoming revolutionary again. During this evolutionary phase, it’s crucial to use our buddhi (intellect) to understand the power of Maya (illusion) and the power of Krishna. This understanding empowers us to keep pushing ourselves, continuously growing closer to Krishna.
Let’s conclude by offering this prayer once more. Please repeat after me: “My dear Lord, let awareness of inner danger drive me toward Your shelter.”
Realistic Expectations and Choosing Our Battles
It’s easy to get discouraged, especially when we set unrealistic expectations for ourselves. While Krishna consciousness works in wonderful ways, we can’t always expect magic. Sometimes it comes, but not consistently. This means we must choose our battles wisely.
Consider India’s historical conflicts with Pakistan and China. In recent years, India has taken strong action against Pakistan, but not yet against China because it’s not yet strong enough. This doesn’t mean India is being passive, but it is strategically choosing its battles.
Similarly, we have many aspects of ourselves we want to improve. However, if we try to fight too many battles or tackle overly difficult ones simultaneously, we risk becoming discouraged and believing change is impossible. When fighting a battle, we need a sense of success or at least progress.
Therefore, start with realistic battles and progress gradually, step by step. You may have many areas for improvement or habits you want to stop. Begin with something doable. Decide, “For the next one to three months, I will focus on this,” and stick to it.
I once spoke with a Western therapist in India who explained why February is his busiest month. People make New Year’s resolutions in January, fail by February, and then get depressed. My understanding is that we need to celebrate small wins. Instead of feeling like a complete failure for breaking a resolution, be happy you stuck to it for a month.
While some vows, like initiation vows, are lifelong commitments, many other intentions don’t carry such serious consequences. If we declare, “I’ll never do this again in my life,” it can feel like a goal with no immediate victory. Even if we stick to it for a year or two, a relapse can lead to despair. The mind might even rationalize, “You have the rest of your life to do this, so just indulge now and start the resolution later.”
Instead, try taking small, manageable steps. “I won’t do this for one month.” This is like the resolutions taken during Kartika or Chaturmas. We need a realistic understanding. Krishna can do magic, but a devotee’s mood isn’t to demand it. We must also recognize our own limitations; deeply ingrained conditions won’t disappear overnight. By choosing our battles and celebrating small victories, it becomes easier to sustain our efforts.
Strengthening Our Connection to Krishna
This approach applies not only to fighting Maya but also to focusing on Krishna. Within Krishna bhakti, there’s a range of activities, and not all will be equally nourishing for us at any given moment. Some bhakti activities are sources of strength. When we engage in them, we feel alive, experience great spiritual joy, and sense Krishna’s presence. For some, this might be kirtan; for others, puja, listening to classes, cooking for Krishna, or performing arati.
Then there are activities that require strength. These are the ones where we truly have to push ourselves, such as chanting Japa. While some may naturally enjoy Japa, for most, it demands effort. We need to identify which bhakti activities give us strength. It’s like Krishna’s “gravitational pull” reaching us in some activities (like kirtan or katha), while in others (like Japa), we have to exert effort to reach that pull.
Recognize the activities that empower you and make them a regular part of your routine. Keep them accessible. When moments of weakness arise, these are the activities you should turn to immediately. While all bhakti activities ultimately provide strength, some may not do so instantly.
Consider which manifestations of Krishna you are naturally attracted to. There are many beautiful deities, but some pictures or forms resonate deeply with us, evoking a prayerful mood. Keep these accessible – on your phone, with you. This will make the battle, though still tough, less difficult. Make a list of these strengthening activities and keep them readily available.
Yes, please. Correct. Good question. So, when we say that Krishna will fix all things, yes, Krishna will fix all things. But, more often than not, Krishna will fix all things by fixing us, so that we can fix all things.
It is not that Krishna will magically solve problems. We see many incidents in the Mahabharata where Krishna miraculously intervened. But, if you consider the majority of the Kurukshetra War, wasn’t Arjuna fighting using his archery and his strength? Which moments led to victory? Was it, say, the miraculous moment when Krishna covered the sun and helped Arjuna kill Jayadratha?
That is true. But Arjuna got to that point by fighting through the entire Kaurava army. So, yes, God helps us, no doubt. But, when we look broadly—and this is a big subject, I’ll try to shorten it—in our lives, there are situations.
Situations can be problematic. Now, situations lead to emotions. Something bad happens to us, and we feel disheartened, discouraged, or frustrated. Then, emotions lead to decisions. So, quite often, when we turn to Krishna, when we pray to Krishna, what we expect is that Krishna will fix the situations. But what Krishna often does is that he fixes our emotions. When he fixes our emotions, that enables us to take better decisions. Now, Krishna can fix the situations also, but that is not what he normally does. A devotee does not depend on Krishna intervening all the time.
So, the whole Bhagavad Gita is not about… see, there is a difference between, to some extent, the mood of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. In the Ramayana, Lord Ram is the hero. Of course, he is not the only hero; Hanuman is also a hero, all of them are heroes, but Ram is the central hero and he is doing the most action. But in the Mahabharata, it is Krishna not doing the most action; it’s the Pandavas, Arjuna, doing the most action.
In many ways, the Mahabharata is more reflective of real life than the Ramayana. So, the call of the Bhagavad Gita is not just that Krishna is the hero, and if you turn to him, he will solve all your problems. The mood of the Bhagavad Gita is: Krishna is the hero, and if you join him, he will make you a hero. So, he will enable you to do heroic things. Yesterday, I gave a class on the same topic in Columbus.
I talked about how we may think of Krishna as a protector. And that is wonderful. Krishna is the protector means that Krishna is the hero who will protect me when I’m in trouble. And that is good to understand. But Krishna is not just a protector; Krishna is also our commander. We are in an army, and we are in Krishna’s army, and this war that we are fighting is a tough war. But we have Krishna as our commander. And when Krishna is the commander, we fight in the war. And then, here, Krishna is the hero. But in Krishna’s army, we also become the hero. So, Krishna wants us to become heroic. Prabhupada was, you can say, the unlikeliest of heroes. At age 69-70, with nothing to show in his life, he went to America and he tried to serve Krishna. In the last ten years: 108 temples, 70 books, 14 world tours, thousands and thousands of people inspired to take to bhakti. So, Prabhupada also became a hero.
So, yes, Krishna helps us, that’s true. But Krishna will do many things through us. And that’s why devotion is not passivity: “Oh, Krishna will take care of everything.” We can think of that when we are gripped by too much anxiety. “I don’t know, Krishna will take care. But Krishna will take care of other things, let me take care of the thing that I am doing right now.” So, in that sense, it’s the devotee’s part and Krishna’s part. So, it’s like a human-divine partnership, like Krishna and Arjuna had a partnership, that divine-human partnership. So, it is like the human takes care of what I can, that I take care of what I can, and the divine Krishna will take care of what I can’t. Thank you. Good question. Yeah, thank you.
Any last question before we stop? Yes, by “children” do you mean teenagers, or…? Okay. Yes, it is difficult. But I think there are, what I’ve found are probably three steps.
One is how we see our children. Especially in their teenage years, this particular time in human history, as far as recorded history, is a time of unprecedented temptation. So, it is a very difficult time in which to grow up. So, instead of thinking that our children are being difficult—”Why don’t they listen to me? Why don’t they care for me? I want their good!”—instead of seeing them as being difficult, we should see that they are in difficulty. They may not want our help, although they need our help. They may not be ready to take our help, but it is that they are in difficulty. It’s an overwhelming time to live in today’s world. So, we may say, “What is the difficulty? I lived in poverty. I lived in far more difficulty than what you are living in. I have given you so many comforts in life now.” But their difficulty quite often is much more psychological, especially what happens when people come to their teenage years. If you consider childhood, teenage, and adulthood: in childhood, a person’s identity is more or less “I’m the son or daughter of so-and-so.” In adulthood, they develop their identity: “I have this degree, I have this job, I have this family.” We have developed our identity. But in the teen years, it is an identity crisis. They are too old to be satisfied simply with the identity that “I am so-and-so’s son or daughter,” but they have not created their own identity.
So, therefore, here, there’s a lot of peer pressure. Because, for whom do we want an identity? We want an identity so that we will be respected in our social circles. So then there are different kinds of peers. And some peers may say, “Okay, you know, have you watched this movie? Have you tried out this drink? Have you tried out these drugs? Come on, have a life. Enjoy. You’re just being a nerd.” All these kinds of small labels come up, but they jar them quite a bit. So, the thing is that it’s not that we are against our children, or rather, our children are against us. We don’t think we are against our children, but they are in difficulty.
So, one of the… especially when I give talks to completely new people, Western people, one of my prayers I offer—it’s there in this book also—is: “Help me to learn how to help others to learn.” So, it is not that people are dumb when they don’t want to learn. It is that I have to learn how to help others to learn. So, it’s that they are in difficulty. Krishna says, “Don’t disturb others’ minds. Try to elevate them gradually.” So the idea over here is that they are in difficulty. And once we understand that, then try to learn how to help them to learn. What does that mean? That often, they won’t help. But what happens is, most often, teenagers feel that “You just don’t understand me. You don’t understand what situation I’m going through.” So, if at any time they start talking, you know, “Okay, this happened in my school today. This happened in my college today. This happened…” Our tendency is immediately to judge them.
How could you do something like this? How could you let this happen? Why are you such a person? A person who acts like this? But if they are expressing something, and we immediately rush to judgment, then they will close down completely.
So, they said, ‘Okay, try to understand what is going on in their life.’ We may think they are foolish and ignorant, and that we are experienced, but they don’t see it that way. For instance, one of the differences between Indian or Eastern culture and Western culture is that Eastern culture is much more hierarchical. There is authority, and there are subordinates.
For many of us, growing up, if our parents told us ‘don’t do this,’ we obeyed. In hierarchical cultures, authority and respect are assumed. Because I am in a position of authority, respect is assumed. Now, in Western culture, authority isn’t inherent; the culture is more horizontal. A child might even call their parents by their first names sometimes, just as we might call our bosses by their first names. To us, this feels weird; it’s disrespectful. That’s a different culture. So, it’s not that there is no respect, but respect has to be earned. Here, respect can be assumed, but there, it has to be earned. The idea is that you have to show me that what you are telling me has value for me; it works for me.
So, if we try to spend some time understanding them… In childhood, we have to set some boundaries; that’s important. But as they grow up, they will have to decide what boundaries they want to live within. And they may want to explore. Now, we don’t want them to explore to dangerous degrees, but the idea is that respect has to be earned. And earning respect means what? It means we try to understand their situation and give them guidance that makes sense to them. They say that even if one small piece of guidance we give helps them, then they’ll become more open to guidance.
So, try to understand what the kids are going through. It is a very different and difficult world they are in today. The last part is that we often want to discipline them. But, instead of talking about discipline, we can talk about it as ‘self-negotiation.’ What do I mean by self-negotiation? It’s like there’s your present self and your future self. For example, if we are trapped in a storm and we have, say, only seven days of food, we may decide that if I just enjoy a big feast right now, then I may not have any food after three or four days. So, the present self should not enjoy at the cost of the future self. Rather than telling children, ‘Don’t do this, don’t do this, don’t do this,’ try to help them to see why discipline is important. You want to enjoy right now, but do you want to enjoy in a way that will harm you, harm your future? That will ruin life for your future self? So, it’s not so much that ‘I am telling you to do this,’ but rather, there is a future you who has to live with the consequences of the present you.
And so, he said, ‘The present me is there. Now, if you care only for the present me, we’ll get stagnated or degraded. But on the other hand, if you care only for the future me – you know, ‘this is good for you in the future, this is good for you in the future’ – what about the present me?’ It’s like we want to have food after seven days. So, ‘But what about me?’ ‘Oh, don’t eat anything because we’ll eat food in the future.’ We’ll have food in the future, but we may not be there in the future, isn’t it? So, what happens if we care only for the present me? We can get degraded; we can get into bad habits. But if we care only for the future me, then we can get suffocated. That, ‘Oh, you are saying so many things are good for the future me, but you don’t seem to care for the present me at all.’ And then, ‘Oh, you will have a career, you will have this.’ But there’s no enjoyment for me right now in my life. So, ideally speaking, there has to be both. It is not that the future me has to be at the cost of the present me, or the future you has to be at the cost of the present you. But it’s also that the present you should not be at the cost of the future you. So, if we get that sense of time and help them get that sense of time, it is not just ‘I who am telling you to do this, and you have to do this.’ It is, ‘You have a future to live in.’
There’s a famous American thinker, Mark Twain. He said that when I was 17, my father was a fool. Now I’m 25, and I’m amazed how much the old guy has learned in the last eight years. Now, it is possible that the father has also learned some things. But it’s quite likely that at 17, when the hormones are high, one thinks, ‘I can conquer the whole world.’ But at 25, one has become a little more responsible, and a person starts recognizing that, ‘You know, my parents have some responsibility. They have gone through life. They have something to teach me.’ So, sometimes what happens? I’m talking about this from the present me and the future me from the child’s perspective. But from our perspective also, sometimes we may want the child to do the right thing in the present. And we force them so much. We can force to some extent, but if we force them too much, once they become young adults, they may just go completely off. So, sometimes doing the right thing is important, or getting them to do the right thing is important, but sometimes maintaining the right relationship is also important. If we tell them that, ‘You know what? What I am telling you is right, and if you don’t listen to me, you will regret it in the future, and then you will come crawling back to me.’ Even if they realize they were wrong, they will not come back.
So, it’s like a bird, like a mother bird. When the baby bird is small, the mother bird protects the baby in the nest. But the baby bird has to fly. And while flying, the baby bird will fall down. But then, that’s how the baby bird learns to fly. So, from our side also, we want to ensure they make the present choices properly. But if we force them to make certain choices right now, they may become resentful. And even when there are good choices to be made, they may not make good choices just because we told them to make those choices. So, it’s like, from our side also, we have to carefully negotiate. ‘I want to get my child to do the right thing, but I also want to have a good relationship with my child.’ So, if the only word the child hears from the parent is ‘no, no, no, you cannot do this, you cannot do that, you cannot do that,’ then eventually the child will grow up and will say ‘no’ to the relationship with the parent itself. And that can be very painful. So, all this, this is not easy; it is difficult. But, gradually, we can help them navigate that difficult phase of teenage years to come to adulthood. Thank you very much.
Hare Krishna. Thank you for coming today. I’m delighted to be here with you. I’ll be speaking on the Bhagavad Gita, drawing from one of my latest books. You’ll receive physical copies of these books as soon as they arrive.
We can read from them then, but until those arrive, I’ll discuss a common problem we all face: the feeling of not being accepted, respected, or appreciated within our social circles. This can happen in any group—whether it’s a devotee circle, a professional setting, our family, or extended relatives.
One of the greatest sources of pain or discontentment in life comes from feeling like we don’t belong where we’re supposed to. For instance, if we live in a distant country, we might feel, “I’m here, but I don’t belong here in America.” This feeling can arise for various reasons, but how do we deal with this sense of not being accepted or connected? That’s what we’ll discuss today, based on a Bhagavad Gita verse. Can everyone see this from wherever you are?
An Affirmation and Prayer
This affirmation is also a prayer. Please repeat after me:
“My dear Lord, help me to learn how to help others to learn.”
Many times, when we feel people aren’t understanding or appreciating us, it’s easy to blame them, thinking “people are terrible” or “these kinds of people are terrible.” While that’s possible, if we immediately jump to that explanation, it becomes very difficult to develop good relationships. As an American comedian once said, “I love humanity; it’s just human beings that I can’t get along with.”
When we try to become spiritual, we might read lofty words like “see equal vision towards everyone.” We might think, “I have an equal vision towards everyone—my vision is that I equally dislike everyone.” No, we don’t want that. Someone once told me, “My life is filled with friends that I do not like. And if I cut off relationships with all the people I do not like, I will have no friends left.” I said, “Oh, that’s an unfortunate and undesirable situation.”
So, how do we communicate with others when there are communication and connection problems? How do we deal with that? That’s what we’ll try to discuss today.
Let’s read this prayer again:
“My dear Lord, help me to learn how to help others to learn.”
If you feel that someone isn’t “getting” you, instead of thinking “they are dumb,” consider: “Maybe I need to learn better how they can understand.” That’s the mindset we’ll discuss today.
Understanding Different Natures
Let’s repeat these words:
“The wise should not disturb the mind of those to worldly work inclined. Let them act while you gently show the path to truth that they may know.”
This is a poetic translation of Bhagavad Gita 3.26. So, let’s look at what’s going on here. I’ll write and draw some things to explain.
The Challenge of Acceptance
Broadly, the challenge we’re discussing is when we don’t feel accepted, connected, appreciated, or respected by others. What do we do in such situations? I’ll discuss this broadly in today’s class based on these words.
What is Krishna broadly saying here? Different people have different natures and are at different levels. Just because someone doesn’t understand you doesn’t mean we have to disturb them by calling them foolish. Rather, we need to consider, “What can I do to help them understand?”
For example, we might be at a particular level—intellectually, culturally, or educationally—and that level may be higher than others. We might expect them to take a high jump and come up to our level. But sometimes, when we expect them to take that high jump, they may try and end up going further down. They are unable to take that leap. Then, our expectations create too much pressure on them, and instead of coming closer, they end up going further away from us.
Navigating Relational Problems
When we face problems in our life, such as relational problems, we generally need a more nuanced approach. When we feel disconnected, our minds can swing to extremes. One extreme is thinking: “People are terrible. People are cold. People don’t care for me.” This feeling can even arise among devotees. Sometimes we’re going through challenges and difficulties, and we expect help and understanding from others, but others don’t seem to understand us.
So, one extreme could be to say, “People are terrible. Nobody cares for me.” An atheistic philosopher was once asked, “Do you believe in hell?” He surprisingly said, “Yes, of course.” When asked how an atheist could believe in hell, he replied, “Hell means other people.” That’s one extreme we can go to.
The Three Glaciers of Life
In life, we broadly experience three kinds of suffering or “glaciers.” As souls, we are situated in three broad circles:
The Body: The soul is situated in the circle of the body.
Society: The soul is situated in the circle of society.
Nature: The soul is situated in the circle of nature.
From each of these, some suffering can come to us.
What is the suffering that comes from nature called? Adi Daivik. Yes.
The suffering that comes from society? Adi Bhautik. Yes.
And the suffering that comes from our own body and mind? Adi Adhyatmik. Yes.
Among these three types of suffering, Adhibhautik (that which comes from other living beings) is often the most difficult to tolerate. If there’s a storm, a tornado, an earthquake, or extremely low temperatures, it’s difficult and can be devastating. But we accept it; we grit our teeth and learn to live with it. In a sense, we see nature as simply “nature”—natural forces that sometimes hurt us. Similarly, with respect to our body, when there’s sickness or disease, it’s extremely troubling, but we accept it. “I’ve got a disease, and as long as it’s there, I have to live with it.”
However, with people, it’s different. We have expectations, and we often think, “How could you do this?” or “Why are you treating me like this?” We see people as conscious agents who make choices, so we wonder, “Why are you being so mean or so cold to me?” This makes social pain the most difficult.
What does pain from other living beings mean? It can range from mosquitoes to Mujahideen (deadly terrorist fanatics), or even a mother-in-law. When this Adhibhautik clash occurs, it becomes very difficult to deal with.
Distress Management
The Gita discusses how distress in this world falls into three categories. We all need to become adept at distress management, much like governments have departments for disaster management. We talk about stress management, but the Gita talks about distress management. Arjuna, for example, is in great distress.
To manage distress, we need to understand its source. We’ll use the acronym IAS. While IAS is a tough exam in India, distress management can also be tough.
Distress broadly falls into three categories:
I: Inevitable Some distress is inevitable, as Krishna discusses in Bhagavad Gita 2.14: “Just as the changing seasons bring heat and cold, happiness and distress will come in our lives.” This is simply a fact of existence.
A: Avoidable Some distress is avoidable. Krishna talks about this in Bhagavad Gita 5.22. This type of distress arises from our own actions. For example, if we walk down a road and bump into someone, they get angry and push us back, and we then punch them, leading to them stabbing us—this whole chain of events could have been avoided. Perhaps we could have been more careful, or even if pushed, we could have avoided losing our temper or punching them. Many problems are avoidable when we give in to our impulses, such as kama (lust), krodha (anger), lobha (greed), moha (illusion), mada (madness), and matsarya (envy). Different approaches are required for dealing with different kinds of problems.
S: Strengthening These are problems that, by going through them, make us stronger. Krishna talks about this in Bhagavad Gita 18.37, saying, “That which tastes like poison in the beginning will taste like nectar in the end.” These are the kinds of problems that are beneficial to experience. For example, if you want to become healthier, you might need to exercise regularly, go to the gym, or do yoga. Learning anything new or self-disciplining for something demanding isn’t easy; initially, it feels like poison. But by enduring that “poison,” we eventually reach a point of “nectar.” This kind of distress helps us reach a better place.
Approaches to Distress
So, how do we deal with these three kinds of distress? There are completely different approaches:
Inevitable distress: We need to accept it as a fact of life.
Avoidable distress: We need to correct our actions and change our behavior to prevent it. We need to counter those kinds of actions.
Strengthening distress: We need to train ourselves or toughen ourselves so we can endure and grow through these challenges.
It’s important to recognize that not all distress is the same. Broadly, these three kinds of distress have three corresponding approaches. While this framework can be applied to all forms of distress, I’ll now focus on Adhibhautik klesha—the social distress that comes into our lives when dealing with people.
Social Reciprocation
We live in society, and generally, we do something for someone, and they do something for us. This is reciprocation, a natural and fundamental aspect of any interaction. Reciprocation can broadly be of two kinds:
Transactional: This means the interaction is a simple exchange. For example, when we go to a shop, we’re polite to the attendant, they’re polite to us, we give money, and they give us a product. This interaction has reciprocation, but it’s transactional. At the end of the day, we might not even remember who that person was.
Transformational: In contrast, some reciprocation can be transformational. Through these interactions, you become a better person, or the other person becomes better by interacting with you. While many of our interactions at work or in social life might be largely transactional, most of our casual relationships fall into this category. In transactional relationships, even if someone misbehaves or mistreats us, it’s annoying and irritating, but it doesn’t cause as much emotional turmoil.
Inevitable Social Distress
Consider an example: America is much more inclusive now, but twenty, thirty, fifty, or a hundred years ago, there was significant racial discrimination and segregation. One reason India, post-independence, aligned with the USSR rather than the USA was partly due to both Gandhi and Nehru criticizing America for its segregation. Before the Civil Rights Movement, Black individuals were expected to sit at the back of the bus and weren’t allowed at the front. Indians were often treated similarly and expected to sit at the back as well, as there weren’t many Indians in America at that time.
So, despite America’s Declaration of Rights, segregation existed. If racial discrimination is the norm in a place, then while it’s painful, people would often accept it, thinking, “What can we do about it?” If that’s the norm everywhere, we learn to live with it.
Similarly, if we, as practicing devotees, visit Islamic countries in the Middle East, where many Indians and Hindus go for employment, the public practice of any religion other than Islam is generally not allowed. We accept that. While there are vibrant devotee communities there, they are all private. In general, if the broader society operates in a particular way, we learn to accept it.
There will always be some inevitable distress in every situation that we need to accept. When two people come to work together, or two people get married and want to build a life together, there will be differences. The idea of finding a “perfect partner” happens only in romantic movies, and even there, a dose of realism eventually comes to destroy the idealism.
I know a devotee couple in Canada where I sometimes stay. The husband is a marketing manager for an international company and also a learned priest who performs rituals like thread ceremonies, housewarmings (graha pravesh), and weddings (vivaha). His wife is in family law, which is a polite term for divorce, as that’s one of their main services. They joke that they’re a “complete power couple”: you go to the husband to get married, and to the wife to get separated.
She told me that sometimes, people—mostly women, as she’s female—come to her seeking separation for reasons that seem frivolous to us. There might be deeper, unarticulated reasons, but one Canadian lady came to her wanting to divorce her husband, saying they couldn’t agree on the air conditioning temperature in their house.
While that can be a problem, considering the hierarchy of problems, there are people without air conditioning, or even without a house. The lawyer paused, “Is that really the reason you want to divorce?” The lady insisted it was, explaining, “I actually married quite late…”
“I was waiting for my perfect partner, my ‘Mr. Right.’ I truly believed this person was perfect for me. But,” she said, “if he had been Mr. Right for me, then our body temperatures should have sung together.”
People can have many unrealistic expectations. So, there will always be some differences whenever we work closely with anyone. Sometimes, you might say certain things that the other person just doesn’t understand. Or the other person expects something from you that you don’t understand. That’s just the way life is.
Casual vs. Serious Relationships
I bring up the distinction between casual and serious relationships because while frustrated expectations can occur in both, the pain caused is different. In casual relationships, frustrated expectations cause little pain. But in serious relationships, they can cause a lot of pain.
When we’re experiencing a lot of pain, we need a sense of perspective. It’s important to remember that some of this is inevitable.
Yesterday, I gave a class about how we are not alone in the world; we are a part of God, and God has a plan for us. Whenever I discuss God’s plan, especially with a Western audience, one common question is, “Has God planned a life partner for each of us?” The idea is that in the romantic imagination, God can sometimes be brought in as an element. “Oh, this was a coincidence, and we are meant to be together.” Maybe, maybe not.
But the point is, if there was such a plan—if A was supposed to be with B, C with D, E with F, and G with H—then if one person makes a mistake, like A goes off with D, then one person’s mistake would disrupt everyone else’s life. Is God’s plan so fragile that one person’s mistake can disrupt it? No, it’s not that simple.
God’s plan is that we learn and grow. Our relationships are not just for our material gratification—”being with you gives me a lot of material pleasure.” While that might be a small purpose, a much bigger purpose for our relationships is our spiritual evolution. We are meant to grow through all our relationships. So, a certain level of feeling misunderstood, unaccepted, or undervalued is just a part of life. And what is inevitable needs to be accepted.
The Imperfection of Ideals
We can apply this to any situation. Some people recounted being at an interfaith meeting where different people from various religions discussed the challenges of reaching out to the world today. One pastor shared that he was doing a radio or TV show where people would call in and ask questions. He said he got a question from a caller who identified as Christian but didn’t go to any church. The pastor very cautiously and respectfully asked, “Can I know why you don’t go to any church?” The caller replied, “I have not yet found a church that agrees with my philosophy.”
We don’t go to an institution of God to learn philosophy; we expect it to conform to our philosophy. Sometimes we might expect an ideal society, an ideal community, an ideal group of people, or an ideal club. But no ideal club exists in the world. And even if an ideal club existed with all ideal members, we wouldn’t get admission there, because we are not ideal, are we?
So, we all have to learn that there are certain inevitable sufferings we need to tolerate. Someone sent me a joke where a person said that a woman spent her entire life looking for the perfect man. She finally found him, and then it turned out that the perfect man was looking for the perfect woman, and she was not the perfect woman.
Nobody’s perfect in life. So, some distress is inevitable.
Avoidable Distress: Our Present Karma
Having said that, it’s important that we shouldn’t consider all distress to be inevitable.
What were the three kinds of distress we discussed?
I was inevitable.
A was what? Avoidable.
And S was strengthening.
So, for avoidable distress, what do we need to do? We need to correct it. That which is inevitable, we accept it.
The problem with the attitude that “some distress is inevitable, so accept it” is that it does not mean all distress is inevitable. Much distress comes because of our own actions.
I was in the UK, staying at a young devotee’s home. He told me, “Tomorrow is my wife’s wedding anniversary.” I asked, “What do you mean, your wife’s wedding anniversary? Are you talking about your ex-wife, or what are you talking about? Is it not your wedding anniversary?” He said, “All these are sentimental things. I don’t believe in these things.” That was a bit of a signal for me.
Then, as he was driving me, he told me he had been introduced to Bhakti in his youth and wanted to do a lot of service and outreach. He had hoped his wife would support him, but he said, “My wife is not at all cooperative; she’s quite disagreeable.” He then added, “I’ve got a realization that Krishna gave me a disagreeable wife so that I’ll become detached from material life.” He was just beginning his married life, about twenty-seven or twenty-eight. I said, “Wait a minute. Don’t jump to that conclusion. Don’t bring Krishna into it where it could be your own problem, isn’t it?”
Later, at their home, while I was taking Prasadam, his wife also spoke with me. She was a very intelligent lady, eager to understand Krishna consciousness, and had some good questions. Then she started talking to me. She said, “I soon realized that as a husband, there are some basic things a wife would expect: to do some work at home, take care of certain things.” This devotee was neglecting that because he thought, “All these are mundane; I want to be transcendental.” Naturally, his wife was dissatisfied.
I told him that you cannot live the life of a brahmachari (celibate student) if you are not a brahmachari. The brahmachariashram (stage of life) is also a place where you can take shelter of Krishna. So, you need to understand your life partner and learn to work together. Understand what their expectations are. You cannot fulfill all expectations, but sometimes when we completely neglect our role, that ends up creating far greater problems.
Present vs. Past Karma
When we talk about avoidable suffering, it means that some suffering comes from our past karma. In India, people sometimes say, “What karma did I do to get a person like you in my life?” People might say it aloud, or just think it, or even say it to another person. It is possible that some of the problems in our lives are because of our past karma.
But it is just as possible that the problems coming into our lives are because of our present karma. Not all things that happen in our lives are solely because of our past karma. Broadly speaking, as I said, problems are either inevitable or avoidable.
Broadly, inevitable problems can be attributed to past karma. If a child goes to a particular school and there are mean kids or bullies, while bullying should be stopped by authorities and parents, we cannot protect our children from every single unpleasant interaction. Some kids will just be mean, and our children need to learn to develop a little bit of a thick skin. Neither parents nor teachers can protect everyone all the time. So, some suffering is inevitable, and we could say that is due to past karma. Everybody has some suffering that comes from their past.
At the same time, there is also suffering which is avoidable. Avoidable suffering is because of our present karma. This means that there is suffering that… (Copies of the text will be distributed to you. We’ll read from this. When you get the book, you can go to page 120, to Bhagavad Gita 3.26. This is something we can read from and discuss.) Let’s look at this.
The Interplay of Past and Present Karma
Understanding that suffering can stem from both past karma and present karma is quite important. Let’s look at this. Would anyone like to read the paragraph? If you have the book, it’s on pages 120 and 121. Yes, please.
Good Intentions Versus Good Intelligence
“My dear Lord, You emphasize that good intention is not a substitute for good intelligence. Even when I want to do good for others and guide them toward a higher level of consciousness so that they ultimately connect with You, I need to carefully consider whether such instruction might be disruptive for them, even to the point of being destructive.”
Sometimes, we want to help others, believing we’re doing something good with our good intentions. However, the other person may not always accept our good intentions. We try to be kind to someone, and they hurt us or lash back; they might even be rude. This can be very disruptive. But why does it happen?
We might assume, “Oh, it’s my bad karma that I’m surrounded by people like that.” But generally speaking, one of the key principles discussed in Nyaya (Vedic logic) is to understand the cause of something, in this case, distress. It states that you should first look at the Drushta cause, which is the visible cause. Start with the visible cause, and if it doesn’t make sense, then move to the Adrishta cause, the invisible cause.
So, regarding the Adrishta cause, if someone isn’t dealing with us properly, you need to question: “Have I rubbed this person the wrong way in some manner? Have I done something that agitated them or made them rude to me?” Start with that, and try to address it as much as you can.
Of course, sometimes, beyond our capacity or even our comprehension, people may just be harsh with us. There will always be some incompatibility and issues when we work with people. But don’t assume that all the problems we’re facing are inevitable and that we must simply live with them. It is possible to decrease problems through better communication and understanding.
Correcting Ourselves: Aversion to Fault-Finding
In this chapter, Krishna discusses a quality called Anupaśyan (often rendered as “aversion to fault-finding”). Generally, when we face any kind of problem, our mind tends to gravitate towards two things: Raga (seeking quick pleasure) or Dvesha (seeking a villain).
Raga means we try to forget the problem through pleasure. For instance, if there’s an argument between two people, they might go to separate rooms and watch TV or start surfing on their phones, avoiding talking to each other. The typical image of two disagreeing people is them sitting next to each other, looking away, glued to their phones. So, one approach is to seek complete pleasure, trying to forget the problem.
If Raga doesn’t work, if the problem is too overwhelming, then we start looking for a villain: “Because of this person, all this problem is coming into my life.” Sometimes we blame the person themselves, or even someone who recommended that person to us. For example, if we enter a business partnership and the person turns out to be unreliable, we might blame the person who recommended them, or the unreliable partner themselves. Our mind tends to look for a villain.
Krishna says that those who possess Daivi Sampada (divine nature) are averse to fault-finding. They are not looking for a villain in their life. Could there be villains in our life? Of course. But if we are constantly looking for villains to blame our problems on, then we give away our sense of agency.
Consider the lives of the Pandavas. They were just small children when they came to the kingdom of Hastinapura. Duryodhana tried to assassinate them, poison Bhima, and even tried to burn their entire family, including their mother. What did the Pandavas do? They were not obsessed with the Kauravas. The Kauravas eventually allowed them to return, offering half the kingdom, but gave them a wild, desolate half called Khandavaprastha. The Pandavas worked hard and converted it into Indraprastha.
They were often treated unfairly, but they made the best of their situation. In effect, the Kauravas, especially Duryodhana, were far more obsessed with the Pandavas than the Pandavas were with the Kauravas. It’s ironic that the Pandavas did nothing to intentionally hurt the Kauravas. While the Pandavas’ very existence was a threat, they never demanded the entire kingdom; they were even ready to settle for just five villages. So, there was practically no direct hurt from the Pandavas to the Kauravas, but a lot of hurt from the Kauravas to the Pandavas. Still, it was the Kauravas who saw the Pandavas as villains in their lives. The Pandavas never thought of them as villains; they focused on their own duties: “Okay, we have our own future. Let’s work on it.”
The point is, the extent to which we are hurt by someone does not determine how much we think of someone as a villain. It is often when we are insecure, looking for someone to blame for our problems, that we end up finding a villain in our life. Generally, we want to avoid both of these tendencies. We should move from the visible (drishta) to the invisible (adrishta) cause only when the drishta does not work.
So, what does “correct” mean? It could mean that we learn how to communicate better, or we try to understand the other person instead of judging them. When the other person gets angry, generally speaking, whenever there’s a conflict or a difference of opinion, it’s very easy for us to point out what the other person did wrong. And it’s true; the other person may have done something wrong. But what requires a lot of humility and courage is to consider what I have done wrong.
One of the standard practices in serious mediation—which is also a principle in Tarka (logic or argumentation)—is that before you dismantle or destroy the other person’s argument, you rephrase the other person’s argument in the best possible way you can. If you can just have that patience, you know, “I am angry with you because of this, this, and this. And you are angry with me because of this, this, and this.” So, instead of just proving to the other person why my reasons for being angry with you are valid, what if I could just say, “Okay, you tell me why you’re angry with me, and I will rephrase that”? Not that I accept it, not that I agree that all the points are valid. But if we try to hear the other person to understand what they’re saying, we don’t have to accept their understanding.
But many times, if we just understand, “Oh, you think like this,” then we might realize that if I had been thinking like that about some other person, I would also have been just as angry. What often happens is, when we hear somebody accusing us of something, we immediately get angry: “How could you accuse me of this? How could you think like this about me? What kind of person do you think I am? What kind of relationship do we have if you think like this about me?”
We tend to become very defensive or aggressive when faced with accusations. However, it’s important to consider that even if the accusations feel outrageous to us, the person making them likely believes them to be true. If those accusations were indeed true, anyone would feel equally angry.
Three Degrees of Avoidable Problems
When discussing avoidable problems, there are generally three degrees of conflict that arise:
1. Disagreement in Judgment
This is the least severe form of conflict. For example, if two people are in charge of cooking for an event, and one suggests cooking for 50 people while the other says 70, and we prepare for 50 but 70 people show up, we might blame the other person for the lack of food. This is a judgment issue, and everyone can make mistakes in judgment. While it can be painful to have one’s judgment questioned, it’s not the most damaging type of conflict.
2. Questioning of Ability
This is more painful than a disagreement in judgment. When someone’s ability is questioned—for instance, “You are not competent enough for this position,” or “You are not capable of doing this role”—it goes beyond a one-time mistake. It implies a fundamental lack of skill or aptitude. While a person can learn and improve from a judgment error, questioning their inherent ability can be deeply discouraging and make reconciliation very difficult. Imagine someone saying, “The one thing I’ve learned about you is that you can’t learn anything.” Such an attitude makes resolution nearly impossible.
3. Questioning of Motive or Morality
This is the most damaging and often a point of no return in relationships. When someone’s motive or morality is questioned—for example, “You didn’t want this program to succeed,” or “You deliberately sabotaged this because you disliked the leader”—it attacks their character and integrity.
Consider two parents who disagree on parenting styles; one is lenient, the other strict. It’s often hard to say who is “right,” as the long-term impact unfolds over time. However, as long as both parents believe the other has the child’s welfare at heart, their relationship can endure. But if one parent starts believing the other doesn’t want the good of the child, the foundation of their co-parenting relationship crumbles.
The Role of Likes and Dislikes
Our personal likes and dislikes play a significant and often dangerous role in how we interpret others’ actions. If we like someone, we tend to attribute their mistakes to a simple judgment error. If we dislike them, we often ascribe their mistakes to a character flaw.
For instance, if a person eats half a cake meant for five people:
If we like them, we might think, “Maybe they were very hungry,” or “Perhaps they didn’t know there was only a small amount of cake.”
If we dislike them, we might think, “What a glutton!” and attribute the worst possible motive to their action.
This tendency to let our biases distort our perceptions can create unnecessary conflict.
Avoiding Relationship “Traffic Jams”
Just as traffic jams occur on roads, relationships can experience “traffic jams” due to these three levels of conflict. While issues at the judgment level are the easiest to overcome, those at the motive level are exceedingly difficult to resolve.
Many relationship problems and interactions are avoidable. How? By focusing on two key aspects of “correction”:
1. Look Inward Rather Than Outward
Instead of immediately assuming the other person is bad or dislikes you, look inward to consider what you might have done to contribute to the situation or anger.
2. Give the Benefit of the Doubt
When a problem arises, try to start with the least negative explanation or motive. Assume it’s a judgment error first. For example, if someone forgets to bring something you asked for, consider that they might have a lot on their mind or be under stress. Don’t immediately jump to the most negative conclusion.
This is where communication becomes crucial. Often, we harbor resentment over perceived wrongs, letting it build up over time, only to explode disproportionately over a minor incident. Instead of accumulating grievances, address issues with the least negative assumption, and communicate openly.
When we start attributing negative motives to others, it can be devastating for relationships. Many relationship problems are avoidable, and we should strive to prevent them. The last part of what we’re discussing is related to strengthening our relationships.
Strengthening Through Difference
Strengthening implies that growth occurs by engaging with people who hold different perspectives. This is where we need to train ourselves. One aspect of this training, as previously mentioned, is to give others the benefit of the doubt to avoid problems. However, I want to focus on two more points before concluding.
Sometimes, working with people who think differently from us is precisely what allows us to grow and expand our understanding. In Krishna consciousness, we often talk about deepening our connection—going deeper into our relationship with Krishna, being more attentive in chanting, and thoroughly understanding the Shastras. This is undoubtedly important.
However, Srila Prabhupada didn’t just want us to be individually Krishna conscious; he founded the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. He wanted us to be a society. For a society to flourish, we also need to broaden our Krishna consciousness, not just deepen it. Broadening means recognizing that there are many different ways to approach Krishna, and various aspects of Krishna can attract different people. People progress in their lives and spiritual paths in diverse ways.
When we interact with others in a non-judgmental way, genuinely trying to understand their perspectives, it broadens our own understanding. It helps us see why someone might be acting a certain way or how things operate in their context.
For example, when I was first introduced to Bhakti, it was in a very conservative, regimented ashram in India, leading to a rather black-and-white understanding of Krishna consciousness: “This is Krishna conscious; everything else is Maya.” However, over the past ten years, I’ve traveled extensively, meeting diverse devotees worldwide who face different challenges across various cultures and social circumstances. This experience has been invaluable in helping me understand that we cannot simply take one version of Krishna consciousness and superimpose it on everyone. Each individual has a unique relationship with Krishna and will pursue it in their own way.
This broadening of our conceptions helps us become more mature and flexible. It enables us to attract more people, not just to Krishna, but generally fosters greater social harmony in our lives, in addition to spiritual harmony. Many problems, therefore, serve to broaden our understanding. Instead of dismissing someone who thinks differently as “a fool” or “a terrible person,” we can recognize that they might be approaching things from a very different perspective.
Enlightenment: Destination and Journey
Let’s consider an image where Krishna represents ultimate reality, or perhaps even a problem that needs to be understood. One person might approach this reality from one angle, while another approaches it from a different angle. Both perspectives can be valid, especially when considering Krishna as the Supreme Reality.
When we approach reality, we may understand the situation, understand Krishna, connect with Krishna, and experience Krishna—and that’s perfectly true for our perspective. In the Bhagavad Gita, a fascinating series of verses illustrates this. In 10.8, Krishna states that those who know Him are Buddha (enlightened). But in the very next verse, 10.9, He describes what these enlightened people do when they meet others: they enlighten each other.
If they are already enlightened, why would they need to enlighten each other? The understanding here is that enlightenment is both a destination and a journey.
Enlightenment as a Destination: For all of us, the ultimate understanding is that Krishna is the supreme object of love. After trying to find love in many different objects, we eventually come to the point of loving Krishna, and that is becoming enlightened.
Enlightenment as a Journey: Even when we know Krishna is the object of love, we continue to learn two things:
How lovable Krishna is: What attracts me to Krishna may be different from what attracts you. By conversing with you, I can come to understand another feature of Krishna, another aspect of His lovability and the attractiveness of Krishna Bhakti.
And how I can love Krishna more deeply. A wonderful example of this is when the queens of Krishna met Draupadi. They asked her, “Draupadi, how do you keep my husband satisfied? We are so many, and we are all trying to satisfy Krishna.” They were focused on their service and eager to learn how to perform it better. The idea is that we can all learn how to love Krishna more perfectly.
Similarly, in life, we can always learn from others. This doesn’t mean we should accept everything everyone does as right. People make mistakes, and we don’t condone what is wrong. However, when we approach interactions with the mindset that “there is always something for me to learn here,” we can continuously grow and broaden our perspectives.
Srila Prabhupada’s example is illuminating. When he first came to America, he stayed at the home of Sally and Gopal Agarwal. Gopal was an Indian man married to a Western woman. They sponsored Prabhupada’s visa out of courtesy for Gopal’s father-in-law, who had requested it; they themselves had no interest in practicing bhakti. After a short time, Prabhupada recognized their lack of spiritual inclination and didn’t pressure them. He stayed at their house for about fifteen days to a month before moving to New York. He had arrived on a two-month visa.
Sally Agarwal later wrote about her experiences, which are recorded in Prabhupada’s biography. She noted several interesting things, including that “Swamiji was so interested in learning everything American.” He wanted to know how the vacuum cleaner worked, how the elevator worked, and how the subway worked. Did Prabhupada travel all the way from India to America just to learn about household appliances? No. By being curious about these things, Prabhupada was trying to understand the American mindset—how people think, how they live. This understanding allowed him to learn how best to communicate Krishna consciousness effectively. Prabhupada’s immense success was undoubtedly due to his spiritual purity, but also, significantly, to his attitude of connecting and learning, which enabled him to attract so many people.
We can all expand our horizons when faced with differences of opinion, or when we feel misunderstood. Through such situations, we can learn to broaden our conceptions and, in turn, connect with more people.
Summary: Dealing with Disconnect
To summarize what I discussed today, our topic was about what to do “when we don’t feel accepted”—when we struggle to connect with people or deal with them effectively. I broadly covered four points:
The Nature of Distress: Not all distress is the same.
Inevitable Distress (I.A.S.S.): Some distress in life is simply unavoidable. As Krishna mentions in the Bhagavad Gita (e.g., 2.14), certain difficulties are inherent to existence.
Avoidable Distress: Krishna discusses this in Bhagavad Gita 5.22. These are problems we can prevent or mitigate.
Strengthening Distress: Discussed in Bhagavad Gita 18.37, these are difficulties through which we grow and become stronger.
Dealing with Inevitable Distress: What do we do with inevitable distress? We accept it. This means recognizing that differences of opinion will always exist. We don’t live in an ideal world, and there will always be some incompatibility because we are all unique individuals. We cannot wish this away. Sometimes, high-level incompatibility can be attributed to past karma. We accept that dealing with difficult people is a part of life, and no one will have a completely pain-free or problem-free existence. While some distress falls into this category, we cannot assume all distress is inevitable.
Dealing with Avoidable Distress: For avoidable distress, what do we do? We correct it. Correcting means looking at the situation not solely as a result of past karma (which can lead to passive tolerance) nor solely as a result of present karma (which can lead to immediate blame). The balanced approach is to start by identifying the Drishta cause—what is visible, the present karma. We try to understand, “Did I do anything wrong that might have made this person angry or upset?” If we immediately jump to blaming past karma or the other person’s inherent flaw, we won’t fix the situation and may create unnecessary suffering. In this context, I discussed two principles for correction:
Look Inward: “Have I done something that may have agitated this person?”
Give the Benefit of the Doubt: When a problem arises, we tend to ascribe a cause to it. Giving the benefit of the doubt means starting with the least negative explanation. This is usually that it was a judgment error—everyone makes mistakes in judgment, including ourselves. A more negative explanation would be that the person lacks the ability, and the most damaging is that the person’s motive itself is bad. We should avoid jumping to attributing negative motives and instead start with the least negative assumption. This approach helps us navigate “jams” in our relationships.
Dealing with Strengthening Distress: For strengthening situations, what do we do? We train ourselves. If we want to grow in our life and in Krishna consciousness, we aim not only to deepen our understanding but also to broaden our Krishna consciousness.
Here’s a corrected and more clearly articulated version of the provided text, focusing on improving flow, grammar, and word choice while retaining the original meaning:
Especially if you aim to live in a community or build a society, deepening your spiritual understanding is important, but broadening it becomes even more crucial. Broadening means actively seeking to understand why others think the way they do. As we discussed, even the enlightened in the Gita continue to enlighten each other. Why? Because Krishna, or reality itself, is so vast that even those who are enlightened always have more to learn. Even once you understand that Krishna is the supreme object of love, there’s still so much more to learn about how lovable Krishna is and how we can love Him more deeply.
With this understanding, we can better navigate life’s situations, minimize distress, and grow closer to Krishna. Let’s conclude with the prayer we offered at the beginning, which you can also find in your book. Please repeat after me: “My dear Lord, help me to learn how to help others to learn.”
Are there any questions? We have time, right?
Managing Defensive Reactions: Bonds and Boundaries
Student: Hare Krishna, Prabhu. Thank you so much for the class. I had a question about reacting defensively when someone accuses me of something. My emotions get very involved. Do you have any suggestions for creating distance from that emotional reaction and stopping that defensive response when I feel it starting to happen?
Speaker: If you’re looking for a foolproof way, I can only say that when I find out, I’ll tell you! It’s difficult. I can speak all this theory, but sometimes when someone annoys me, I also explode. That’s decreasing as I practice bhakti more, but it’s still a challenge.
Krishna discusses mind management primarily through two principles: Abhyasa and Vairagya. While these terms can be understood in different ways, I’ll use a specific framework.
Abhyasa (Practice): This refers to building our bonds. The practice is to fix our minds on Krishna, to build a bond with Him, and to hear from and build bonds with our spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada, and senior devotees. This forms one aspect.
Vairagya (Detachment/Boundaries): This can be understood as establishing boundaries.
The way to manage the mind’s urges and impulses is through a combination of bonds and boundaries. Let me give an example of each.
The Power of Bonds: Shatrughna and Manthara
In the Ramayana, when Bharata returns to the kingdom after Rama’s exile, he’s horrified by Kaikeyi’s actions. After performing his father’s last rites, as they walk back to the palace, a courtier approaches Bharata. While they talk, Shatrughna walks ahead. He sees them passing Kaikeyi’s palace, and from there, Manthara emerges. Manthara is the one who instigated Kaikeyi. Shatrughna sees Manthara adorned in opulent clothes and costly ornaments, lavishly gifted by Kaikeyi. She was so proud of these expensive possessions that she had no awareness of the kingdom’s grief—the king had just passed away, and people were returning from the funeral.
Seeing her dressed so ostentatiously, Shatrughna lost control. He charged towards her. Manthara noticed him and tried to flee, calling out to Kaikeyi. But Shatrughna grabbed her and violently shook her, exclaiming, “You are the cause of the ocean of agony and pain that has drowned all of Ayodhya! You are the wretched person who has destroyed our entire kingdom’s and family’s peace!”
Kaikeyi came running out and told Shatrughna to stop, but he paid her no attention. Then Bharata heard the commotion and rushed over. Bharata ran to Shatrughna, pleading, “Stop! Look at what you are doing. I’ve felt that same urge to do this a dozen times over, but we want to go to the forest and bring Rama back. If Rama comes to know that we have attacked either Manthara or Kaikeyi, he will be very unhappy with us. For Rama’s sake, let her go.” Immediately, Shatrughna released her.
For us, especially if our devotion is genuine and not just a ritual, our bond with Krishna becomes paramount in every interaction. It means that while I am here and the other person is here, Krishna is also here. I’m not just reacting to the other person based on their actions towards me. For a devotee, there’s always the consideration: “How can I serve Krishna in this situation? How can I please Krishna? Or, if I cannot please Him, how can I at least not displease Him, or displease Him as little as possible?”
When we have that bond with Krishna, even if someone has done something terrible to us, that bond restrains us from retaliating. It’s similar to how we might restrain ourselves from attacking a close friend’s relative, even if they behave badly, for the sake of our friendship. Having a bond with something higher—whether it’s Krishna, our spiritual master, or our community leaders—helps us control our impulses.
The Wisdom of Boundaries
The other principle is boundaries. Our bond with Krishna is crucial, but what do boundaries mean in this context? Boundaries refer to the lines we commit not to cross, no matter how angry we get. We might raise our voice, but perhaps we won’t use obscenities. Even if we use obscenities, maybe we won’t resort to physical violence. We all have certain boundaries we don’t want to violate.
However, when we allow ourselves to be controlled by impulses, we start violating our own established boundaries. These boundaries can be societal, cultural, or traditional, but also the personal ones we set for ourselves. Once we start crossing one line repeatedly, it becomes a slippery slope, leading us to cross further and further boundaries.
Whatever the other person has done needs to be addressed. But while dealing with them, we must be aware: “I don’t want to become like that.” No matter what happens, we don’t want to behave in a way we know is wrong. If we have these boundaries clearly defined for ourselves, strengthened by scriptural study and positive association, then even if we make mistakes in our behavior, we won’t go too far astray.
Generally speaking, the safest position is when we have both bonds and boundaries. Conversely, if we have neither, we are at our weakest.
If we lack a higher person we wish to please, someone for whom we strive to do good or avoid doing wrong, and we have no bonds guiding us, then our behavior can escalate to any degree. For example, young men might get into violent fights. But if that same person marries, starts a family, and has children, they often think, “I can’t get into these things now.” That sense of bond creates a boundary that helps them guard their behavior.
If we have only boundaries but no bonds, we’ll eventually feel suffocated. We’ll start to resent the restrictions, thinking, “Why can’t I do this?” Rules, like roads, have barriers, but the purpose of a road isn’t just to stay within the barriers; it’s to go somewhere. If we only have barriers and no direction, we’ll wonder why we have to stay within them. We adhere to boundaries so that we can have better relationships—with others, with Krishna, or for our overall well-being. Sometimes, our behavior towards one person might not improve our relationship with them, but it can harm our relationship with everyone else connected to that person. So, having only boundaries without bonds can be problematic.
Conversely, if we have only bonds but no boundaries, we remain vulnerable. We might say, “Yes, I love Krishna, I care for you,” but then when an urge arises, we might act impulsively in any direction. Therefore, to be truly safe and strong, we need both bonds and boundaries.
Speaker: Okay, thank you. Any other questions or comments? It’s a long answer, I’ll try to keep the other answers short. It’s a very important question, actually. Thank you for asking it.
Student’s Testimony and Question: Navigating Difficult Relationships
Student: Hare Krishna, Prabhuji. Thank you so much for this nectar we’ve received for two days. It’s truly Krishna’s blessings that you were here and shared your wisdom. I just want to share a little about how I connected with you, and then I have a follow-up question.
A few months back, I learned about a Bhakti Yoga conference, which was all virtual. I joined, and one session was yours. I was very interested and intrigued by how you connected the Gita’s lessons with science and spirituality. It really resonated with me, and I started following you from there. I then checked your calendar and saw you were coming to our town, so I really wanted to come, see you, and learn more. Thank you for that. I’m truly grateful to Krishna for allowing me to come and listen to you for these two days.
I also learned about your story. From all of us, I want to offer three Haribols for your mother, if you would allow, because I feel she played a significant part in what we have today.
Speaker: Yesterday, I mentioned that when I got polio at one year old, it was from a defective vaccine. I couldn’t walk normally after that. But when I was about two and a half or three, a distant relative visited and was consoling my mother, saying, “So sad that your son got polio.” I remember my mother’s words, spoken very calmly, clearly, and confidently: “Whatever he lacks physically, God will provide him intellectually.”
Audience: Haribol! Haribol! Haribol!
Student: Thank you, Prabhuji. My question is related to the discussion we just had about the question Mataji asked. We live with our boundaries, that’s true. But there are certain people in our lives whom we love deeply—they are either family or very close friends. Even with our boundaries, their behaviors are not acceptable. If I want to react negatively, my Krishna consciousness tells me I’m destroying my karma, which I want to avoid. So I want to walk away. But how many times do I walk away from how many people? And does that mean at some point, I’ll start feeling like it’s my fault—that I’m walking away from everyone and losing every loved one? That’s just my internal struggle.
Speaker: Thank you for your kind words and for mentioning my mother. This is an important question. It would take me an hour to answer fully, but I’ll try to address it in a few minutes.
Broadly speaking, tolerance is an important virtue, but it’s not the only virtue. Tolerance has a purpose. If you look at the Bhagavad Gita, there’s a sequence:
2.14 talks about tolerance.
2.15 talks about transcendence. What happens when we tolerate? We attain a higher level of consciousness; we grow.
Before this, Krishna discusses intelligence, which fundamentally means differentiating between temporary things (the body) and the eternal (the soul). Intelligence also means understanding the proper perspective: knowing what are the big things in our life and what are the small things. Just as a selfie can distort perspective, making us seem very large while others are small, proper perspective means seeing things as they are.
Tolerance is based on this intelligence. It’s meant to keep small things small so that we can keep big things big. For example, Krishna tells Arjuna to tolerate, but he doesn’t mean “tolerate all the atrocities the Kauravas have committed against you, no need to fight.” Instead, He’s telling Arjuna to tolerate the pain of fighting against Bhishma and Drona because it is his dharma to fight. At that time, fighting against Bhishma and Drona felt like the big thing for Arjuna. But Krishna clarifies, “You are not fighting against them; you are fighting for dharma. Duryodhana embodies adharma, and they have chosen his side.” The big thing was to uphold dharma.
So, for all of us in our relationships, we need to maintain this perspective: What is the big thing? And what does transcendence mean? It means the “big thing” ultimately becomes the biggest thing in our life: Krishna becomes a living, loving reality for us.
Here’s a corrected and more clearly articulated version of the provided text, focusing on improving flow, grammar, and word choice while retaining the original meaning:
Ultimately, we attain Krishna. That is the sequence, the progression. For us, we may need to decide, if someone is repeatedly misbehaving with us, what is the big thing here? If that person’s behavior isn’t a significant issue, and they’re not a very important person in our life—perhaps we interact with them only once in a while at social gatherings—then we can simply forget it and move on.
However, if that person interacts with us regularly and causes us considerable distress, agitating us to the point where we’re unable to function properly, then we may have to take steps to protect ourselves. This isn’t about taking revenge. When I speak of boundaries, it means not only staying within our own ethical limits but also sometimes creating distance from the other person.
It’s crucial that we are able to perform our dharma properly. For example, in a workplace, if a boss, manager, or colleague is exploitative, abusive, or manipulative, and we are constantly agitated, we might come home and take it out on our family, getting angry with our spouse or children. If this prevents us from performing our dharma at home, we must consider solutions. This might involve changing teams, changing jobs, or filing a complaint. The goal is to keep the big thing big.
Often, we talk about our karma. The purpose of life isn’t simply fulfilled by exhausting our past karma. While it’s true that suffering can be a result of past karma, that’s only one part of the picture. The purpose of life is fulfilled not so much by exhausting past karma as by executing our present dharma. We don’t just want to remove negative entries from our past karmic record; we want to do something positive in our lives.
Consider our spirituality: if a relational situation is so severe that we can’t focus at all when we sit down to chant Krishna’s name or pray to Him, then even if we sit for meditation, we won’t be able to fix our minds on Krishna. In such cases, we might need to do something—perhaps create distance from that person.
We need to understand that there are many ways of interacting with people. Sometimes, we have to cooperate because we must work together. But sometimes, cooperation might mean “you operate here, I’ll operate here.” “You take this particular responsibility; I’ll take this one.” This minimizes direct interaction. Just because two people can’t work closely together doesn’t mean they have to constantly criticize each other or ruin each other’s lives. Simply create some space.
We may need to have some hard conversations to explain why that distance is necessary. However, it’s better to create some distance than to maintain closeness with bitterness. If not warmth, at least cultivate cordiality and politeness. I believe we all have to be responsible and resourceful in dealing with these situations.
Student: Thank you, Prabhuji, very, very much. Thank you.
Transactional vs. Transformational Relationships
Speaker: Last question. We’ll start with this.
Student: Prabhu, I have a question. First of all, thank you for a wonderful talk, Prabhu. It’s been enlightening for the last two days. And I hope we continue the Buddha to the Buddha Vanti (enlightened enlighten each other), so we can spread enlightenment amongst us. You made a statement at the beginning, Prabhu, that reciprocation is a basic foundation for any interaction or relationship. And then you categorized it into two: transactional and transformational. My question is if you can explain them a little bit more. And also, if we see that reciprocation is lacking in a relationship, does that mean we should end the relationship, or is that too strong a statement?
Speaker: Okay. What do transactional and transformational mean?
Imagine you go to a takeout place to get some food, perhaps vegetarian food. You just walk in, take the food, maybe pay, and sometimes you don’t even see the person serving; you just see their hand as you exchange money for food. That’s a highly transactional interaction.
However, if you come to a temple regularly, and someone is serving prasadam, you might talk with that person, perhaps sit down and take prasadam with them afterward. There’s more engagement. It’s not just a transaction; it’s a transformational interaction. You come closer to that person, they come closer to you, and perhaps you learn something more. That’s the difference between transactional and transformational.
Now, when I say there is some interaction, some reciprocation, the reciprocation doesn’t always have to be in perfect proportion. For example, parents do much more for a child on a practical level than a child does for parents. But while parents do a lot physically, children fulfill the parents’ emotional need to nurture and care for someone. We all have a deep need to be needed. I saw a very nice quote at your home about your son/daughter, which I think said, “We did not give you the gift of life; life gave you as a gift to us.” It’s a beautiful thought.
So, reciprocation can occur at different levels. In some relationships, we might do a lot for the other person, and they do less for us, and that’s perfectly fine if that’s the nature of the relationship. A teacher might teach much more to the student than the student does for the teacher. The student’s contribution might be to attend the talks or classes (and of course, pay fees to the college or for tuition).
Basically, the closeness or distance in a relationship will naturally correspond to the kind of reciprocation present. For instance, in a teacher-student interaction, if the teacher sees the student is very interested and attentive, perhaps the student asks questions after the talk, and the teacher and student grow closer. But if the student is just waiting for the class to end, and once it’s over, the teacher looks up and all the students have vanished, then it’s just a job. The intimacy or closeness in the relationship will be affected by the nature of the reciprocation.
Should we end a relationship if reciprocation is lacking? Well, it depends. “Ending” is a strong word, as I said. But it depends. For example, if we have a distant relative or a childhood friend whom we wish happy birthday every year or do something for, but they never respond. They were closures. We decide, “Why do I need to keep spending time on this?” That’s fair enough. However, in some relationships, we might feel it’s important to continue as a service.
Ultimately, it comes down to deciding what’s the big thing and what’s the small thing in that particular situation. If we determine that a relationship or action is a “big thing,” then we can decide to continue investing in it, even if the expected reciprocation isn’t there. Conversely, if we decide it’s not a priority, we might question the need to continue if reciprocation isn’t meeting our expectations. We can make decisions accordingly.
कल हमने एक सवाल पर चर्चा की थी, जिसका जवाब 2.50, 422, 0.72 था। हमने यह भी देखा कि भगवद गीता एक व्याख्यान नहीं है, बल्कि प्रश्नोत्तरों का संग्रह है। गीता के प्रवाह को समझने के लिए, हमें यह देखना होगा कि किस प्रकार का प्रश्न पूछा गया है और उसका उत्तर कैसे दिया गया है।
कोई भी सवाल आने पर, हम उसके बारे में तीन मुख्य प्रश्न पूछ सकते हैं:
प्रश्न क्या है? (What is the question?) — कभी-कभी लोग ऐसे सवाल पूछते हैं जो स्पष्ट नहीं होते।
प्रश्न क्यों पूछा गया? (Why the question?) — अगर चर्चा किसी एक विषय पर है और कोई बिल्कुल अलग सवाल पूछता है, तो यह समझना ज़रूरी है कि वह प्रश्न क्यों प्रासंगिक है।
उत्तर क्या है? (What is the answer?) — सवाल का जवाब क्या है?
हम भगवद गीता के प्रवाह को विभिन्न तरीकों से देख सकते हैं, लेकिन यहाँ हम इसे विशेष रूप से प्रश्नों और उत्तरों के माध्यम से समझने का प्रयास करेंगे।
अर्जुन का भ्रम: शांति और युद्ध
दूसरे अध्याय में, जब भगवान ने धर्म का सवाल उठाया, तो उन्होंने अर्जुन को अपने क्षत्रिय धर्म का पालन करने पर ज़ोर दिया। इसे करने के लिए उन्होंने दो रास्ते बताए: एक कर्मकांड के स्तर पर, और दूसरा कर्मयोग के स्तर पर। सार यह था कि अर्जुन को युद्ध करना चाहिए।
जब भगवान ने ऐसा कहा, तो तीसरे अध्याय की शुरुआत में अर्जुन ने सवाल पूछा, “आपके वाक्य मुझे मोहित कर रहे हैं, मुझे मिश्रित लग रहे हैं। कृपया मुझे एक चीज़ स्पष्टता से बताएं।” अर्जुन को कौन से वाक्य मिश्रित लग रहे थे और क्यों उन्हें लगा कि भगवान ने स्पष्ट नहीं बताया है?
धारणाओं का महत्व
जब हम कोई सवाल पूछते हैं, तो हर सवाल कुछ धारणाओं से उत्पन्न होता है (Every question arises from a set of conceptions)। यदि वे धारणाएँ अधूरी या गलत हैं, तो कोई भी जवाब समझ में नहीं आएगा।
अर्जुन की दो मुख्य धारणाएँ थीं: युद्ध करें या युद्ध न करें (Fight or Don’t fight)? यानी, कर्म करें या संन्यास लें? अर्जुन को लगा कि यदि उन्हें शांति चाहिए, तो उन्हें युद्ध नहीं करना चाहिए। स्वाभाविक रूप से, अर्जुन शांति को युद्ध न करने (Peace is associated with not fighting) के साथ जोड़ रहे थे।
भगवान के निर्देश और अर्जुन की दुविधा
भगवान ने स्पष्ट रूप से अर्जुन को युद्ध करने के लिए कहा था। यह उन्होंने 2.37 और 2.38 में कहा, जहाँ उन्होंने स्वर्ग प्राप्ति या पृथ्वी प्राप्ति के लिए युद्ध करने की बात की, या फिर बिना किसी कामना के युद्ध करने को कहा। 2.48 में उन्होंने कर्म करने को कहा, फल की अपेक्षा किए बिना। दोनों ही जगह पर, भगवान युद्ध करने की बात कर रहे थे।
लेकिन, दूसरे अध्याय के अंत में, श्लोक 70 और 71 में, भगवान शांति का उल्लेख करते हैं। वे कहते हैं कि उसे शांति मिलेगी (ना काम कामी)। इससे अर्जुन भ्रमित हो गए। एक तरफ भगवान उन्हें युद्ध करने को कह रहे हैं, और दूसरी तरफ शांति की बात कर रहे हैं। अर्जुन को लगा, “आप मुझे युद्ध करने को कह रहे हैं या युद्ध न करने को?” उनके मन में आया, “युद्ध करने से शांति कैसे मिलेगी?”
वास्तव में, अर्जुन बाह्य शांति (external peace) के बारे में बात कर रहे थे, जबकि भगवान अंतरंग शांति (internal peace) के बारे में।
शब्दों का अर्थ: लक्ष्यार्थ और संदर्भ
अंग्रेजी में इसे ‘denotation’ और ‘connotation’ कहते हैं – शब्द का शाब्दिक अर्थ और उसका प्रासंगिक अर्थ। जैसे मुहावरा “लातों के भूत बातों से नहीं मानते।” इसका शाब्दिक अर्थ लें तो समझ नहीं आएगा। इसका अर्थ उसके संदर्भ में ही समझना होगा।
इसी तरह, शांति का अर्थ संदर्भ के अनुसार बदलता है। युद्धभूमि में कोई शांति की बात कर रहा है, तो अर्जुन को लगा कि वह युद्ध न होने की बात कर रहा है।
दूसरे अध्याय में एक और जटिलता है। भगवान कहते हैं, “दूरेण ह्यवरं कर्म” (2.49) — यानी, जो कर्म अधम है उसे दूर रखो। ‘अवर’ का अर्थ है निम्न या घटिया। भगवान कहते हैं कि ऐसे कार्य से दूर रहो जिससे तुम्हें कोई अच्छी प्राप्ति नहीं होगी। अर्जुन की दृष्टि से, अपने ही रिश्तेदारों को मारना एक ‘अवर’ कर्म था।
शिक्षा के पहलू: सरलता और जटिलता
शिक्षा के दो पहलू होते हैं: सरल चीज़ को जटिल बनाना और जटिल चीज़ को सरल करना। उदाहरण के लिए, एक छोटा बच्चा जानता है कि छोटे नंबर से बड़ा नंबर घटाया नहीं जा सकता (3-5 संभव नहीं)। शिक्षक उसे बताता है कि यह संभव है, पर एक अलग स्तर पर (नकारात्मक संख्याएँ)।
कभी-कभी शिक्षा में, हमें सरल चीज़ को जटिल बनाना पड़ता है (complexify the simple), क्योंकि सत्य उतना सरल नहीं होता जितना लगता है। अगर कोई व्यक्ति किसी चीज़ को बहुत सरल मान रहा है, तो उसे उसकी जटिलता समझानी पड़ती है। जैसे, बच्चों को सिखाते हैं कि “यह काला है, यह सफेद है।” लेकिन दुनिया में काले और सफेद चीज़ें बहुत कम हैं; अधिकांश दुनिया ग्रे या अन्य रंगों की है।
अर्जुन सोच रहे थे कि उनके पास केवल दो ही विकल्प हैं: युद्ध करना या युद्ध न करना। लेकिन भगवान ने वास्तव में बताया कि कर्म के अनेक स्तर होते हैं। सबसे नीचे है विकर्म (जो कर्म नहीं करना चाहिए)। भगवान कहते हैं कि अगर तुम युद्ध नहीं करोगे, तो भी वह एक विकर्म होगा। उसके बाद है कर्मकांड (निश्चित विधि-विधान से किया गया कार्य), और उसके ऊपर है कर्मयोग। अभी तक भगवान ने कर्म के तीन स्तर बताए हैं, और तीनों में ‘कार्य’ (action) शामिल है।
कर्म, वैराग्य और अर्जुन की दुविधा
भगवद्गीता के तीसरे अध्याय में भगवान कृष्ण अर्जुन को कर्म और वैराग्य के बीच की दुविधा से निकालने का प्रयास करते हैं. अर्जुन के मन में केवल दो ही विकल्प हैं: कर्म करना या कर्म न करना. कर्म न करने के संबंध में भगवान स्पष्ट करते हैं कि यह उचित नहीं है, क्योंकि इससे निंदा और पाप लगता है. यह बात विशेषकर 2.33 श्लोक में बताई गई है, जहाँ भगवान कहते हैं कि “तुम्हारी निंदा हो जाएगी और तुम्हें पाप लगेगा.”
इसके अलावा, भगवान उन “पुष्पिताम वाचम्” (यानि लुभावनी बातें) की भी चर्चा करते हैं जो क्षणिक भौतिक फल का वर्णन करती हैं. वे कहते हैं कि ये भी त्यागने योग्य हैं, क्योंकि इनका फल क्षणिक होता है. 4.9 में भगवान अर्जुन को कर्म करने का आदेश देते हैं, और 4.7 से आगे भी इसी बात को दोहराते हैं.
कर्म योग और ज्ञान योग: विभिन्न स्तर
अर्जुन को लगता है कि एक ओर कर्म है और दूसरी ओर वैराग्य है, और उसे समझ नहीं आ रहा कि क्या चुने. भगवान कृष्ण बताते हैं कि कर्म के ही कई स्तर हैं, और इन स्तरों में वैराग्य भी शामिल है. अर्जुन इन विभिन्न स्तरों को समझ नहीं पाता और पूछता है, “मुझे क्या करना चाहिए—कर्म या वैराग्य?”
अगर हम इसे सरल शब्दों में समझें तो, अर्जुन के सामने युद्ध करने (कर्म) और युद्ध न करने (वैराग्य) का विकल्प है. अर्जुन अपनी दृष्टि से देखता है कि युद्ध करने के सकारात्मक और नकारात्मक दोनों पहलू हैं.
नकारात्मक पहलू (अर्जुन की दृष्टि से): युद्ध करके अपने ही परिवारजनों को मारना (जिसे अंग्रेजी में ‘fratricide’ कहते हैं, यानी भाई-बंधुओं की हत्या). अर्जुन सोचता है कि यह ‘बुरा कर्म’ होगा और इससे पाप लगेगा.
सकारात्मक पहलू (अर्जुन की दृष्टि से): युद्ध न करने से कोई ‘बुरा कर्म’ नहीं होगा.
नकारात्मक पहलू (युद्ध न करने का): यह सामाजिक कर्तव्य से विमुख होना है (social irresponsibility). अर्जुन जानता है कि कर्तव्य छोड़ना अच्छी बात नहीं है.
इन दोनों के बीच, भगवान कर्म योग का मार्ग सुझाते हैं. कर्म योग में व्यक्ति अपना सामाजिक कर्तव्य निभाता है, लेकिन अनासक्त भाव से. जैसा कि 2.39 में कहा गया है: “बुद्ध्या युक्तो यया पार्थ कर्मबन्धं प्रहास्यसि.”
प्रवचन की व्याख्या: एक दर्शक का परिप्रेक्ष्य
कभी-कभी प्रवचनकर्ता सोचते हैं कि वे जो समझा रहे हैं, वह श्रोताओं को समझ आ रहा है. लेकिन श्रोता कह सकते हैं, “सर, आपको लगता है कि आप समझा रहे हैं, लेकिन आप वास्तव में समझा नहीं रहे हैं.”
भगवान कृष्ण अर्जुन की इसी दुविधा को समझते हैं और 3.3 में उसकी संकल्पना से ही शुरुआत करते हैं. वे दो प्रकार के मार्गों की बात करते हैं: कर्म योग और ज्ञान योग.
भगवान कहते हैं कि दोनों मार्ग अच्छे हैं, क्योंकि दोनों से आध्यात्मिक प्रगति हो सकती है. अगर हम आध्यात्मिक स्तर को एक छोर पर और भौतिक स्तर को दूसरे छोर पर रखें, तो दोनों मार्गों (कर्म योग और ज्ञान योग) से व्यक्ति भौतिक स्तर से आध्यात्मिक स्तर तक पहुंच सकता है. इसलिए, दोनों अच्छे हैं.
लेकिन इसके बाद भगवान बताते हैं कि अर्जुन के लिए कौन सा मार्ग अच्छा है. अर्जुन का प्रश्न है: “मुझे क्या करना चाहिए? युद्ध करना है या युद्ध नहीं करना है?”
भगवान जवाब देते हैं कि दोनों अच्छे हैं, लेकिन दोनों की पात्रता अलग-अलग है. इस पूरे अध्याय में इसी की चर्चा होने वाली है.
ज्ञान योग की व्यक्तिगत पात्रता
अगर ज्ञान योग को अपनाना है, तो इसका अर्थ है वैराग्य का मार्ग स्वीकार करना. भगवान कहते हैं कि इसके लिए सबसे पहले व्यक्तिगत पात्रता (individual qualification) होनी चाहिए.
मिथ्याचारी: यदि व्यक्ति में वास्तविक वैराग्य नहीं है, तो वह मिथ्याचारी बन जाएगा. 3.6 में भगवान कहते हैं, “कर्मेन्द्रियाणि संयम्य य आस्ते मनसा स्मरन्। इन्द्रियार्थान्विमूढात्मा मिथ्याचारः स उच्यते” (जो व्यक्ति कर्मेन्द्रियों को रोककर मन से विषयों का चिंतन करता है, वह मूढ़ व्यक्ति मिथ्याचारी कहलाता है).
सामाजिक निर्वाह: भगवान बताते हैं कि यदि सभी वैराग्य ले लेंगे, तो समाज कैसे चलेगा? शरीर का निर्वाह कैसे होगा? 3.8 में भगवान कहते हैं, “शरीरयात्रापि च ते न प्रसिद्ध्येदकर्मणः” (बिना कर्म किए तेरा शरीर का निर्वाह भी संभव नहीं होगा).
अध्याय का प्रवाह: कर्म योग की श्रेष्ठता
इस अध्याय के प्रवाह को देखें तो, नौवें श्लोक तक भगवान यह बता रहे हैं कि कर्म योग ज्ञान योग से बेहतर है, खासकर उन लोगों के लिए जो परिपक्व नहीं हैं. भगवान अर्जुन को हर तरह से उसके कर्तव्य कर्म करने के लिए प्रेरित करना चाहते हैं.
सामाजिक निर्वाह (यज्ञ): 3.9 से 3.16 श्लोक में भगवान यज्ञ के बारे में बताते हैं. वे कहते हैं कि यदि व्यक्ति अपना कर्म करेगा तो वह यज्ञ करेगा और धर्म का पालन करेगा, जिससे समाज की ज़रूरतें पूरी होंगी. यह एक वैश्विक दृष्टिकोण (cosmic perspective) से बताया गया है.
मानवीय दृष्टिकोण (नेतृत्व): 3.16 से 3.25 श्लोक में भगवान मानवीय दृष्टिकोण से बात करते हैं. कोई कह सकता है कि संसार तो चलेगा ही, मेरे कर्म करने या न करने से क्या फर्क पड़ेगा? भगवान कहते हैं कि तुम समाज में एक नेता के रूप में हो, और तुम्हें एक आदर्श स्थापित करना चाहिए.
नेता और अनुयायी: वैराग्य का प्रभाव
भगवान आगे बताते हैं कि भले ही तुम वैराग्य के लिए परिपक्व हो, फिर भी तुम्हें समाज के लिए एक उदाहरण स्थापित करना चाहिए. लोग क्या सोचेंगे? यदि कोई व्यक्ति बड़ी मुश्किल में आता है और समस्या के कारण वैराग्य लेता है, तो लोग सोचेंगे कि उसने आध्यात्मिक कारणों से नहीं, बल्कि कठिन समस्याओं से बचने के लिए वैराग्य लिया है. दूसरे लोग भी उसका अनुकरण करेंगे.
नेता (परिपक्व): यदि नेता वैराग्य के लिए योग्य और परिपक्व है, तो उसके वैराग्य से उसका उद्धार हो सकता है.
अनुयायी (अपरिपक्व): लेकिन यदि अनुयायी अपरिपक्व हैं और वैराग्य लेते हैं, तो उनका पतन हो सकता है.
इसलिए, भगवान कहते हैं कि तुम्हें अपने कर्मों के दूसरों पर पड़ने वाले परिणामों को भी देखना चाहिए. तुम परिपक्व हो सकते हो, लेकिन दूसरे नहीं हैं.
वैराग्य के प्रकार: परिपक्वता और परिस्थिति
जब हम वैराग्य की बात करते हैं, तो दो संभावनाएं हो सकती हैं:
परिपक्व (Mature): जो आध्यात्मिक रूप से तैयार हैं और उन्होंने वैराग्य का निर्णय लिया है क्योंकि उनकी आध्यात्मिक रुचि है.
अपरिपक्व (Immature): जो आध्यात्मिक रूप से तैयार नहीं हैं, लेकिन जीवन में कोई बड़ी समस्या आने पर वैराग्य ले लेते हैं.
यह संभव है कि किसी व्यक्ति के जीवन में कोई समस्या आए और तभी उसमें आध्यात्मिक जागृति हो जाए. लेकिन यह भी हो सकता है कि किसी व्यक्ति में आध्यात्मिक प्रवृत्ति न हो, और वह केवल समस्याओं से बचने के लिए वैराग्य ले.
यहां आपका पाठ संशोधित किया गया है, इसे और अधिक सुसंगत, स्पष्ट और प्रभावशाली बनाया गया है:
कर्तव्य का महत्व: स्वभाव और सामाजिक भूमिका का संतुलन
तो ऐसे भी लोग हो सकते हैं, और इसी संदर्भ में भगवान बताते हैं कि मैं भी अपना कर्तव्य करता हूँ. इसलिए, तुम्हें भी अपना कर्तव्य करना ज़रूरी है. इस तरह, भगवान अर्जुन को यह समझा रहे हैं कि उन्हें अपना कर्तव्य निभाना चाहिए. मैं इसे थोड़ा और विस्तार से समझाता हूँ, नहीं तो यह आपके लिए पूरी तरह स्पष्ट नहीं होगा. मैं इस अध्याय को पूरा करने के बाद इसे और सरल बनाऊँगा.
भगवान 35वें श्लोक तक (और अगला सत्र 36वें से शुरू होता है) यह बताते हैं कि हर व्यक्ति को कर्म योग करना चाहिए. कर्म योग वैराग्य से बेहतर है, क्योंकि वैराग्य में ज्ञान योग या ध्यान योग हो सकता है, पर वह क्रियात्मक कर्तव्य से बेहतर है. भगवान यहाँ स्वभाव के परिप्रेक्ष्य से समझाते हैं कि हर व्यक्ति का अपना स्वभाव होता है, और हर किसी को अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करना चाहिए.
जैसे अभी तुम, अर्जुन, एक क्षत्रिय हो. अभी तुम कह रहे हो कि मैं युद्ध नहीं करूँगा, पर क्या होगा? कुछ समय बाद जब तुम्हें कहीं और अत्याचार या कोई बुरा कार्य होता दिखेगा, तो तुम्हारा क्षत्रिय स्वभाव तुरंत जागृत हो जाएगा और तुम युद्ध करने की इच्छा करोगे.
इसे ऐसे समझो, मान लीजिए कोई व्यक्ति पुलिस या सेना में भर्ती हो गया क्योंकि उसमें वास्तव में दूसरों की सुरक्षा करने की इच्छा है. वहाँ कुछ समस्या आती है, कुछ होता है, और वह नौकरी छोड़ देता है. जो व्यक्ति पुलिस में है, वह किसी अपराधी पर आक्रमण कर सकता है, लाठी मार सकता है, गोली चला सकता है, और उसे वास्तव में मेडल मिलेगा. पर बाद में, वही व्यक्ति अभी सेवानिवृत्त हो गया है, नौकरी छोड़ दी है, और बाद में वह देखता है कि कोई गुंडागर्दी कर रहा है. वह जाकर उस गुंडे से लड़ने लगता है.
तब क्या होगा? उसका इरादा अच्छा भी हो सकता है, पर अब उसके पास वह पद नहीं है. तो क्या होगा? जो गुंडागर्दी कर रहा था, तुम भी एक तरह से गुंडा बन गए. तुम अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य कर रहे हो, लेकिन क्या है? एक व्यक्तिगत प्रकृति होती है और एक बाहरी नियम होता है. यदि तुमने अपनी बाहरी भूमिका, अपने बाहरी कर्तव्य को छोड़ दिया, तो तुम्हारा अंदर का स्वभाव तो नहीं जाने वाला है.
लेकिन तब तुम हिंसा करोगे. अभी तुम कह रहे हो कि मैं हिंसा नहीं करना चाहता क्योंकि इससे कर्म बंधन होता है, यह नहीं करना है – तुम बड़ी-बड़ी बातें कर रहे हो. पर जब तुम्हारा स्वभाव जागृत होगा, तो यह सब नहीं चलेगा. तो बेहतर है कि तुम अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार जो भूमिका है, वह भूमिका रखो.
आत्मा, स्वभाव और सामाजिक भूमिका का संबंध
तो क्या हो रहा है कि यह जो है अभी, एक आत्मा है. और फिर आत्मा के बाहर उसका एक स्वभाव है. यह स्वभाव कहाँ आता है? यह मानव शरीर में होता है. और उसके बाहर, उसकी एक सामाजिक भूमिका (social role) है.
अभी अर्जुन कह रहा है कि वह सामाजिक भूमिका छोड़ देगा. वह वैराग्य लेने वाला है. अर्जुन अभी सोच रहा है कि मैं वैराग्य लूँगा, जिसका अर्थ है कि यह भूमिका यहाँ रह जाएगी और मैं यहाँ चला जाऊँगा. वह क्षत्रिय का पद, क्षत्रिय का कर्तव्य छोड़ देगा. अर्जुन कह रहा है कि यह वैराग्य मतलब उसने अपनी सामाजिक भूमिका को छोड़ दिया. पर क्या है? क्षत्रिय की प्रवृत्ति अभी तक उसके अंदर है. तो अभी क्या होगा? व्यक्ति को अपना कर्तव्य तो करना ही पड़ेगा.
कर्तव्य का आंतरिक संतोष
यहाँ भगवान इसलिए समझा रहे हैं क्योंकि क्या होता है, हर व्यक्ति जो अपना कर्तव्य कर रहा होता है, जब वह अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार वह कर्तव्य करता है, तो उसमें एक तरह से उस व्यक्ति को एक आंतरिक संतुष्टि मिलती है.
मान लीजिए कोई डॉक्टर है. अगर उसमें सही में लोगों की देखभाल करने की प्रवृत्ति है, तो हर डॉक्टर को पैसा चाहिए, हर डॉक्टर को पद चाहिए, हर डॉक्टर को समाज में थोड़ा आदर चाहिए – वह सब तो चाहिए, पर आंतरिक रूप से भी सेवा भाव है. तो क्या है? दूसरों को मदद करना है, दूसरों की तबीयत ठीक करना है.
तो वह जो बाहरी परिणाम है, एक तरह से कैसे हैं? हम एक देख रहे हैं कि क्यों, अगर आप दूसरों का कर्म करोगे, दूसरों के स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करोगे तो यह भयावह क्यों है? भगवान बता रहे हैं कि क्यों है इसमें, क्योंकि क्या होता है कि प्रकृति के अनुसार कर्म (action according to nature) जब व्यक्ति अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करता है, तो दो चीज़ें होती हैं:
एक आंतरिक संतुष्टि होती है कि मुझे जो अच्छा लगता है, जो मैं अच्छा कर सकता हूँ, वह मुझे मिल रहा है और मैं उसे कर रहा हूँ.
कोई लेखक है, उसको लिखने में अच्छा लगता है. कोई संगीतकार है, उसको संगीत में अच्छा लगता है.
कुछ लोग ऐसे होते हैं जिनको इतना अच्छा लगता है कि वे हज़ार लोगों के सामने बहुत सुंदर कीर्तन करेंगे. पर वह सही में उनको कितना अच्छा लगता है? जब उनका मन विचलित हो गया होगा, किसी ने कुछ वैसा बोला होगा, वे कोई मुंडन ले लें, करताल ले लें, हारमोनियम ले लें, और खुद अकेले कीर्तन करेंगे. कोई सुन नहीं रहा है, पर वे कीर्तन करते हैं. क्यों? क्योंकि उसमें उनको आंतरिक संतुष्टि मिल रही है. उनको अंतर से ही भगवान का अनुभव हो रहा है. तो जब हम हमारे स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करते हैं, तो हम यह कह सकते हैं कि यह सही आध्यात्मिक है.
आंतरिक संतुष्टि बनाम बाहरी प्रोत्साहन: कर्म और समाज पर प्रभाव
यह समझना महत्वपूर्ण है कि आंतरिक संतुष्टि और बाहरी प्रोत्साहन (जैसे पैसा या पहचान) दोनों ही व्यक्तियों के लिए आवश्यक हैं। हालाँकि, जब कोई व्यक्ति केवल बाहरी लाभ के लिए कार्य करता है और उसे अपने काम में कोई आंतरिक सुख नहीं मिलता, तो इसके नकारात्मक परिणाम हो सकते हैं।
आंतरिक असंतोष के परिणाम
जब कोई व्यक्ति अपने स्वभाव या रुचि के विरुद्ध कार्य करता है, तो उसे उस काम में कोई आंतरिक खुशी नहीं मिलती। उदाहरण के लिए, एक ऐसे व्यक्ति को लें जिसकी रुचि लोगों की सेवा करने में है, लेकिन उसे किसी कॉर्पोरेट कंपनी में मार्केटिंग या विज्ञापन की भूमिका मिल जाती है। ऐसे में, वह व्यक्ति केवल बाहरी पुरस्कारों के लिए काम करेगा, जिससे समाज में समस्याएँ पैदा हो सकती हैं।
समाज में उपद्रव: आंतरिक संतुष्टि के बिना काम करने वाला व्यक्ति समाज के लिए हानिकारक हो सकता है। एक डॉक्टर, जिसे लोगों की देखभाल करने में रुचि नहीं है, वह बीमार व्यक्ति की बीमारी को और बढ़ा सकता है, अनावश्यक जाँचें करवा सकता है, या ऐसे कार्य कर सकता है जो लोगों के स्वास्थ्य के लिए हानिकारक हों।
पफाइज़र का उदाहरण: हाल ही में, पफाइज़र कंपनी के एक कार्यकारी ने एक साक्षात्कार में बताया कि कैसे वे कोरोनावायरस के उत्परिवर्तन को नियंत्रित करने के लिए शोध कर रहे हैं। उनका उद्देश्य वायरस के स्वयं उत्परिवर्तित होने से पहले ही उसे उत्परिवर्तित करना है, ताकि उनकी दवाएँ प्रभावी रहें। लेकिन इसमें एक बड़ा खतरा है: यदि यह परिवर्तित वायरस समाज में फैल जाए, तो इससे बड़े पैमाने पर तबाही मच सकती है।
कॉर्पोरेट व्यवहार और नैतिक चिंताएँ
कुछ कंपनियों का व्यवहार भी चिंता का विषय है। अमेरिका में, सार्वजनिक स्वास्थ्य प्रणाली में सरकार दवाइयाँ खरीदती है, और लोग सरकार को कर देते हैं। इस तरह, पैसे का लेन-देन सरकार और कंपनियों के बीच होता है। कोविड वैक्सीन के दौरान, कंपनियों ने सरकार से ऐसे कानून पारित करवाए, जिससे उन्हें वैक्सीन से होने वाली किसी भी समस्या के लिए अदालती मामलों से छूट मिल गई। यह एक तरह से उनकी तरफ से सुरक्षा का एक बड़ा कदम था, लेकिन यह नैतिकता पर सवाल उठाता है।
कर्तव्य से विमुख होना
यह केवल कॉर्पोरेट या चिकित्सा क्षेत्र तक सीमित नहीं है। यदि एक राजा को अपने लोगों के कल्याण में सुख नहीं मिलता, तो वह उन्हें नियंत्रित करने और उनका शोषण करने में सुख पा सकता है, अपनी शक्ति का प्रदर्शन कर सकता है। भगवान कृष्ण ने अर्जुन से यही कहा था कि यदि वह अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य नहीं करेगा, तो वह समाज में उपद्रव पैदा करेगा।
आंतरिक संतुष्टि और पूर्व कर्म
हर व्यक्ति को अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करना चाहिए ताकि उसे आंतरिक संतुष्टि मिल सके। यह ज़रूरी नहीं कि सभी को बाहरी पहचान या नाम मिले। बाहरी मान्यता, जैसे कि प्रसिद्धि या धन, व्यक्ति के वर्तमान कर्म के साथ-साथ उसके पूर्व कर्मों से भी निर्धारित होती है।
उदाहरण के लिए, यदि कोई व्यक्ति बहुत अच्छा कीर्तन करता है, लेकिन वह ऐसी जगह पर है जहाँ कोई भक्त नहीं है, तो उसे उतनी पहचान नहीं मिलेगी जितनी किसी ऐसे व्यक्ति को मिलेगी जो हज़ारों भक्तों वाले मंदिर में कीर्तन करता है।
कर्तव्य से विमुख होने का कारण
यदि व्यक्ति को आंतरिक सुख नहीं मिल रहा है और वह केवल बाहरी फल, नाम या ख्याति के लिए कार्य कर रहा है, और यदि उसे वह बाहरी फल नहीं मिलता, तो वह विचलित हो जाता है। ऐसी स्थिति में, व्यक्ति सोच सकता है, “यदि मुझे यह नहीं मिल रहा है, तो मैं यह क्यों करूँ?”
अर्जुन का सवाल यही था: जब भगवान बार-बार कहते हैं कि व्यक्ति को अपना कर्तव्य करना चाहिए, तो फिर लोग अपने कर्तव्य से क्यों विमुख हो जाते हैं? यह इसलिए होता है क्योंकि व्यक्ति स्वार्थी हो जाता है, और यह कर्म योग के मार्ग में एक बाधा है। यह उन लोगों के लिए भी प्रासंगिक है जो जानते हुए भी गलत कार्य करते हैं, हालाँकि उन्हें पाप करने में आनंद नहीं आता।
अर्जुन का भ्रम और कर्तव्य का मार्ग
आपने जो बताया है, उसमें अर्जुन की दुविधा और भगवान कृष्ण द्वारा दिए गए समाधान पर विस्तार से चर्चा की गई है। इसे और स्पष्ट रूप से समझते हैं:
शुरुआत में, अर्जुन अपनी कमजोरी और क्रूरता के बारे में सवाल पूछते हैं। वह कहते हैं कि व्यक्ति न चाहते हुए भी कुछ ऐसे कार्य क्यों करता है जिनकी उसकी इच्छा नहीं होती, जैसे कोई बाहरी शक्ति उसे नियंत्रित कर रही हो। अर्जुन जानना चाहते हैं कि व्यक्ति अपने कर्तव्य से भ्रष्ट क्यों हो जाता है।
यहाँ ‘काम’ शब्द का अर्थ केवल कामवासना से नहीं है, बल्कि उस शक्ति से है जो व्यक्ति को निष्काम कर्म (निस्वार्थ भाव से कार्य करना) से सकाम कर्म (स्वार्थी भाव से कार्य करना) की ओर खींचती है। अर्जुन युद्धभूमि में युद्ध करने आए थे, लेकिन उनकी युद्ध करने की शक्ति और बुद्धि चली गई थी।
अर्जुन के संदर्भ में ‘काम’
भगवान कृष्ण अर्जुन को जो ‘काम’ और ‘क्रोध’ बता रहे हैं, वह अर्जुन के लिए केवल कामुकता से संबंधित नहीं है। अर्जुन आत्म-नियंत्रित थे, जैसा कि उर्वशी के प्रस्ताव को ठुकराने के उदाहरण से स्पष्ट है। अर्जुन के लिए ‘काम’ का अर्थ है स्वार्थपूर्ण या दूरदर्शिता रहित इच्छाएँ (selfish or short-sighted desires)। अर्जुन जानते थे कि युद्ध करना उनका कर्तव्य है, लेकिन वह इसके विपरीत जा रहे थे।
ज्ञान का आवरण और कर्तव्य का पालन
भगवान समझाते हैं कि भीष्म और द्रोण भी आत्मा हैं, और अर्जुन भी आत्मा हैं, लेकिन यह ज्ञान आवृत्त (ढका हुआ) हो गया है। इस आवरण से परे जाने के लिए ज्ञान की आवश्यकता है, जो भगवान भगवद्गीता में दे रहे हैं।
भ्रम दो कारणों से हो सकता है:
बौद्धिक भ्रम (Intellectual Confusion): जब व्यक्ति को यह समझ नहीं आता कि क्या सही है और क्या गलत।
मानसिक भ्रम (Mental Confusion/Desires): जब व्यक्ति को सही-गलत पता होता है, लेकिन फिर भी गलत करने की प्रबल इच्छा होती है।
गीता के आरंभ में (अध्याय 2, श्लोक 7), अर्जुन का भ्रम बौद्धिक था – उन्हें पता नहीं था कि क्या बेहतर है। लेकिन बाद में (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 36) उन्हें समझ आ गया कि युद्ध करना कर्तव्य है, फिर भी वह सोचते थे कि भीष्म जैसे पूजनीय व्यक्ति पर कैसे तीर चलाएँ।
बुद्धि और मन का महत्व
भगवान बताते हैं कि हमारी बौद्धिक स्तर पर भी इच्छाओं और वासनाओं से आवरण हो सकता है। सही कार्य करने के लिए हमें स्पष्ट बुद्धि और स्पष्ट मन की आवश्यकता है। बुद्धि के स्तर पर हमें पता होना चाहिए कि क्या सही है और क्या गलत, और मन के स्तर पर हमें उस सही कार्य को करने की इच्छा होनी चाहिए।
भगवान कहते हैं कि भले ही मन के स्तर पर वासनाएँ आ जाएँ, हमें बुद्धि के स्तर पर कार्य करना चाहिए। यदि हम बुद्धि के स्तर पर ज़िम्मेदारी से कार्य करेंगे, तो हम आगे बढ़ेंगे।
मिथ्याचारी से कर्मयोगी तक
संक्षेप में, आज की चर्चा इस प्रकार है:
मिथ्याचारी से कर्मयोगी: भगवान सबसे पहले बताते हैं कि यदि आप वैराग्य के स्तर पर नहीं हैं, तो ढोंग करने (मिथ्याचारी बनने) से समाज का विनाश होगा और आपका पतन होगा। इसलिए कर्म योग करना बेहतर है। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 1-8)
ब्रह्मांडीय व्यवस्था (Cosmic Order): कर्म योग से ब्रह्मांड में व्यवस्था बनी रहती है। यज्ञ करने से देवता संतुष्ट होते हैं, जिससे वर्षा और अन्न की प्राप्ति होती है। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 9-16)
सामाजिक व्यवस्था (Social Order): कर्म योग से समाज में व्यवस्था बनी रहती है। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 17-25)
व्यक्तिगत सामंजस्य (Individual Harmony): कर्म योग से आप अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करते हैं, जिससे आप व्यक्तिगत रूप से अच्छी परिस्थिति में रहते हैं। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 26-35)
कामवासना से परे (Beyond Kama): अंत में, भगवान बताते हैं कि आप धीरे-धीरे कामवासना से परे जा सकते हैं। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 37-43)
भगवान इन विभिन्न दृष्टिकोणों से यही बता रहे हैं कि आपको अपना कर्तव्य करना चाहिए। अभी तक भगवान ने भक्ति योग का सीधा उल्लेख नहीं किया है, हालांकि अगले अध्याय में इसका अधिक स्पष्टीकरण आएगा।
बुद्धि का उपयोग
जब अर्जुन भीष्म पितामह पर चिंतन करते हैं, तो उनकी युद्ध करने की दृढ़ता चली जाती है। अर्जुन को बौद्धिक स्तर पर यह देखना होगा कि भीष्म भी एक आत्मा हैं और उनका कर्तव्य उनके और समाज के कल्याण के लिए आवश्यक है।
आपकी बात सही है कि बुद्धि की दो भूमिकाएँ हो सकती हैं। कभी-कभी हम अपनी बुद्धि का उपयोग गलत कार्य को सही ठहराने के लिए करते हैं। अर्जुन ने पहले अध्याय में जो तर्क-वितर्क किया, उसमें उन्होंने अगले जन्म, धर्म, पाप और पुण्य की बात की, लेकिन वह पर्याप्त दूरदर्शितापूर्ण नहीं था।
अर्जुन की दृष्टि में, भीष्म पितामह और कौरवों के प्रति उनकी आसक्ति उनके भ्रम का कारण थी। अर्जुन अपनी बुद्धि से इस आसक्ति को सही ठहरा सकते थे, लेकिन वह भौतिक स्तर पर ही रहता। इसलिए भगवान कहते हैं कि हमें उस बुद्धि को त्यागना होगा जो हमें भौतिक सुख की ओर प्रवृत्त करती है, और उस बुद्धि को स्वीकार करना होगा जो हमें आध्यात्मिक मार्ग की ओर ले जाती है।
स्वभाव की पहचान और कलियुग की समस्या
कलियुग में व्यक्ति के लिए अपना स्वभाव समझना मुश्किल हो जाता है। इसके लिए आत्म-अवलोकन महत्वपूर्ण है। हम विभिन्न कार्य कर सकते हैं और देख सकते हैं कि:
क्या करना हमें अच्छा लगता है (गुण कर्म विभागशः)।
किन कार्यों में हम कुशल हैं (क्षमता)।
यदि इन दोनों का किसी एक कार्य में मिलन होता है, तो वह हमारा स्वभाव हो सकता है। जैसे कि एक व्यक्ति कंप्यूटर पर करताल बजाता है और खुश है, लेकिन शायद उसे ताल-सुर की समझ नहीं है, जिससे बाकी लोग खुश नहीं होते। हमें ऐसे कार्यों को पहचानना चाहिए जिनमें हम सहज भी हों और कुशल भी।
अर्जुन का भ्रम और कर्तव्य का मार्ग
आपने अर्जुन की दुविधा और भगवान कृष्ण द्वारा दिए गए समाधान पर विस्तार से चर्चा की है। इसे और स्पष्ट रूप से समझते हैं:
शुरुआत में, अर्जुन अपनी कमजोरी और क्रूरता के बारे में प्रश्न करते हैं। वह जानना चाहते हैं कि व्यक्ति न चाहते हुए भी ऐसे कार्य क्यों करता है जिनकी उसकी इच्छा नहीं होती, मानो कोई बाहरी शक्ति उसे नियंत्रित कर रही हो। अर्जुन समझना चाहते हैं कि व्यक्ति अपने कर्तव्य से भ्रष्ट क्यों हो जाता है।
यहां ‘काम’ शब्द का अर्थ केवल कामवासना से नहीं है, बल्कि उस शक्ति से है जो व्यक्ति को निष्काम कर्म (निस्वार्थ भाव से कार्य करना) से सकाम कर्म (स्वार्थी भाव से कार्य करना) की ओर खींचती है। अर्जुन युद्धभूमि में युद्ध करने आए थे, लेकिन उनकी युद्ध करने की शक्ति और बुद्धि चली गई थी।
अर्जुन के संदर्भ में ‘काम’
भगवान कृष्ण अर्जुन को जो ‘काम’ और ‘क्रोध’ बता रहे हैं, वह अर्जुन के लिए केवल कामुकता से संबंधित नहीं है। अर्जुन आत्म-नियंत्रित थे, जैसा कि उर्वशी के प्रस्ताव को ठुकराने के उदाहरण से स्पष्ट है। अर्जुन के लिए ‘काम’ का अर्थ है स्वार्थपूर्ण या दूरदर्शिता रहित इच्छाएँ (selfish or short-sighted desires)। अर्जुन जानते थे कि युद्ध करना उनका कर्तव्य है, लेकिन वह इसके विपरीत जा रहे थे।
ज्ञान का आवरण और कर्तव्य का पालन
भगवान समझाते हैं कि भीष्म और द्रोण भी आत्मा हैं, और अर्जुन भी आत्मा हैं, लेकिन यह ज्ञान आवृत्त (ढका हुआ) हो गया है। इस आवरण से परे जाने के लिए ज्ञान की आवश्यकता है, जो भगवान भगवद्गीता में दे रहे हैं।
भ्रम दो कारणों से हो सकता है:
बौद्धिक भ्रम (Intellectual Confusion): जब व्यक्ति को यह समझ नहीं आता कि क्या सही है और क्या गलत।
मानसिक भ्रम (Mental Confusion/Desires): जब व्यक्ति को सही-गलत पता होता है, लेकिन फिर भी गलत करने की प्रबल इच्छा होती है।
गीता के आरंभ में (अध्याय 2, श्लोक 7), अर्जुन का भ्रम बौद्धिक था—उन्हें पता नहीं था कि क्या बेहतर है। लेकिन बाद में (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 36) उन्हें समझ आ गया कि युद्ध करना कर्तव्य है, फिर भी वह सोचते थे कि भीष्म जैसे पूजनीय व्यक्ति पर कैसे तीर चलाएं।
बुद्धि और मन का महत्व
भगवान बताते हैं कि हमारी बौद्धिक स्तर पर भी इच्छाओं और वासनाओं से आवरण हो सकता है। सही कार्य करने के लिए हमें स्पष्ट बुद्धि और स्पष्ट मन की आवश्यकता है। बुद्धि के स्तर पर हमें पता होना चाहिए कि क्या सही है और क्या गलत, और मन के स्तर पर हमें उस सही कार्य को करने की इच्छा होनी चाहिए।
भगवान कहते हैं कि भले ही मन के स्तर पर वासनाएं आ जाएं, हमें बुद्धि के स्तर पर कार्य करना चाहिए। यदि हम बुद्धि के स्तर पर जिम्मेदारी से कार्य करेंगे, तो हम आगे बढ़ेंगे।
मिथ्याचारी से कर्मयोगी तक
संक्षेप में, आज की चर्चा इस प्रकार है:
मिथ्याचारी से कर्मयोगी: भगवान सबसे पहले बताते हैं कि यदि आप वैराग्य के स्तर पर नहीं हैं, तो ढोंग करने (मिथ्याचारी बनने) से समाज का विनाश होगा और आपका पतन होगा। इसलिए कर्म योग करना बेहतर है। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 1-8)
ब्रह्मांडीय व्यवस्था (Cosmic Order): कर्म योग से ब्रह्मांड में व्यवस्था बनी रहती है। यज्ञ करने से देवता संतुष्ट होते हैं, जिससे वर्षा और अन्न की प्राप्ति होती है। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 9-16)
सामाजिक व्यवस्था (Social Order): कर्म योग से समाज में व्यवस्था बनी रहती है। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 17-25)
व्यक्तिगत सामंजस्य (Individual Harmony): कर्म योग से आप अपने स्वभाव के अनुसार कार्य करते हैं, जिससे आप व्यक्तिगत रूप से अच्छी परिस्थिति में रहते हैं। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 26-35)
कामवासना से परे (Beyond Kama): अंत में, भगवान बताते हैं कि आप धीरे-धीरे कामवासना से परे जा सकते हैं। (अध्याय 3, श्लोक 37-43)
भगवान इन विभिन्न दृष्टिकोणों से यही बता रहे हैं कि आपको अपना कर्तव्य करना चाहिए। अभी तक भगवान ने भक्ति योग का सीधा उल्लेख नहीं किया है, हालांकि अगले अध्याय में इसका अधिक स्पष्टीकरण आएगा।
बुद्धि का उपयोग
जब अर्जुन भीष्म पितामह पर चिंतन करते हैं, तो उनकी युद्ध करने की दृढ़ता चली जाती है। अर्जुन को बौद्धिक स्तर पर यह देखना होगा कि भीष्म भी एक आत्मा हैं और उनका कर्तव्य उनके और समाज के कल्याण के लिए आवश्यक है।
आपकी बात सही है कि बुद्धि की दो भूमिकाएं हो सकती हैं। कभी-कभी हम अपनी बुद्धि का उपयोग गलत कार्य को सही ठहराने के लिए करते हैं। अर्जुन ने पहले अध्याय में जो तर्क-वितर्क किया, उसमें उन्होंने अगले जन्म, धर्म, पाप और पुण्य की बात की, लेकिन वह पर्याप्त दूरदर्शितापूर्ण नहीं था।
अर्जुन की दृष्टि में, भीष्म पितामह और कौरवों के प्रति उनकी आसक्ति उनके भ्रम का कारण थी। अर्जुन अपनी बुद्धि से इस आसक्ति को सही ठहरा सकते थे, लेकिन वह भौतिक स्तर पर ही रहता। इसलिए भगवान कहते हैं कि हमें उस बुद्धि को त्यागना होगा जो हमें भौतिक सुख की ओर प्रवृत्त करती है, और उस बुद्धि को स्वीकार करना होगा जो हमें आध्यात्मिक मार्ग की ओर ले जाती है।
स्वभाव की पहचान और कलियुग की समस्या
कलियुग में व्यक्ति के लिए अपना स्वभाव समझना मुश्किल हो जाता है। इसके लिए आत्म-अवलोकन महत्वपूर्ण है। हम विभिन्न कार्य कर सकते हैं और देख सकते हैं कि:
क्या करना हमें अच्छा लगता है (गुण कर्म विभागशः)।
किन कार्यों में हम कुशल हैं (क्षमता)।
यदि इन दोनों का किसी एक कार्य में मिलन होता है, तो वह हमारा स्वभाव हो सकता है। जैसे कि एक व्यक्ति कंप्यूटर पर करताल बजाता है और खुश है, लेकिन शायद उसे ताल-सुर की समझ नहीं है, जिससे बाकी लोग खुश नहीं होते। हमें ऐसे कार्यों को पहचानना चाहिए जिनमें हम सहज भी हों और कुशल भी।
This article describes the higher potential for the development of civilization that is offered through Vedic culture, and some of the tools for doing such as found therein. First of all, we should understand that the development of civilization, which means the upliftment of consciousness in society, should not be a fight or competition between Read More...
Thousands of people are expected to join a procession as part of a Hindu festival in Leicester later this month. The Festival of Chariots, known as Rath Yatra, will take place on 22 June. The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) Leicester – a Hare Krishna branch of Hinduism which organises the event – said Read More...
The Chida-dadhi Mahotsav, also known as the Chipped Rice Festival of Panihati, is a yearly celebration of the pastimes of Srila Raghunatha dasa Goswami and Lord Nityananda Prabhu. Thisastonishing pastime took place on the banks of the Ganges atPanihati, which is just north of Calcutta. Lord Caitanya and his associates enjoyed many transcendental pastimes here. Read More...
The new temple building will be modern and functional and will be accented with elements of classical Vedic architecture. The following are the key components of the planned temple: • Vedic Temple Architecture • Spacious Darshan Hall (3,500 sqft) • Educational Facilities • Community Hall and Auditorium • Commercial Kitchen • Library • Vedic Books Read More...
Question: When the Bhagavad Gita appears to be talking about Karma Yoga, why do we suddenly find purports that emphasize Bhakti Yoga? How do we deal with this when trying to teach the Gita systematically?
Answer: I’ll make three points to address this: Prabhupada’s strategy, his overall vision and purpose, and how we can align our approach accordingly.
1. Prabhupada’s Perspective and Strategy: Srila Prabhupada approached his translations and purports with a sense of urgency. He was elderly when he began writing, and after surviving a severe heart attack in 1967, there was never any certainty about how much time he had left. Naturally, this sense of urgency shaped his presentation. He was not aiming for a technical commentary but rather a spiritually transformational one that could benefit as many people as quickly and deeply as possible.
Prabhupada was also deeply aware of his audience. He understood that many readers may not have the patience to go through the technical nuances of the Gita, so he emphasized its essential spiritual message on every page. He once mentioned that anyone opening any page of his books should be able to understand the fundamental truths:
We are souls, not bodies.
We are eternal servants of Krishna.
Life’s goal is to serve Krishna and return back to Godhead.
Chanting the holy names is the means.
This consistent emphasis reflects Prabhupada’s clarity of purpose—making people Krishna conscious.
2. Was Prabhupada Misrepresenting the Gita? Not at all. Prabhupada was faithful to Krishna’s ultimate conclusion in the Gita, which is Bhakti. In 18.66, Krishna clearly states: “Sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja…” So, what Prabhupada does is present that conclusion throughout the Gita, not just at the end.
Some might argue that this approach disrupts the flow of the Gita, especially in sections that are primarily about Karma Yoga or Jnana Yoga. However, Prabhupada was aware of the flow. For example, at the end of Chapter 2, he notes that Karma Yoga has been discussed with a hint of Bhakti. He quotes 2.61, which Vishvanatha Chakravarti Thakur identifies as the first “drop” of Bhakti. Yet, Prabhupada expands on it significantly, describing Ambarisha Maharaj’s full engagement in devotional service. So, he knows both what the Gita is doing and what he is doing.
If Prabhupada had intended to obscure the text, he could have avoided including the Sanskrit verses and word-for-word meanings. But he didn’t. He transparently presented the original text alongside his translations and purports, thus encouraging readers to think critically.
3. What About Our Role as Teachers? This brings us to our purpose. Are we teaching Krishna consciousness using the Gita? Or are we teaching the Gita itself?
If our goal is to inspire Krishna consciousness, then Prabhupada’s purports offer a powerful tool.
If our goal is to teach the Gita as a philosophical text, we might need to trace the unfolding of Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, Dhyana Yoga, and Bhakti Yoga as Krishna presents them.
This distinction is important. The Bhagavad Gita contains space for people at various levels—those interested in Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, and ultimately, Bhakti Yoga. Krishna doesn’t rush everyone to surrender in the second chapter itself; he allows a gradual evolution.
We can visualize this as two overlapping circles:
One is the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), rooted in the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition.
The other is the Bhagavad Gita as a standalone text with its own philosophical flow.
They intersect significantly, but they are not identical. ISKCON is based on the broader Gaudiya Vaishnava canon, including the Bhagavatam and Chaitanya Charitamrita, which many consider more central than the Gita itself in our tradition.
Interestingly, Prabhupada once mentioned that he would like to write another commentary on the Gita, possibly from the perspective of another acharya. This suggests that he saw his own commentary as one valid expression within a larger tradition, and that there was room for complementary approaches.
Conclusion: If our purpose is to teach Krishna consciousness, then Prabhupada’s purports serve us well. But if our purpose is to teach the Gita systematically, we may let Krishna’s own words guide the reader at their natural pace. Helping people gradually connect with Krishna’s message, allowing the text to speak for itself, is also a valid and potent form of Krishna consciousness.
More and more devotees today are moving toward this second approach—not to replace Prabhupada’s vision, but to complement it and reach broader audiences who may connect more deeply when the Gita is allowed to unfold organically.
Not all leaders wear crowns—and not all dissenters seek rebellion. Mandodari, the queen of Lanka and wife of Ravana, stands out in the Ramayana as one of the most tragically overlooked voices of reason.
When Ravana abducted Sita, Mandodari repeatedly warned him: “Return her. This path will only bring ruin.”
Her words fell on deaf ears. Ravana, intoxicated by power and ego, dismissed her wisdom. She had no army. No ministers. No allies. All she had was moral clarity—and the courage to speak it.
Mandodari didn’t lead a rebellion. She didn’t storm the gates. She simply held her ground and told the truth.
Leadership Lesson: True leadership isn’t always loud. It doesn’t always command the room. Sometimes, it’s the quiet voice of dissent that holds the deepest integrity.
And on the flip side: Ravana failed not only because he acted recklessly—but because he refused to listen. He silenced dissent. And it destroyed him.
Takeaway for Today’s Leaders: Are there Mandodaris in your team? Voices that see what others miss—who may not shout, but sense danger long before it arrives?
The question isn’t whether such voices exist. The question is: Are you listening?
We all know Hanuman as the mighty hero who leapt across the ocean. But do you know who reminded him he could?
Before that legendary leap, Hanuman was hesitant. Unsure of himself. It was Jambavan, the wise elder of the Vanaras, who stepped forward—not to fly himself, but to ignite belief in Hanuman.
“You have the strength,” Jambavan said. And just like that, a leap became a legacy.
Jambavan didn’t take center stage. He didn’t lead the mission. But he enabled it—silently, powerfully.
Leadership Lesson: Great leaders don’t just shine. They help others shine. They see dormant potential and give it a voice.
Jambavan reminds us that mentorship is one of leadership’s highest forms. It’s not about being the hero. It’s about making heroes.
Takeaway for Today’s Leaders: Look around you. Who’s your Hanuman? And can you be their Jambavan?
The Musk–Trump Spat: A Gita-Inspired Reflection on Conflict
The context
The world has recently been treated to the spectacle of the Elon Musk and Donald Trump spat—which has turned nasty very rapidly. What was initially promised to be a bromance for the ages has withered away and degenerated into a public spat with accusations being hurled at each other in public. Irrespective of the specific political affiliations of the individuals involved, the fact remains. that a confrontation between the politically most powerful person in the world and the financially most powerful person in the world does not occur well for the world at large, not just the United States of America. What can we learn from this? If we apply the lens of the Bhagavad Gita, broadly I will talk about three things, the cause, the conduct and the consequence.
The cause
In terms of the cause of the conflict, there are broadly three factors being considered, the political, the business and the personal. At a political level, Musk was called in to make certain changes but he could not make in the government changes in the same way he would have liked to make based on the way a business operates. And. that just is a basic limitation of politics. As it is often said, politics is the art of the possible, not the ideal. And when he felt. that changes. that he had worked hard to make were being rolled back, he exploded. The financial level, when the spending was being expanded but support. that was given previously to his business of electric cars is now being stopped. Actually, he felt as if he was getting the worst of both worlds. Having lost, having failed to achieve, to bring about the change in the spending by the political establishment and having lost business credibility as well as business capital. And thirdly, at a personal level, people who are financially successful frequently have an ego and do not like to be publicly told. that they are wrong. The result overall when they feel challenged is. that they lash out at each other. So, the Bhagavad Gita talks about in its 18th chapter, perception can be either in the mode of goodness, passion or ignorance. Perception in goodness looks at the commonality and seeks harmony, perception and passion, sees the differences and ensures coexistence, settles for coexistence as long as it does not compromise on one’s own. Surviving and thriving, perception and ignorance sees differences and considers them non-negotiable and leads to confrontations. that can be not just disruptive but even destructive. This is talked about in three successive verses from 18.20 to 22. We see the perceptions here in the mode of ignorance, unfortunately, dominating the public discourse between these two individuals leading to their escalated public spat. Of course, like in most such situations, there may well be more than what meets the eye. But we can make inferences only based on what we know.
The conduct
When it comes to the conduct of the conflict,we see aspersions being cast and even allegations being made not just about the other person’s judgment or ability but even their morality and motives. The Bhagavad Gita 16.2 recommends aversion to fault-finding as a defining quality of those with godly nature. Unfortunately, those who may be driven by or even dominated by an ungodly nature often speak with harshness and anger as outlined in 16.4 to phrase in contemporary terms. Aversion to fault-finding would mean giving the other person the benefit of the doubt and not ascribing the worst possible motive for a particular questionable action but starting with the, in a charitable spirit with the least negative motive for an action. that we do not comprehend or agree with.
In general, when someone does something which we do not like, we could find ourselves in a relational JAM, where JAM is an acronym that refers to three possible causes for the difference of opinion, judgment, ability and motive or morality. So, the least negative ascription to a questionable, that the other person has the right intentions and also has the right intelligence, that is, the person has both the morality and the ability to be in that particular role, but has arrived at an error of judgment. Though the decision taken is wrong, there’s still the hope that the person may learn by experience and would thus improve. The more negative ascription would be to assume. that the person lacks the ability to be in. that particular role, wherein we start criticizing not just, what is criticized is not just the particular decision as a judgment error, but the very competence of the person to be in. that particular role. This happened when the accusation was made that not only the particular bill, supposedly called the big beautiful bill, should be opposed by the concerned legislators, but. that the head of state should be impeached. The most damaging ascription, however, is to question the morality of the person involved, where the underlying or even the explicit message is that the person is not operating in good faith and is morally not just challenged but also compromised. This happened when the allegation of the head of state being involved with a convicted child trafficker Epstein was tossed around, and questioning the judgment of a powerful person is itself problematic and for it is painful for that person. Questioning their ability is far more painful, but questioning their morality often wrecks the relationship to a point of no return. That brings us to the last point of our discussion: the consequence.
The consequence The Bhagavad Gita explains. that for speech to be effective, we need to discipline it in two broad ways. Ensuring that it is both sensible and sensitive—sensible in the sense that it is truthful and helpful; and sensitive in the sense that it is non-agitating and pleasing, as stated in 17.15. We all have the power to speak, which is like having a permanently loaded gun with us and we all can hurt each other with the words. that we speak with our tongue, just as the bullets from a gun can hurt severely. In. that context, it becomes even more important for us to have some level of inner mastery, self-mastery. If we have powerful guns, as happens when people have influential positions and correspondingly widely heard social media platforms. which can broadcast their voices and views to millions or even billions.
From perception to provocation
We can only hope that better sense prevails and somehow good counsel helps both these contending parties to arrive at least at a detente, if not at a reconciliation. The Ramayana depicts a sordid saga wherein the brothers Vali and Sugriva end up from being the closest of friends to becoming the harshest of enemies or more precisely it is Vali who is the elder and stronger brother who starts treating his younger brother Sugriva as a traitor and a threat to his life and thereby starts pursuing and persecuting him for the purpose of assassinating him. This starts as an unfortunate circumstance involving a judgment error where Sugriva thinks that Vali has been killed by a demon and who therefore closes the door of the cave in which the fight occurred in order to trap that mighty demon inside. However, it is mistaken by Vali to be evidence that Sugriva lacks morality and so plotted to have him trapped in the cave so. that Sugriva could usurp the kingdom. By thus ascribing the worst possible motive for his brother’s actions and by refusing to give him any opportunity to clarify the reasoning for his actions, it is primarily Vali’s actions that turn their bromance into enmity. It is only due to Lord Ram’s intervention where his arrow shot unexpectedly and apparently unfairly into the heart of Vali forcefully reminds. that mighty monkey king about how unexpected and unfair his own attack on Sugriva must have felt to that younger brother. It is only through that realization brought about by the seemingly questionable but ultimately beneficial intervention of Lord Ram that there happens to be a deathbed reconciliation between the two alienated brothers. That reconciliation is brought about by three key actions primarily on the part of Vali who firstly acknowledges that he made a serious mistake in his evaluation of Sugriva’s actions, then apologizes for the viciousness of his attacks and finally makes amends by giving to his wronged brother the gift of a life-preserving celestial necklace that he could very easily have passed on to his son and as would be the norm expected from a dying father. Life is quite complex and incidents across history are so nuanced. that generally there are no strict parallels between two incidents. In the spat between Musk and Trump there may well be differences of opinion about who is in the position of Vali and who in the position of Sugriva—that is, who is in the wrong and who has been wronged. Nonetheless, the principles for reconciliation involving acknowledging, apologizing and amending still remain true and hopefully it won’t require an act of nature or God to bring about a deathbed reconciliation and. that there can be some sort of patching up before. that. And more relevantly for all of us, we can learn principles to resolve our conflicts among each other without letting them become a public spectacle, even if our stage may not be as public as this, as in for these two individuals.
We have gathered at the lotus feet of the Pancha-tattva on this most auspicious occasion of Raghunatha dasa Gosvami’s cida-dadhi festival, the background to which can be found in his early life. Raghunatha dasa’s uncle and father, Hiranya and Govardhana Majumadara, were wealthy landlords in Bengal—almost like kings—and had a huge, opulent riverside palace, with boats that plied the river. Hiranya and Govardhana were generous and devoted to brahminical culture, and they practically maintained the entire brahman community of Nadia with their charity. Raghunatha was their only son, so naturally they put all their hopes in him to carry on the family dynasty. But from a young age, Raghunatha was attracted to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. The Majumadaras’ spiritual master was Yadunandana Acharya, a disciple of Advaita Acharya (of the Pancha-tattva) and an intimate student of Vasudeva Datta, and their family’s priest was Balarama Acharya, a dear associate of Haridasa Thakura and close friend of Yadunandana Acharya. Balarama Acharya and Yadunandana Acharya used to host Haridasa Thakura, and when Haridasa stayed in their village, Raghunatha visited him daily and received his mercy. Balarama Acharya also invited Haridasa Thakura to speak in the Majumadaras’ assembly about the glories of the holy name. Thus Raghunatha dasa had the association of these great souls, followers of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, who would tell him about Mahaprabhu and encourage him to chant.
Once, when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, after taking sannyasa, visited Shantipur, Raghunatha dasa went to meet Him. In pure love, he fell at Lord Chaitanya’s lotus feet, and the Lord, out of His mercy, blessed him with the touch of His feet. Raghunatha served the Lord for a week, and after he returned home he was mad with ecstatic love. He wanted to join Mahaprabhu in Puri, but his family would not allow him. Time and again he would run away from home to go to Puri, and every time, his father would catch him and bring him back. His father even kept five watchmen to guard him day and night, four servants to see to his comforts, and two brahmans to cook for him, so eleven people were engaged to serve him and make sure he did not go to Puri. Later, when Mahaprabhu again visited Shantipur, Raghunatha begged his father, “Please allow me to see the lotus feet of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Otherwise, my life will not remain in my body.” So, his father allowed him to go to Shantipur, sending many servants to accompany him. For seven days Raghunatha stayed in the Lord’s association, constantly thinking, “How will I get free from the watchmen? How will I be able to go with Mahaprabhu to Puri?” The Lord, being omniscient, could understand Raghunatha’s mind, and He reassured him with some important statements. These instructions form the background of the Panihati festival, and we shall read them as they are recorded in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila, Chapter Sixteen: “The Lord’s Attempt to go to Vrndavana.”
TEXT 237
“sthira hana ghare yao, na hao vatula krame krame paya loka bhava-sindhu-kula
TRANSLATION
[Lord Chaitanya told Raghunatha dasa:] “Be patient and return home. Don’t be a crazy fellow. By and by you will be able to cross the ocean of material existence.
TEXT 238
“markata-vairagya na kara loka dekhana yatha-yogya visaya bhunja’ anasakta hana
TRANSLATION
“You should not make yourself a showbottle devotee and become a false renunciant. For the time being, enjoy the material world in a befitting way and do not become attached to it.”
PURPORT by Srila Prabhupada
The word markata-vairagya, indicating false renunciation, is very important in this verse. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, in commenting on this word, points out that monkeys make an external show of renunciation by not accepting clothing and by living naked in the forest. In this way they consider themselves renunciants, but actually they are very busy enjoying sense gratification with dozens of female monkeys. Such renunciation is called markata-vairagya—the renunciation of a monkey. One cannot become really renounced until one actually becomes disgusted with material activity and sees it as a stumbling block to spiritual advancement. Renunciation should not be phalgu, temporary, but should exist throughout one’s life. Temporary renunciation, or monkey renunciation, is like the renunciation one feels at a cremation ground. When a man takes a dead body to the crematorium, he sometimes thinks, “This is the final end of the body. Why am I working so hard day and night?” Such sentiments naturally arise in the mind of any man who goes to a crematorial ghata. However, as soon as he returns from the cremation grounds, he again engages in material activity for sense enjoyment. This is called smasana-vairagya, or markata-vairagya.
In order to render service to the Lord, one may accept necessary things. If one lives in this way, he may actually become renounced. In the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.108), it is said:
“The bare necessities of life must be accepted, but one should not superfluously increase his necessities. Nor should they be unnecessarily decreased. One should simply accept what is necessary to help one advance spiritually.”
In his Durgama-sangamani, Sri Jiva Gosvami comments that the word sva-nirvahah actually means sva-sva-bhakti-nirvahah. The experienced devotee will accept only those material things that will help him render service to the Lord. In the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.256), markata-vairagya, or phalgu-vairagya, is explained as follows:
“When persons eager to achieve liberation renounce things related to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, thinking them to be material, their renunciation is called incomplete.” Whatever is favorable for the rendering of service to the Lord should be accepted and should not be rejected as a material thing. Yukta-vairagya, or befitting renunciation, is thus explained:
“Things should be accepted for the Lord’s service and not for one’s personal sense gratification. If one accepts something without attachment and accepts it because it is related to Krsna, one’s renunciation is called yukta-vairagya.” Since Krsna is the Absolute Truth, whatever is accepted for His service is also the Absolute Truth. . . .
COMMENT by Giriraj Swami
In the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu Srila Rupa Gosvami enumerates sixty-four items of devotional service, beginning with guru-padasraya, taking shelter of a spiritual master; krsna-diksadi-siksanam, taking initiation and instruction from him; visrambhena guroh seva, serving him with respect; and sad-dharma-prccha, inquiring about one’s eternal duties. And at the end of the list he discusses certain items that he has not included but which one might think could or should have been included. One such item is the cultivation of vairagya (detachment), and Rupa Gosvami explains why he has not included it. He says that bhakti by nature makes the heart soft. The primary activities of bhakti, hearing and chanting about Krishna and remembering Him, make the heart soft, whereas the cultivation of speculative knowledge and performance of artificial austerities tend to make the heart hard—the exact opposite of bhakti.
The question then arises, “If we do not cultivate detachment from material things, are we meant to be attached to them?” The answer, of course, is no. Shastra says that a person absorbed in material enjoyment is far from being absorbed in Krishna. Then how do we resolve this dilemma—that we do not want to be attached to material things yet do not want to cultivate detachment from them? In reply, Rupa Gosvami says that a taste for devotional service itself will destroy one’s material attachments, without the hardness of heart caused by the practice of vairagya. And in this important verse he explains what kind of vairagya is suitable for bhakti:
Anasaktasya means “without being attached,” and visayan means “material sense objects.” Without being attached, when one engages (upayunjatah) material sense objects in appropriate ways (yatharham) in relation to Krishna (krsna-sambandhe)—in devotional service—that is called proper renunciation (yuktam vairagyam ucyate).
Srila Prabhupada used to cite the example of a famous monk in India who was supposed to be so renounced that if anyone offered him money, his hand would curl and turn away. Srila Prabhupada said, “But if anyone offers us money, we will immediately take it and use it in Krishna’s service.”
The impersonalists, who have no idea of Krishna—the beauty of Krishna—or of the actual identity of the living entity as the eternal servant of Krishna, may pose as being renounced, but actually they are not. So, in contrast to yukta-vairagya, Rupa Gosvami composed a verse that describes phalgu-vairagya. The Phalgu is a river in Bihar that has the peculiar quality of appearing like dry land. On the surface is sand, but underneath is water—a real river, with a strong current. The renunciation of impersonalists who reject the world—who reject material things as maya (illusion) even when related to the Lord—is called phalgu. On the surface they appear to be renounced, but underneath is a strong current of material desire.
In the beginning of his discussion of bhakti, Rupa Gosvami poses the question of what makes one eligible—what is the adhikara—for bhakti, and he quotes a verse from the Eleventh Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam:
yadrcchaya mat-kathadau jata-sraddhas tu yah puman na nirvinno nati-sakto bhakti-yogo ’sya siddhi-dah
First, one should have faith (adau sraddha)—faith in and attraction to the messages of Krishna (mat-kathadau). And na nirvinno nati-sakto: one should not be too attached or too detached. This too might seem odd, but the Bhagavatam explains that if someone is too attached to material life, they will be unable to take to bhakti but will be inclined to fruitive activities (karma), and if they are too averse, too negative, they will take to jnana, impersonal speculation. For bhakti, one should be neither too attached nor too detached, too disgusted with material life.
yadrcchaya mat-kathadau jata-sraddhas tu yah puman na nirvinno nati-sakto bhakti-yogo ’sya siddhi-dah
“If somehow or other by good fortune one develops faith in hearing and chanting My glories, such a person, being neither very disgusted with nor attached to material life, should achieve perfection through the path of loving devotion to Me.” (SB 11.20.8) In other words, one should be in the middle. Then the heart will be open to bhakti. Both sense gratification and artificial renunciation make the heart hard.
So, what did Lord Chaitanya tell Raghunatha dasa? First He said, “Don’t be a crazy fellow. Don’t be a monkey renunciant.” That is what Raghunatha should not do. Now, what should he do?
TEXT 239
“antare nistha kara, bahye loka-vyavahara acirat krsna tomaya karibe uddhara
TRANSLATION
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu continued, “Within your heart you should keep yourself very faithful, but externally you may behave like an ordinary man. Thus Krsna will soon be very pleased and deliver you from the clutches of maya.
TEXT 240
“vrndavana dekhi’ yabe asiba nilacale tabe tumi ama-pasa asiha kona chale
“You may see Me at Nilacala, Jagannatha Puri, when I return after visiting Vrndavana. By that time you can think of some trick to escape.
“What kind of means you will have to use at that time will be revealed by Krsna. If one has Krsna’s mercy, no one can check him.”
TEXTS 242–243
In this way, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu bade farewell to Raghunatha dasa, who returned home and did exactly what the Lord told him.
After returning home, Raghunatha dasa gave up all craziness and external pseudo renunciation and engaged in his household duties without attachment.
COMMENT
For one year Raghunatha remained at home, acting exactly as advised by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
TEXT 15
bhitare vairagya, bahire kare sarva-karma dekhiya ta’ mata-pitara anandita mana
“Raghunatha dasa was inwardly completely renounced, even in family life, but he did not express his renunciation externally. Instead, he acted just like an ordinary businessman. Seeing this, his father and mother were satisfied.” (Cc Antya 6.15)
COMMENT
Raghunatha expertly handled a serious legal implication that could have led to his uncle’s arrest, thus saving his family from a difficult situation with the Muslim government. And because he was acting like a proper materialist, his family members were happy and relaxed their guard.
As a relatively new devotee, I really liked the image of Raghunatha dasa Gosvami in Vrindavan, although I did not know what his internal consciousness actually was. And I wanted to be like him—a gosvami in Vrindavan, staying one night under one tree and another night under another tree. I never said anything to Srila Prabhupada, but because he was empowered by the Lord, he could understand my mind—just as Lord Chaitanya could understand Raghunatha’s mind. One day I was sitting before Prabhupada in his room in Juhu—I hadn’t said anything—and he just looked at me and said, “First you manage your father’s property like Raghunatha dasa Gosvami, then you go to Vrindavan and be a gosvami.” He was very concerned about the Juhu project.
Finally, although Raghunatha dasa was still being watched by guards, he got the idea to meet Nityananda Prabhu in nearby Panihati. He thought, “Let me see Nityananda Prabhu, even if the guards come with me. At least let me see Lord Nityananda.”
Now we shall read from Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya-lila, Chapter Six: “Lord Caitanya Meets Raghunatha dasa Gosvami.”
TEXTS 35–41
In this way Raghunatha dasa passed one year exactly like a first-class business manager, but the next year he again decided to leave home.
He got up alone one night and left, but his father caught him in a distant place and brought him back.
This became almost a daily affair. Raghunatha would run away from home, and his father would again bring him back. Then Raghunatha dasa’s mother spoke to his father as follows.
“Our son has become mad,” she said. “Just keep him by binding him with ropes.” His father, being very unhappy, replied to her as follows.
“Raghunatha dasa, our son, has opulences like Indra, the heavenly king, and his wife is as beautiful as an angel. Yet all this could not tie down his mind.
“How then could we keep this boy home by binding him with ropes? It is not possible even for one’s father to nullify the reactions of one’s past activities.
“Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has fully bestowed His mercy on him. Who can keep home such a madman of Caitanyacandra?”
COMMENT
Sometimes the parents of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples also thought that their children had become mad. Once, two brothers, Bruce and Greg Scharf (later initiated as Brahmananda and Gargamuni), joined Srila Prabhupada’s movement and their mother came to Prabhupada and complained that her boys had become crazy. After speaking with her for some time, Prabhupada invited her to join him in the temple room, and there he gave a class: “Who is Crazy?” He said, “What is the definition of ‘crazy’? A crazy person is someone who doesn’t know who he is.” For example, if I think I am Napoleon Bonaparte or Theodore Roosevelt or Mahatma Gandhi—if I don’t know who I am—that means I am crazy. Srila Prabhupada concluded, “So anyone who thinks he is the body is crazy, because he doesn’t know who he is. So, who is crazy? Are these boys crazy—these devotees—or are you crazy?”
TEXTS 42–44
Then Raghunatha dasa considered something in his mind, and the next day he went to Nityananda Gosani.
In the village of Panihati, Raghunatha dasa obtained an interview with Nityananda Prabhu, who was accompanied by many kirtana performers, servants, and others.
Sitting on a rock under a tree on the bank of the Ganges, Lord Nityananda seemed as effulgent as hundreds of thousands of rising suns.
COMMENT
Narottama dasa Thakura sings, nitai-pada-kamala koti-candra-susitala: “The lotus feet of Lord Nityananda are as cooling as hundreds of thousands of moons.” And here He is described as being “as effulgent as hundreds of thousands of rising suns.” He Himself is like the sun and the moon.
TEXTS 45–47
Many devotees sat on the ground surrounding Him. Seeing the influence of Nityananda Prabhu, Raghunatha dasa was astonished.
Raghunatha dasa offered his obeisances by falling prostrate at a distant place, and the servant of Nityananda Prabhu pointed out, “There is Raghunatha dasa, offering You obeisances.”
Hearing this, Lord Nityananda Prabhu said, “You are a thief. Now you have come to see Me. Come here, come here. Today I shall punish you!”
COMMENT
Out of humility, Raghunatha dasa had offered obeisances from a distance, but Lord Nityananda, in a humorous mood, said that he was like a thief—one who hides in the shadows on the outskirts. At this time Raghunatha dasa was a young man, only about twenty-two years old.
TEXTS 48–51
The Lord called him, but Raghunatha dasa did not go near the Lord. Then the Lord forcibly caught him and placed His lotus feet upon Raghunatha dasa’s head.
Lord Nityananda was by nature very merciful and funny. Being merciful, He spoke to Raghunatha dasa as follows.
“You are just like a thief, for instead of coming near, you stay away at a distant place. Now that I have captured you, I shall punish you.
“Make a festival and feed all My associates yogurt and chipped rice.” Hearing this, Raghunatha dasa was greatly pleased.
COMMENT
This was a humorous request, because Raghunatha dasa was practically a prince and chipped rice is a most simple food. It would be as if Mukesh Ambani, now one of the richest men in the world, came to the temple and said, “I want to do some service” and Tukarama Prabhu, the temple president, replied, “Okay, buy puffed rice for all the devotees.” That would be a joke. Imagine: Raghunatha dasa is living in unlimited opulence, like Indra, the king of heaven, and Nityananda Prabhu says, “Oh, I am going to punish you! You have to serve chipped rice and yogurt to all My associates.”
TEXTS 52–54
Raghunatha dasa immediately sent his own men to the village to purchase all kinds of eatables and bring them back.
Raghunatha dasa brought chipped rice, yogurt, milk, sweetmeats, sugar, bananas, and other eatables and placed them all around.
As soon as they heard that a festival was going to be held, all kinds of brahmanas and other gentlemen began to arrive . . .
COMMENT
Just like here, you all heard that there was a festival, and so you came.
TEXT 54 (continued)
Thus there were innumerable people.
TEXTS 55–60
Seeing the crowd increasing, Raghunatha dasa arranged to get more eatables from other villages. He also brought two to four hundred large, round earthen pots.
He also obtained five or seven especially large earthen pots, and in these pots a brahmana began soaking chipped rice for the satisfaction of Lord Nityananda.
In one place, chipped rice was soaked in hot milk in each of the large pots. Then half the rice was mixed with yogurt, sugar, and bananas.
The other half was mixed with condensed milk and a special type of banana known as canpa-kala. Then sugar, clarified butter, and camphor were added.
After Nityananda Prabhu had changed His cloth for a new one and sat on a raised platform, the brahmana brought before Him the seven huge pots.
On that platform, all the most important associates of Sri Nityananda Prabhu, as well as other important men, sat down in a circle around the Lord.
COMMENT
Next the author lists various great associates of Nityananda Prabhu who were present. Nityananda Prabhu is the incarnation of Balarama, just as Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is the incarnation of Krishna, and Balarama is always associated with His cowherd boyfriends. Many of Lord Balarama’s cowherd boyfriends in krsna-lila descended on earth at the time of gaura-lila and took birth in brahman and other families. Many of them became associates of Lord Nityananda, and one of them, Uddharana Datta Thakura, who was also with Him at Panihati, appeared in a family that was related to the family in which Srila Prabhupada later appeared.
TEXTS 64–66
Hearing about the festival, all kinds of learned scholars, brahmanas, and priests went there. Lord Nityananda Prabhu honored them and made them sit on the raised platform with Him.
Everyone was offered two earthen pots. In one was put chipped rice with condensed milk, and in the other chipped rice with yogurt.
All the other people sat in groups around the platform. No one could count how many people there were.
COMMENT
Each person was supplied two pots, one with chipped rice and yogurt and one with chipped rice and condensed milk. Raghunatha dasa kept purchasing more chipped rice, more milk and yogurt, more bananas and other fruits, and more sweets. Not only did brahmans hear about the festival and come to partake, but merchants heard too and came to sell their goods. Raghunatha dasa would buy their chipped rice and yogurt and sweets and bananas, and then he would feed them the very same food. The multitude of people eventually occupied all the space on the land, and when there was no more place to sit, people started to stand on the bank of the Ganges and eat. And when all the space on the bank was taken, people began to stand in the water of the Ganges and eat their chipped rice and yogurt.
Toward the end of the feast, Nityananda Prabhu, in meditation, brought Lord Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to see the fun. Lord Nityananda stood up and walked with Him amidst all the eaters. As a joke, He took a morsel of rice from each pot and put it in Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s mouth, and Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu took a morsel from each pot and put it in Nityananda Prabhu’s mouth, laughing as He made Him eat it. But nobody could understand what Nityananda Prabhu was doing. Only some rare, fortunate souls could see that Lord Chaitanya was also present.
The entire pastime is very nice, but time does not allow us to read or describe it all in detail. Suffice to say, in the words of Sri Caitanya-caritamrta (Antya 6.90, 89, 88):
“All the confidential devotees who were cowherd boys, headed by Sri Ramadasa, were absorbed in ecstatic love. They thought the bank of the Ganges to be the bank of the Yamuna.”
nityananda-prabhava-krpa janibe kon jana? mahaprabhu ani’ karaya pulina-bhojana
“Who can understand the influence and mercy of Lord Nityananda Prabhu? He is so powerful that He induced Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to come eat chipped rice on the bank of the Ganges.”
nityananda mahaprabhu-krpalu, udara raghunathera bhagye eta kaila angikara
“Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Lord Nityananda Prabhu are extremely merciful and liberal. It was Raghunatha dasa’s good fortune that They accepted all these dealings.”
Another great devotee of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Nityananda Prabhu was Raghava Pandita, who lived nearby, in Panihati. During the festival he came and invited Nityananda Prabhu to his house for prasada, and Nityananda replied, “I belong to a community of cowherd boys, and I generally have many cowherd associates with Me. I am happy when we picnic like this by the bank of a river. So let Me eat this food here now, and in the evening I shall eat at your home.”
That evening, as promised, Nityananda Prabhu came to Raghava Pandita’s house. He performed sankirtana in Raghava’s temple and inspired all the devotees to dance. Then He Himself began to dance, thus inundating the world with ecstatic love. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu personally came to see Nityananda Prabhu’s sweet, ecstatic dancing, but only Lord Nityananda could see Him. Thereafter, Raghava Pandita served Lord Chaitanya, Lord Nityananda, and Their associates a sumptuous feast, and after everyone was satisfied, he gave Raghunatha dasa the remnants of food left by Gaura and Nitai on Their plates.
He said to Raghunatha, “Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has eaten this food. If you take His remnants, you will be released from the bondage of your family.” (Cc Antya 6.123)
As stated in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Raghava Pandita would always prepare a plate for Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, and every day Chaitanya Mahaprabhu would come and eat at Raghava Pandita’s house, sometimes allowing Raghava Pandita to see Him. On this occasion, Raghava Pandita was pleased to see that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had come to honor the prasada at the place he had set for Him next to Nityananda Prabhu. Srila Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami explains:
bhakta-citte bhakta-grhe sada avasthana kabhu gupta, kabhu vyakta, svatantra bhagavan
“The Supreme Personality of Godhead always resides either in the heart or in the home of a devotee. This fact is sometimes hidden and sometimes manifest, for the Supreme Personality of Godhead is fully independent.
sarvatra ‘vyapaka’ prabhura sada sarvatra vasa ihate samsaya yara, sei yaya nasa
“The Supreme Personality of Godhead is all-pervasive, and therefore He resides everywhere. Anyone who doubts this will be annihilated.” (Cc Antya 6.124–125)
The next morning, when it was time for Raghunatha dasa to return home, out of humility he did not approach Nityananda Prabhu directly but submitted his appeal through Raghava Pandita. After having taken His bath in the Ganges, Nityananda Prabhu was sitting with His associates beneath the same tree under which they had sat the previous day. Raghunatha approached Him there and worshipped His lotus feet. Then, through Raghava Pandita, he submitted his desire:
TEXT 128
“adhama, pamara mui hina jivadhama! mora iccha haya—pana caitanya-carana
TRANSLATION
“I am the lowest of men, the most sinful, fallen, and condemned. Nevertheless, I desire to attain shelter at the lotus feet of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
TEXTS 129–133
“Like a dwarf who wants to catch the moon, I have tried my best many times, but I have never been successful.
“Every time I tried to go away and give up my home relationships, my father and mother unfortunately kept me bound.
“No one can attain the shelter of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu without Your mercy, but if You are merciful, even the lowest of men can attain shelter at His lotus feet.
“Although I am unfit and greatly afraid to submit this plea, I nevertheless request You, Sir, to be especially merciful toward me by granting me shelter at the lotus feet of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
“Placing Your feet on my head, give me the benediction that I may achieve the shelter of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu without difficulty. I pray for this benediction.”
COMMENT
This is an important point: Without the mercy of Nityananda Prabhu, no one can attain the shelter of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. And Nityananda Prabhu agreed to be merciful; He placed His lotus feet on Raghunatha dasa’s head, and He praised him to the other devotees, saying that although Raghunatha’s standard of material happiness was equal to that of Indra, the king of heaven, by the mercy of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu he had no attachment to it at all. Then Nityananda asked all the devotees to bless Raghunatha dasa that he would soon attain shelter at Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s lotus feet. And He spoke to Raghunatha:
TEXTS 139–143
“My dear Raghunatha dasa, since you arranged the feast on the bank of the Ganges, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu came here just to show you His mercy.
“By His causeless mercy He ate the chipped rice and milk. Then, after seeing the dancing of the devotees at night, He took His supper.
“Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Gaurahari, came here personally to deliver you. Now rest assured that all the impediments meant for your bondage are gone.
“Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu will accept you and place you under the charge of His secretary, Svarupa Damodara. You will thus become one of the most confidential internal servants and will attain shelter at the lotus feet of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
“Being assured of all this, return to your own home. Very soon, without impediments, you will attain shelter at the lotus feet of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.”
COMMENT
After consulting with Raghava Pandita, Raghunatha dasa privately delivered one hundred gold coins and some gold to Nityananda Prabhu’s treasurer, telling him not to mention the presentation to Lord Nityananda until Raghunatha returned home. Then, to honor Lord Nityananda’s associates—great devotees and servants and subservants—Raghunatha left another hundred gold coins and some gold with Raghava Pandita, who, in accordance with Raghunatha’s instructions, prepared a list of how much would be given to each devotee. Then Raghunatha took leave of Raghava Pandita and, filled with gratitude to Lord Nityananda for His mercy, returned home.
At home, Raghunatha no longer went into the interior section of the palace; he slept on the Durga-mandapa outside. Then one night it happened, as Lord Nityananda had predicted, that Raghunatha got an opportunity to escape. The Majumadaras’ and Raghunatha’s guru, Yadunandana Acharya, came at the end of the night and told Raghunatha that one of the other disciples, who had been engaged in worshipping the Deity, had left that service, and Yadunandana wanted Raghunatha to induce that brahman to take up his service again, as there was no other brahman to do it.
All the guards were asleep, and in any case, Yadunandana Acharya was a trusted well-wisher of the family. So, Raghunatha dasa left with Yadunandana Acharya, and after walking some distance he submitted to his spiritual master, “There is no need for you to accompany me. You may proceed to your home, and I will meet that brahman and persuade him to resume his service.” So Yadunandana Acharya went to his place, and Raghunatha dasa, after convincing the brahman to resume his service, left for Nilacala, Jagannatha Puri.
Because he knew that his family would search for him, Raghunatha took the inner route and for twelve days walked through jungles and remote villages, always thinking of the lotus feet of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Nityananda Prabhu. On most days he did not eat anything, but because he was fixed in his determination, he did not mind. He managed with whatever little he could get, and eventually he attained the lotus feet of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in Puri, as Nityananda Prabhu had predicted.
This gives us a clue as to how we can become free from material attachments. All the scriptures say that to achieve Krishna—to achieve love for Krishna—one must be free from material attachments. But cultivating detachment is not the process. So, then, what is the process? The process is service, specifically service that will please Nityananda Prabhu, because if we please Nityananda Prabhu, by His mercy we will become detached from all that is material.
ara kabe nitai-candera karuna haibe samsara-vasana mora kabe tuccha ha’be
“When will Lord Nityananda bestow His mercy upon me so that my desire for material enjoyment will become very insignificant?” (Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, Prarthana)
Becoming free from material attachments does not necessarily mean that one must leave home, like Raghunatha dasa did. He is one example, but there are other examples of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s associates who did not leave home. Lord Chaitanya did not ask them to leave home, and in some cases He actually instructed them to remain at home. This is another mystery—how one can serve the Lord in either a position of renunciation or a position of opulence.
Once, Srila Prabhupada asked his guru maharaja about this question. He began by saying that Rupa Gosvami left everything—his lucrative and prestigious position as minister—for the service of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Tyaga. And Ramananda Raya, who was a governor and a householder, lived in great material opulence—bhoga. Both were accepted equally by Lord Chaitanya. “So, what is the difference?” he asked. “Both were devotees of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.” Thus he raised the question of bhoga and tyaga—enjoyment and renunciation.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura gave a striking answer. He invoked the term prosita-bhartrka, which refers to a wife when her husband is away. In Vedic culture, when a woman’s husband was home, she would bathe twice daily, apply oil to her body, wear beautiful clothing, and decorate herself in an attractive way. But when the husband was away, she would wear very plain clothes, she wouldn’t decorate herself or comb her hair, and she would sleep on the floor—she would live in a very austere and renounced way. But in both cases the central point is the husband. When the husband is away she lives in that renounced way, and when the husband is present she acts in that more spirited way, but in both situations the central point is to please the husband, and so there is no difference. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta explained that as devotees, we are interested neither in bhoga nor in tyaga. We are interested only in Krishna and Krishna’s service. For Krishna’s service we can, like the Gosvamis, give up everything. And for the sake of Krishna’s service we can accept any opulent position, like that of Ramananda Raya, who was a governor. And either—or both—will please Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
So, becoming free from material attachments doesn’t necessarily mean that the son will leave the parents or that the husband will leave the wife or that the wife will leave the husband. It means that one is free from material bondage and acts to please the Lord. When Lord Chaitanya was discussing the perfection of life (sadhya) with Ramananda Raya, the first answer Chaitanya Mahaprabhu accepted was that one can remain in one’s position (sthane sthitah) and chant and hear the glories of the Lord in the association of pure devotees. As stated in the Tenth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, one should completely give up the process of mental speculation and just become submissive. You can remain in your position (sthane sthitah). If you are a grihastha, you can remain a grihastha. If you are a brahmachari, you can remain a brahmachari. Whatever you are, you can remain in your position but hear the messages of Krishna from the mouths of pure devotees. That is the real principle of devotional service, as accepted by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
jnane prayasam udapasya namanta eva jivanti san-mukharitam bhavadiya-vartam sthane sthitah sruti-gatam tanu-van-manobhir ye prayaso ’jita jito ’py asi tais tri-lokyam
[Lord Brahma said to Krishna:] “Those who, even while remaining situated in their established social positions, throw away the process of speculative knowledge and with their body, words, and mind offer all respects to descriptions of Your personality and activities, dedicating their lives to these narrations, which are vibrated by You personally and by Your pure devotees, certainly conquer Your Lordship, although You are otherwise unconquerable by anyone within the three worlds.” (SB 10.14.3)
Why, then, should one leave one’s family at all? One may do so only to expand one’s service to the Lord and to humanity. As Srila Prabhupada explains, “A pure devotee cuts off the limited ties of affection for his family and widens his activities of devotional service for all forgotten souls. The typical example is the band of Six Gosvamis, who followed the path of Lord Caitanya. All of them belonged to the most enlightened and cultured rich families of the higher castes, but for the benefit of the mass of population they left their comfortable homes and became mendicants. To cut off all family affection means to broaden the field of activities. Without doing this, no one can be qualified as a brahmana, a king, a public leader, or a devotee of the Lord.” (SB 1.8.41 purport)
Many of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s intimate associates were householders. In the Pancha-tattva Advaita Acharya was the ideal householder. But at a certain stage it may become favorable for a devotee to leave his family and engage fully in the mission of the Lord. Either way, we depend on the mercy of Lord Nityananda. Whether we are with family or not doesn’t really matter. What really matters is increasing our attachment to Krishna and Krishna’s service. When one is attached to Krishna, one naturally becomes detached from maya. At the same time, if one is too preoccupied with maya, it will be hard to develop attachment to Krishna. So, we should keep our lives simple. If our lives are too complicated, we will be distracted. We will have too many things on our minds to really chant and hear properly.
And the main process, as we know, is to chant the holy names of the Lord:
harer nama harer nama harer namaiva kevalam kalau nasty eva nasty eva nasty eva gatir anyatha
“One should chant the holy names, chant the holy names, chant the holy names of Hari [Krishna]. There is no other way, no other way, no other way for success in the present age of Kali.” (Brhan-naradiya Purana 38.126) And to get the full benefit, one must chant with attention. If our mind is wandering while we are chanting, we will not really get the full benefit. In fact, it is an offense (nama-aparadha) to be inattentive while chanting. It is said that all the other offenses follow from inattention but that if one chants with attention—if one actually hears the holy names—then all the other offenses will be destroyed. So, it is very important to chant with attention. But if we are too preoccupied with material affairs, then even while we are chanting on our beads, our minds may be thinking of other things—how much money we have in the bank, whether we have enough to pay the bills, or whatever.
So, we want to keep our lives simple. Although it is hard in Kali-yuga, we want to keep our lives as clear as possible. And we should keep our chanting time exclusively for Krishna. That is our time with Krishna, with the holy name. We shouldn’t think about other things. Of course, we do have to consider other matters, but not while we are chanting and hearing about Krishna.
What also pleases Krishna—and especially Lord Nityananda—is sharing Krishna consciousness with others. At the end of the Bhagavad-gita Lord Krishna says, “Of all of My servants, he who preaches My message is most dear to Me. There will never be one as dear to Me as he, and in the end it is guaranteed that he will come to Me.” He will go back home, back to Godhead.
ya idam paramam guhyam mad-bhaktesv abhidhasyati bhaktim mayi param krtva mam evaisyaty asamsayah
“For one who explains this supreme secret to the devotees, pure devotional service is guaranteed, and at the end he will come back to Me.
na ca tasman manusyesu kascin me priya-krttamah bhavita na ca me tasmad anyah priyataro bhuvi
“There is no servant in this world more dear to Me than he, nor will there ever be one more dear.” (Gita 18.68–69)
In a talk in Los Angeles Srila Prabhupada paraphrased many of the principles we have just discussed. He said that in order to approach Radha and Krishna, one must get the mercy of Lord Chaitanya, and that in order to get the mercy of Lord Chaitanya, one must get the mercy of Lord Nityananda, and that in order to get the mercy of Lord Nityananda, one must approach people like Jagai and Madhai.
Jagai and Madhai were sinful people. Nityananda Prabhu and Haridasa Thakura approached them and requested them to chant the holy names, but they were so fallen that they began to blaspheme Nityananda and Haridasa. Eventually Madhai hurled a pot at Nityananda Prabhu and hit Him on the forehead, causing Him to bleed. When Chaitanya Mahaprabhu heard of this, He rushed to the spot, ready to kill the offenders, but Nityananda Prabhu intervened. He said, “My Lord, we are in Kali-yuga. In previous ages You came to kill the demons, but in Kali-yuga You have come to deliver them. If You kill people like Jagai and Madhai in Kali-yuga, You will have to kill everyone, because everyone will be like Jagai and Madhai—eating meat, drinking wine, and exploiting women.” He said, “In Kali-yuga, We don’t kill the demons physically. We kill their demonic mentalities.” Under the threat of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s Sudarsana chakra, and touched by Nityananda Prabhu’s mercy, Jagai and Madhai accepted Lord Nityananda’s mercy, surrendered to Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, and took up the chanting of the holy name.
“Lord Krsna, the son of the king of Vraja, became the son of Saci, and Balarama became Nitai. The holy name delivered all those souls who were lowly and wretched. The two sinners Jagai and Madhai are evidence of this.” (Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, Prarthana) Jagai and Madhai gave up their sinful activities, and thereafter Chaitanya Mahaprabhu never referred to their sinful pasts.
So, Srila Prabhupada instructed, “To get the mercy of Lord Nityananda, we have to approach people like Jagai and Madhai.” That means the people on the street, people everywhere; we have to approach the people. Following Lord Nityananda, who was ordered by Lord Chaitanya, we should beseech people, prabhura ajnay, bhai, magi ei bhiksa/ bolo‘krsna,’ bhajo krsna, koro krsna-siksa: “By the order of Lord Gauranga, O brothers, I beg this one request: Chant ‘Krishna!’ worship Krishna, and follow Krishna’s instructions.” Very simple. Srila Prabhupada also quoted Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, yare dekha, tare kaha ‘krsna’-upadesa, amara ajnaya guru hana tara’ ei desa: “Wherever you go, whomever you meet, just repeat the instructions of Krishna. In this way, on My order, become a guru and try to deliver everyone in this land.”
So, it is not very difficult. We just repeat. Krishna says, “Surrender to Me,” and the guru says, “Surrender to Krishna.” The guru doesn’t say, “Surrender to me”—he says, “Surrender to Krishna.” It is very easy.
Srila Prabhupada’s secretary Shyamasundar, and Shyamasundar’s wife, Malati, had a little girl, Saraswati, who from the age of three or four would approach people and ask, “Do you know who Krishna is?” Our first temple in Bombay was an apartment on Warden Road, a prestigious place near the sea. Many respectable gentlemen would come, and Saraswati would approach them and ask, “Do you know who Krishna is?” And then she would answer, “Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” And Srila Prabhupada remarked, “She is preaching. What she says is perfect, because she is repeating what she has heard.” We just repeat what we have heard from authorities. Anyone can do it. We don’t have to be very intellectual or imaginative or creative. We just repeat. And in that way we get the mercy of Nityananda Prabhu—through Srila Prabhupada.
Srila Prabhupada is the representative of Nityananda Prabhu, and everything that we can achieve through the mercy of Nityananda Prabhu can be achieved by the mercy of Srila Prabhupada, who has taken up the mission of Nityananda Prabhu and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the mission of the Pancha-tattva. The spiritual master engages the disciples in such a way that they get the mercy of the Lord. And Srila Prabhupada has done that for us through ISKCON. He has created ISKCON in such a way that by practicing and preaching Krishna consciousness—by holding festivals like we are having today and have every Sunday and holy day—we get the mercy of the Lord.
But to have the potency to preach, we must practice. And the most essential practice is to chant sixteen rounds with attention. One teacher commented that devotees have become very expert with their left hands, because with their right hands in their bead bags, with their left hands they can dust the house or type on the keyboard of the computer. They become very expert with their left hands. But we do not want to chant like that. We want to chant sixteen good, attentive rounds, follow the four principles, and work to spread the sankirtana movement. If we chant sixteen good, offenseless rounds, follow the regulative principles, and work to our capacity to spread the sankirtana movement, Srila Prabhupada has assured us that we will go back home, back to Godhead, and serve Sri Sri Radha and Krishna and Their associates.
Srila Prabhupada has given us everything. We just have to take it. It is so simple. We just have to take it. Sometimes Srila Prabhupada would cite a cartoon in a newspaper, which depicted an old lady sitting across from her husband. The lady was requesting her husband, “Chant. Chant. Chant.” And the husband was replying, “Can’t. Can’t. Can’t.” That is our misfortune in Kali-yuga. With the same effort that it takes to refuse to chant, we could chant. That is our misfortune.
Still, devotees work tirelessly to induce people to chant. And it may be difficult to convince them. Srila Prabhupada raised the question “Who is crazy?” People now are mad with material desires:
nunam pramattah kurute vikarma yad indriya-pritaya aprnoti na sadhu manye yata atmano ’yam asann api klesada asa dehah
“People are mad after sense gratification, and they do not know that this present body, which is full of miseries, is a result of one’s fruitive activities in the past. Although this body is temporary, it is always giving one trouble in many ways. Therefore, to act for sense gratification is not good.” (SB 5.5.4)
It is very hard to make a crazy person sane. Srila Prabhupada compared our work to that of a psychiatrist in a madhouse. He is trying to help the patients, but the patients may not appreciate his efforts; in fact, they may turn against him. Still, he continues to endeavor to help them.
Of course, I am very happy with all of you here today. But you are just a small fraction of the population. Most people are out there enjoying—or trying to enjoy—what they call material happiness. And because it is so hard to bring people to Krishna consciousness, the mercy one gets for making that effort is very great. And so we try our best—depending on the mercy of Srila Prabhupada and Sri Sri Gaura-Nityananda.
Srila Prabhupada ki jaya! Sri Nityananda Prabhu ki jaya! Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami ki jaya! Nitai-gaura-premanande hari-haribol!
[A talk by Giriraj Swami on the Panihati Cida-dadhi festival, June 15, 2008, Laguna Beach, California]
Can lack of time be an impediment to spiritual growth? Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that one of the factors that impedes bhakti is prayasa (over-endeavor). So we need to consider: What exactly is causing the shortage of time?
At one level, time poverty is something almost everyone experiences. We all need to make the best use of whatever time we have. I look at this issue from three perspectives.
1. The IAS Framework:
I like to analyze the problems we face in life into three categories, using the acronym IAS. Just as many aspire to become an IAS officer, we can aspire to become an IAS in problem-solving.
I – Inevitable problems
A – Avoidable problems
S – Strengthening problems
Inevitable Problems:
These are challenges we all face, like juggling multiple roles—family, work, social duties, etc. No one gets as much time as they would like for everything they want to do. In this sense, time poverty is just a fact of life.
Within that framework, we need to become more conscious of how we use time. Complaining about the lack of time often isn’t helpful—who doesn’t feel they lack time?
More importantly, Krishna knows our situation and doesn’t hold it against us. For instance, if it’s very cold and someone’s body is sensitive to cold, they may not be able to wake up early. When things are beyond our control, Srila Prabhupada says in a purport that “there is nothing to lament.” So we can trust that Krishna is understanding.
After all, Krishna is an understanding God. So we shouldn’t waste too much emotional energy in guilt. If we’re juggling family, a job, and social obligations along with spiritual life, we simply do our best.
Avoidable Problems:
These are often self-created problems. Sometimes, we get entangled in activities that aren’t necessary. How much we want to grow materially—career-wise, financially, socially—is a decision each of us has to make.
This is where prayasa comes in. If we’re over-endeavoring in material pursuits and creating a time shortage for ourselves, that’s something we need to correct.
Some practical steps:
Cut down on unnecessary social engagements.
Limit professional ambition to what’s sustainable.
Set clear boundaries for time and energy.
Of course, there are exceptions. If someone has exceptional talent in a field and feels called to contribute meaningfully, that might be their calling, not just a career or job.
In such cases, if their focus is contribution, not just compensation, then even that activity can be spiritualized—if they remember that their gifts come from Krishna and offer their work to Him.
Strengthening Problems:
These are challenges that actually help us grow.
If we have a shortage of time, it can push us to become more conscious of how we use it. In our tradition, time is also a manifestation of Krishna.
So if we recognize time as Krishna and try to use it consciously in His service, we can come closer to Him. That means:
Using every moment meaningfully.
Aligning our life with our values and spiritual purpose.
Avoiding distractions and unnecessary engagements.
Yes, having more time is a good foundation for rapid spiritual growth. But growth doesn’t come just from more time—it comes from how we use the time we already have.
The Retired Trap:
Sometimes people think, “I’ll retire and just chant, read, and worship.” But merely having more time doesn’t guarantee spiritual growth.
In reality, retirees can sometimes get entangled in gossip, controversies, or institutional politics, especially when the institution has a spiritual purpose but operates in the material world.
The Key: Inspiring Goals
Set clear and inspiring spiritual goals. Try to prioritize time for those goals. When we experience deep engagement, absorption, and fulfillment in pursuing them—even if not fully achieving them—it becomes easier to let go of other engagements.
At that point, cutting down on other activities doesn’t leave us feeling empty—it simply frees up more time for things we’re already eager to do.
So, at a certain stage of life, even if we don’t fully retire, we can take on a less demanding role, giving us more opportunity to connect with and contribute to Krishna’s cause. That’s definitely conducive to rapid spiritual growth.
In his last days, the disciples in the room with Srila Prabhupada heard him make a statement that beautifully sums up his mission: “Just go on discussing Srimad-Bhagavatam among yourselves and everything will remain clear.” He also enshrined this idea in one of the last purports he dictated: “Thus the more we read Srimad-Bhagavatam, the Read More...
Any statement about a particular gender in Srila Prabhupada’s teachings is not meant to target or diminish any demographic. The overarching focus is on Krishna consciousness and spiritual elevation, and everything needs to be seen in that light.
At times, such statements may appear anti-women or male chauvinistic. However, that was never the intention of Srila Prabhupada. In fact, if we consider his life and legacy from an experiential perspective, we find that he had many female disciples — most of whom were Western women raised during the 1960s and 70s, when the feminist movement was gaining momentum.
Despite this, these women dedicated their lives to serving Srila Prabhupada, which strongly suggests that he was not at all trying to demean or suppress women. None of his female disciples reported that Srila Prabhupada made them feel inferior or devalued due to their gender. On the contrary, he empowered women in extraordinary ways — encouraging them to lead kirtans, give classes, distribute books, manage temples, and take leadership roles in his movement.
From a philosophical perspective, when Srila Prabhupada used the term “less intelligent,” we must consider the context. He often spoke of intelligence in terms of realizing our spiritual identity. All embodied souls — regardless of gender — are conditioned to identify with the body. However, due to their nurturing roles, women may be more likely to develop stronger bodily identification, as their responsibilities involve physically caring for and emotionally connecting with children.
Still, this deeper emotional capacity is not a sign of inferiority. On the contrary, it reflects a different kind of intelligence — an emotional intelligence that is invaluable for nurturing and sustaining human life. When Prabhupada mentioned “less intelligence,” he was referring more to philosophical inclination, not overall ability or value.
In fact, emotional sensitivity, often more prominent in women, enables them to care for infants and others with greater empathy and intuition than most men. That is also a profound form of intelligence, vital to family and society.
From a traditional perspective, among all the religious traditions, the Vedic tradition offers some of the most inclusive depictions of the divine feminine. There are female deities, and God is often represented as a divine couple, where the female is mentioned first — Sita-Rama, Radha-Krishna. The goddess of learning and intelligence, Saraswati Devi, is also a female deity.
Even in the Bhagavad-gita, intelligence (buddhi) is described as a feminine quality. So, philosophically and metaphysically, intelligence is closely associated with feminine energy.
It’s also important to understand the cultural and historical context of Srila Prabhupada’s time. He learned English during the 1910s and 1920s and preached primarily in the 1960s and 70s. At that time, public talks often addressed men more directly. Hence, women and children were sometimes grouped together as those who need protection, not in a demeaning way, but as a call to responsible guardianship from men.
Even today, during wars and crises, the term “women and children” is commonly used to refer to vulnerable groups who should not be harmed. The emphasis in Prabhupada’s talks is not on labeling women as “less intelligent” to justify subjugation, but rather to urge men to take responsibility for protecting and respecting them.
Furthermore, Srila Prabhupada made a clear distinction between principles and details. The core principle was always Krishna consciousness. While he supported traditional gender roles in his writings, he was flexible and pragmatic in practice. He recognized that Western women were quite different from Indian women and engaged them according to their abilities, often saying they were “as good as their male counterparts.”
In conclusion, statements that appear critical of women should not be taken as reflecting a misogynistic mindset, but should be seen within the broader, transcendental purpose of cultivating Krishna consciousness. That was — and always remained — Srila Prabhupada’s ultimate concern.
Ekadasi is one of the regular celebrations in the Vaishnava calendar. It is observed eleven days after the full moon and eleven days after the new moon of every month. Even in the thirteenth, or leap, month, called adhika-masa, or purusottama-masa, which comes every three years, during which no other festivals are celebrated, Ekadasi is observed. Ekadasi is known as the day of Lord Hari and is said to be the mother of devotion. Keeping the fast on Ekadasi is one of the sixty-four items of devotional service listed in Srila Rupa Gosvami’s Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. In fact, it is one of the first ten.
The Nectar of Devotion, Srila Prabhupada’s summary study of Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, states, “In the Brahma-vaivarta Purana it is said that one who observes fasting on Ekadasi day is freed from all kinds of reactions to sinful activities and advances in pious life. The basic principle is not just to fast, but to increase one’s faith and love for Govinda, or Krsna. The real reason for observing fasting on Ekadasi is to minimize the demands of the body and to engage our time in the service of the Lord by chanting or performing similar service. The best thing to do on fasting days is to remember the pastimes of Govinda and to hear His holy name constantly.”
Later in The Nectar of Devotion, Srila Prabhupada cites the observance of Ekadasi as a stimulus (uddipana) for ecstatic love: “Some things which give impetus or stimulation to ecstatic love of Krsna are His transcendental qualities, His uncommon activities, His smiling features, His apparel and garlands, His flute, His buffalo horn, His leg bells, His conchshell, His footprints, His places of pastimes (such as Vrndavana), His favorite plant (tulasi), His devotee and the periodical occasions for remembering Him. One such occasion for remembrance is Ekadasi, which comes twice a month on the eleventh day of the moon, both waning and waxing. On that day all the devotees remain fasting throughout the night and continuously chant the glories of the Lord.”
The importance of the Ekadasi fast is also seen in the history of King Ambarisa and the sage Durvasa. Maharaja Ambarisa had observed the fast without even drinking water up until the appointed time to break the fast, called the Ekadasi-parana. Durvasa Muni was to have returned before the time of the parana, and because he was playing the part of a brahman and Ambarisa Maharaja the part of a kshatriya, proper etiquette dictated that Durvasa break the fast first. However, because Durvasa did not come in time, Ambarisa was in a dilemma. If he did not break the fast punctually, the whole observance would be spoiled. At the same time, if he did not wait for Durvasa, he would be guilty of an offense, because the etiquette demanded that he wait for the sage to break the fast first. King Ambarisa consulted his advisors, but none could resolve his problem. Finally, the king himself determined the solution: he would take water. Taking water would break the fast and at the same time not break it.
So, Ekadasi is an important observance. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu personally observed Ekadasi, and He ordered all of His followers to do the same. And of all the Ekadasis, Pandava-nirjala Ekadasi, Bhima Ekadasi, is the most special.
The story behind this special Ekadasi is recounted in the Brahma Vivarta Purana. Five thousand years ago, during the time of the Mahabharata, Arjuna’s elder brother Bhima admitted that he had great difficulty fasting. (In those days everyone would fast completely from all food and water.) So the Vedic authority Vyasadeva gave Bhima permission to observe the full fast (nirjala, “without water”) just once a year, in the early summer, and to derive the same benefit as if he had observed all the other twenty-three Ekadasis. Thus, devotees who are unable to properly observe Ekadasi during the year, or who by chance happen to miss an Ekadasi, can get the benefit of fully observing all the Ekadasis if they properly observe the Pandava-nirjala Ekadasi. Strictly observed, the fast begins before sunset the evening before Ekadasi and continues until the parana, about the time of sunrise, the morning after Ekadasi. Many devotees try to chant at least sixty-four rounds on Ekadasi, especially the Bhima Ekadasi.
Once, when we were with Srila Prabhupada in Amritsar, Yamuna-devi read to him from the newly published Nectar of Devotion: “One such occasion for remembrance is Ekadasi, which comes twice a month on the eleventh day of the moon, both waning and waxing. On that day all the devotees remain fasting throughout the night and continuously chant the glories of the Lord.” Then she asked, “Should we also observe Ekadasi like that?”
“No,” Prabhupada replied. “We have too much service to do for Krishna.”
Still, Srila Prabhupada said, “Ekadasi is most auspicious. And chanting is more effective.” And to a disciple who asked, “Should we chant twenty-five rounds on Ekadasi?” Srila Prabhupada replied, “Why only twenty-five rounds? You should chant as many as possible.”
So, the basic observance of Ekadasi as prescribed by Srila Prabhupada is to refrain from eating grains and beans and to chant as many rounds as possible. Although most devotees in ISKCON do not perform nirjala on every Ekadasi, many do on Pandava-nirjala Ekadasi. They also try to chant at least sixty-four rounds. And by the mercy of Ekadasi, they make great spiritual advancement: they are blessed by spiritual strength and realization and so continue their service to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s mission with renewed vigor—enthusiasm and inspiration.
In 1973, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Founder of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), arranged for several of his disciples to go to Mayapura, West Bengal, to study the traditional art of putul (dollmaking). These unfired clay figures are composed of raw materials gathered from the riverbank of the Ganges, traditionally created for holiday Read More...
Once Bhimasena, the younger brother of Maharaja Yudhisthira, asked the great sage Shrila Vyasadeva, the grandfather of the Pandavas, if it is possible to return to the spiritual world without having observed all the rules and regulations of the Ekadasi fasts.
Bhimasena then spoke as follows, “Oh greatly intelligent and learned grandfather, my brother Yudhisthira, my dear mother Kunti, and my beloved wife Draupadi, as well as Arjuna, Nakula and Sahadeva, fast completely on each Ekadasi and strictly follow all the rules, guidelines and regulative injunctions of that sacred day.
Being very religious, they always tell me that I should also fast on that day too. But, Oh learned grandfather, I tell them that I cannot live without eating, because as the son of Vayudeva – Samanaprana, (the digestive air) hunger is unbearable to me.
I can give widely in charity and worship Lord Keshava properly with all manner of wonderful upacharas (items), but I cannot be asked to fast on Ekadasi. Please tell me how I can obtain the same merits result without fasting.”
Hearing these words, the grandsire of Bhima, Srila Vyasadeva said, “If you want to go to the heavenly planets and avoid the hellish planets, you should indeed observe a fast on both the light and dark Ekadasis.”
Bhima replied, “Oh great saintly intelligent grandfather, please listen to my plea. Oh greatest of munis, since I cannot live if I eat only once in a day, how can I possibly live if I fast completely? Within my stomach burns a special fire named Vrika, the fire of digestion.
Shrila Vyasadeva replied, Oh king, you have heard from me about the various kinds of occupational duties, such as elaborate Vedic ceremonies and pujas. In the Kali-yuga, however, no one will be able to observe all these occupational & functional duties properly.
I shall therefore tell you how, at practically no expense, one can endure some small austerity and achieve the greatest benefit and resultant happiness.
Vyasadeva replied, “Without drinking even water, you should fast on the Ekadasi that occurs during the light fortnight of the month of Jyeshtha (May-June) when the sun travels in the sign of Taurus (Vrishabh) and Gemini (Mithun),
One must certainly not eat anything, for if he does so he breaks his fast. This rigid fast is in effect from sunrise on the Ekadasi day to sunrise on the Dwadashi day. If a person endeavours to observe this great fast very strictly, he easily achieves the result of observing all twenty-four other Ekadasi fasts throughout the entire year.
Washington, D.C., Maryland, Delaware, New York City
(Sent from New York City on June 7, 2025)
Where I Went and What I Did
For the twenty-second week of 2025, I spent four days in Maryland, one day in Delaware, and two days in New York City. Wednesday it rained, and so I chanted Hare Krishna with Gurudas Prabhu at the Bethesda Metro Station for an hour or so. Thursday I chanted with devotees from ISKCON DC in front of the Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C., during the middle of the day, and with devotees from ISKCON Baltimore and the Baltimore Krishna House on the Inner Harbor Waterfront in the evening to promote the Baltimore Ratha-yatra. Friday I chanted at Inner Harbor Watherfront for three hours with Bharata Prabhu, of Augusta, Georgia, who is working in Baltimore temporarily, and who I met when he briefly worked in Tallahassee. Saturday was Baltimore Ratha-yatra. Sunday I spoke at the Sunday feast program at ISKCON Delaware, and I chanted with devotees afterward for an hour at Newark, Delaware, a local college town.
Monday and Tuesday I spent at ISKCON NYC in Brooklyn, serving Rama Raya Prabhu’s NYC Harinam program by chanting Hare Krishna and distributing Ratha-yatra flyers for three or four hours each day, at Battery Park and Union Square, respectively.
I share quotes from Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Srimad-Bhagavatam, Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, and Krishna: The Supreme Personality of Godhead. I share quotes from Sri Caitanya-bhagavata by Vrindavana Dasa Thakura and its commentary by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and from Prabhupada Nectar by Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami. I share notes on classes by Arcita, Nityananda Chandra, Sundarananda, and Nitai-pada-kamala Prabhus.
Many thanks to Nimai Prabhu for his kind donation toward my Delaware visit. Thanks also to Sankarsana Prabhu for his donation toward my visit to ISKCON DC. Thanks to Ryan for picking me up at Baltimore Ratha-yatra and dropping me at the Chinese bus station in Wilmington, DE. Thanks to Ahaituki Prabhu for the photos and videos of NYC Harinam.
Itinerary
May 7–June 16: NYC Harinam June 17–August 19: Paris – June 22: Paris Ratha-yatra – July 11: Amsterdam harinama – July 12: Amsterdam Ratha-yatra – July 13: Holland harinama August 20: London harinama August 21–22: Liverpool harinamas August 23: Liverpool Ratha-yatra August 24: Manchester harinama August 25: London harinama and flight to New York
Chanting Hare Krishna in Washington, D.C.
Wednesday it rained the whole day, and because the authorities do not allow Sankarsana Prabhu to have a tent, it was impractical to chant by the Museum of Natural History as usual. Gurudas Prabhu told me that Bethesda Metro Station was protected from the rain, so he and I decided to chant there. There was saxophonist setting up to play between the metro and the buses, so I positioned myself between the buses and the parking lots. We chanted for a little over an hour. One young guy, who was attracted to the music, played the shakers and chanted for five minutes, asking if he could keep the “On Chanting Hare Krishna” he had been reading mantra from when he left. A young Indian woman said “Hare Krishna” to us. She enjoyed attending the Potomac temple as a child with her parents. I told her about our new temple building, and encouraged her to visit. I am glad I decided go on harinama despite the rain.
Thursday Sankarsana and I were back by the Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C.
After Sankarsana Prabhu chanted for a while, we were joined by devotees we had invited from the Potomac temple, along with two devotees visting from Festival of India.
Here Baldev Prabhu chants Hare Krishna with devotees from ISKCON DC and the Festival of India by the Museum of Natural History (https://youtu.be/xybIr_FCULI):
Later while Baldev Prabhu was chanting Hare Krishna, passersby, encouraged by devotees, played shakers and danced (https://youtu.be/oRU76gJobM8):
Gangadhara Prabhu of Festival of India chants Hare Krishna by the Museum of Natural History, and an Indian man plays shakers (https://youtu.be/oydlA5msHDQ):
Chanting Hare Krishna in Baltimore
I proposed doing harinama two days before Baltimore Ratha-yatra to the Baltimore temple president, Nila Madhava Prabhu, and he scheduled harinama for Thursday, saying that Friday people would be setting up for the Ratha-yatra. Kartikeya Prabhu of Krishna House picked me up at the train, and joined me on harinama at Inner Harbor, near the place where the Ratha-yatra festival is held.
On harinama I was happy to find about 70% or 80% of the passersby would accept invitations to the Ratha-yatra, which is much greater than in New York or Paris, where it is less than 30%.
Friday I did harinama with the assistance of Bharata Prabhu of Augusta, Georgia, who I met when he was briefly working in Tallahassee but who is now working temporarily in Baltimore. We chanted Hare Krishna for three hours and passed out many invitations.
Ajamila Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at the beginning of the Baltimore Ratha-yatra (https://youtu.be/6zywJWA6U7M):
Isha Ray chants Hare Krishna on the Inner Harbor Wavefront in Baltimore during Ratha-yatra (https://youtu.be/3fDuW-beupc):
I sat in front of the kirtan tent while I took prasadam. I let people play my shakers while Vishnugada Prabhu was leading the chanting.
After I finished prasadam, Sasthivara Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna at Baltimore Ratha-yatra kirtan tent, and Vishnugada Prabhu played my pink shakers (https://youtu.be/HGqn903kSgs):
Chanting Hare Krishna in Delaware
Nimai Prabhu from Delawarevisited our NYC Harinam party for a few days not too long ago. He told me about their temple in Delaware and his love for harinama. It occurred to me that it may be possible for me to attend the Sunday feast program and do a harinama there in Delaware, while returning to New York City, after Baltimore Ratha-yatra. There were about thirty people attending the Sunday feast program in Delaware, which is held from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. At least ten were Westerners. Then about six of us did harinama at Newark, DE, a local college town, though the college was on summer break. Several people were clearly happy to encounter the devotees, their kirtan, and their literature.
“There is complete facility for the small complete units, namely the living entities, to realize the complete [Krishna], and all sorts of incompleteness are experienced due to incomplete knowledge of the complete. So Bhagavad-gita contains the complete knowledge of Vedic wisdom.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.1.16, purport:
“A devotee is always in a renounced temperament because the worldly attractions can never satisfy him.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.7.19:
“By serving the feet of the spiritual master, one is able to develop transcendental ecstasy in the service of the Personality of Godhead, who is the unchangeable enemy of the Madhu demon and whose service vanquishes one’s material distresses.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.7.19, purport:
“Service to the Lord is rendered in different transcendental mellows (relationships): neutral, active, friendly, parental and nuptial. A living entity in the liberated position of transcendental service to the Lord becomes attracted to one of the above-mentioned mellows, and when one is engaged in transcendental loving service to the Lord, one’s service attachment in the material world is automatically vanquished.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.7.36:
“O best among the brahmanas, those who are spiritual masters are very kind to the needy. They are always kind to their followers, disciples and sons, and without being asked by them, the spiritual master describes all that is knowledge.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.25.19:
“Perfection in self-realization cannot be attained by any kind of yogi unless he engages in devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, for that is the only auspicious path.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.8.45, purport:
“Impersonal meditation is a bogus invention of modern days. In none of the Vedic literatures is impersonal meditation recommended.”
From Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.8.46, purport:
“Everyone has to surrender to someone superior. That is always the nature of our living condition. At the present moment we are trying to surrender to someone—either to society or to our nation, family, state or government. The surrendering process already exists, but it is never perfect because the person or institution unto whom we surrender is imperfect, and our surrender, having so many ulterior motives, is also imperfect. As such, in the material world no one is worthy to accept anyone’s surrender, nor does anyone fully surrender to anyone else unless obliged to do so. But here the surrendering process is voluntary, and the Lord is worthy to accept the surrender. This surrender by the living entity occurs automatically as soon as he sees the beautiful youthful nature of the Lord.”
From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya 22.16:
“O my Lord, there is no limit to the unwanted orders of lusty desires. Although I have rendered these desires so much service, they have not shown any mercy to me. I have not been ashamed to serve them, nor have I even desired to give them up. O my Lord, O head of the Yadu dynasty, recently, however, my intelligence has been awakened, and now I am giving them up. Due to transcendental intelligence, I now refuse to obey the unwanted orders of these desires, and I now come to You to surrender myself at Your fearless lotus feet. Kindly engage me in Your personal service and save me.” (Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhi 3.2.25)
From Krishna, Chapter 87:
“‘The conditioned souls can execute pious activities only when You mercifully inspire them to do so. Therefore, without taking shelter at Your lotus feet one cannot surpass the influence of the material energy. Actually, we, as personified Vedic knowledge, are always engaged in Your service by helping the conditioned souls understand You.’”
Vrindavana Dasa Thakura:
From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 18.149:
“Krishna is unhappy when the demigods are offended. If one worships Krishna
along with His associates, He is pleased.”
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura:
From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 18.149, commentary:
“If one serves Kṛṣṇa with His associates, Kṛṣṇa becomes particularly pleased. By becoming envious of heroes like the demigods and scenes that consist of false ego in the mode of goodness, one denies that they are related to the devotional service of Lord Viṣṇu. When after giving up the desire for material enjoyment one begs all living entities, including the demigods, for the service of Kṛṣṇa, then such natural prayers are devoid of all driving urges for material enjoyment. When living entities freed from the influence of mundane knowledge follow the examples of the Lord’s associates and their characteristics, they become liberated from material concepts. Such maha-bhagavatas are fully capable of pleasing Kṛṣṇa.”
“Faith in Srimad Bhagavatam and freedom from faultfinding in petty matters are symptoms of a pure devotee.”
Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami
From Prabhupada Nectar:
From Chapter 1, Number 47:
“‘Yes,’ said Śrīla Prabhupāda, ‘you can decorate the naked dancing club and go to hell, or you can decorate the temple and go back to Vaikuṇṭha.’”
From Chapter 2, Number 5:
“While Prabhupāda was living in Los Angeles in 1969, he got a letter from one of his relatives stating that one of his brothers had died. Prabhupāda received this information in the presence of some of the devotees and he informed them, ‘I have just received this letter saying that my brother died. Previously my other brother died. These two brothers were very nice. They wanted to live long, healthy lives, but they didn’t care so much for Kṛṣṇa consciousness. But my sister and I,’ Prabhupāda laughed softly, ‘we didn’t want to live long, healthy lives. We only wanted to do some service, and when Kṛṣṇa wanted to, He would take us. Now I see that my two brothers are both dead, and my sister and I are living long, happy lives.’”
Arcita Prabhu:
I heard many classes with Srila Prabhupada in person, and he would typically allow fifteen devotees to chant the verse before he spoke on it because he wanted the devotees to remember it.
I personally heard Srila Prabhupada tell the story of the brahmana and the cobbler. That story makes the point that there is nothing that the Lord cannot do.
“We used to think, but now we know!” is a quote from a class given by Sadaputa Prabhu in San Diego. He was referring to the scientific community in general, not a particular scientist! He stated that reality was just the opposite: “They used to KNOW, but now they THINK (differently)!”
Ratha-yatra is so important because it gives persons who have absorbed themselves in matter their whole lives the chance to have darsana of the Lord and to ultimately attain the spiritual world.
In so many places of worship there are people doing business and searching for a mate and very little genuine spiritual life, so people have lost faith in them.
A rtvik is someone who is appointed by someone who cannot be present. You cannot appoint yourself as a rtvik. That is another defect of the rtvik initiation idea.
Srila Prabhupada said that the gardener who grew the rose that is offered to Krishna gets the same benefit as the person who offered it.
Referring to Rukmini Dvarakadhisa, Srila Prabhupada said that the Deity is ready to speak with you. He then suggested that one go before the Deity and say: “Sir, this is my problem!”
We should have halfway houses for those not ready to move in the temple.
Nityananda Chandra Prabhu:
There are three different ways Sanskrit verses are translated:
Mukhya-vrtti is the face (mukhya) value of the words.
Laksana-vrtti is an interpreted meaning when the mukhya-vrtti does not make sense.
Gauna-vrtti is a metaphorical meaning that does not stray far from the mukhya-vrtti.
One of the acaryas explains that the four items mentioned in Bhagavad-gita 9.34 are listed in a progression. (1) Always think of Me. If you cannot do that, then (2) become my devotee. If you cannot do all the items of devotional service, then at least (3) worship Me. If you do not have the means to worship me, then at least (4) bow down to Me.
According to Krishna, Chapter 87, if we want knowledge we should get it from someone like Sanat Kumara, who does not only have knowledge, but who is also austere and who has good character.
Sundarananda Prabhu of Baltimore:
Through the stories of the lives of great souls in Srimad-Bhagavatam, we learn how to see the events in our lives in relation to the Supreme Lord, and thus develop our relationship with Him.
We give advice when people ask for it, otherwise they likely will not take it seriously.
Duryodhana called Vidura a maidservant’s son (dasi-putra) and said he should be thrown out of the palace. Actually according to the culture, dasi-putras, although they cannot inherit the throne, are allow to live in the palace and be maintained.
If we are mistreated we can see that the aggressors are being controlled by the material energy and therefore not have a grudge with them. We can also consider that everything is ultimately sanctioned by Krishna, and if we are upset about an action, we are upset with Krishna.
Devotees continue with their practice of bhakti, no matter what happens to them, and thus they receive the right to attain the kingdom of God.
Svayam Bhagavan Keshava Swami says that obstacles are not the problem but rather our attitude toward obstacles is the problem.
If someone does something nice for us, we feel gratitude both to the person and also Krishna, who inspired and sanctioned the nice act.
Comments by me:
It is offensive to consider the birth of a pure devotee, as Duryodhana does here with Vidura.
From difficulties we can always learn that the material world is a miserable place, and we can become inspired to endeavor to get out of it.
We cannot expect everyone to be nice to us because everyone is not even nice to Krishna, and He is far more qualified than we are.
Comment by Kartikeya Prabhu: We may have a problem with someone in the ashram, but then when we go to the office, we find that we have the same problem with someone else. Thus the problem is in ourselves, and we have to find out what it is and solve it.
Nitai-pada-kamala Prabhu:
Even Vyasa, the author of the Vedic literature, needed a guru to visualize the form of the Lord.
They asked Srila Prabhupada if our pictures of Krishna looked like Krishna, and Srila Prabhupada said they looked close enough that we would recognize Him.
Arjuna said he was unable to concentrate his mind, and yet he was so qualified he was the only one of Dronacarya’s disciples who could fix his mind on the target. How hard then will it be for us to concentrate our minds in the way Krishna recommends.
Acaryas explain Bg. 9.27 as being karma-misra-bhakti.
Dhruva was so enthusiastic in following the instructions of his guru, Narada Muni, he became so powerful within six months that he could influence the whole universe.
Comment by Narada Rsi Prabhu: It is said, yasya deva para bhaktir. I was told by Gopal Krishna Maharaja, Sridhara Swami, and Bhima Prabhu to manage the Mumbai BBT, and I knew nothing about printing of books. I surrendered, and by Krishna’s grace I was able to learn everything required.
Krishna Kripa Das:
From posts to Official Hare Krishna Humor:
I wondered why there was no quiet time in the ashram and why the washers and dryers can be found running at any time of the day or night, and then it came to me. New York is the city that never sleeps for devotees too!
It always disturbs me when they mispronounce rati-keli-siddhyai as ratty-keli-siddhyai. I think of the rats I see in the New York subway stations, instead of the elevated sentiments expressed in the prayer!
-----
Although we may have so much theoretical spiritual knowledge, we may feel a lack in practical realization. How do we get that realization? This important verse from Svetasvatara Upanisad, which was quoted over three hundred times by Srila Prabhupada, gives us a clue:
yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmanah
“Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed.” (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.23, quoted in Bhagavad-gita 6.47, purport)
Regarding the issue of book changes, somehow that topic has not caught my interest deeply, and I’ve often wondered why people are so fixated on it. Still, I’ll share my quick understanding, based on whatever I’ve studied.
The way Srila Prabhupada’s books have come into existence is quite an unusual process compared to how most books are written. While some spiritual teachers’ books may have evolved in similar ways, most authors usually sit down and write their books themselves—either by hand or by typing—and they carefully review any edits. Prabhupada, however, did not personally check all the edits. But when he noticed any edits that he felt were inappropriate or incorrect, he asked the devotees to correct them.
The Five Stages of Book Preparation
To understand the issue better, we can look at the stages involved in the creation of Prabhupada’s books. I propose a simple model of five stages:
Stage 0 (0D) – Dictation: Prabhupada would dictate his content. In a few cases, he also typed himself, but he practically never handwrote his works.
Stage 1 (1T) – Transcription: The dictated content (0D) was transcribed by devotees.
Stage 2 (2P) – Initial Publication: The transcribed text was edited and then published. This editing involved basic grammar correction and sometimes minor interpretative changes.
Stage 3 (3P) – Publication during Prabhupada’s lifetime: This included further edited versions that were approved or at least not objected to by Prabhupada during his physical presence.
Stage 4 (4E) – Edited editions after Prabhupada’s departure: Editors attempted to revise based on listening to original audio recordings and comparing them with transcriptions and printed versions. This stage is where most of the controversy arises.
Types of Editorial Changes
Editing is essential because spoken words are not always suitable for direct publication. Based on my understanding, editorial changes generally fall into five categories:
Basic Grammar and Punctuation Fixes – These are universally accepted and necessary.
Incorrect Attribution of Words – For example, Prabhupada may refer to something inaccurately, such as confusing a reference point or mislabeling a term.
Incorrect Quotation of Verses – E.g., quoting a verse slightly wrong due to memory or dictation error.
Improper Wording or Ambiguity – An example is the phrase “O the King,” which can misleadingly suggest a person named “O.” The correct rendering should be “O King.”
Content Issues or Problematic Phrasing – For instance, in one lecture, Prabhupada said the blood from a fight reached the sun, to indicate that the sun is closer than the moon. Later, Harikesh Prabhu pointed out that the battle he referred to took place on another planet. When this was brought to Prabhupada’s attention, he admitted the point was more to discredit scientific claims and asked that the line be edited out.
Similarly, Prabhupada used certain analogies—like the one involving a Black man inside a grand car—to illustrate concepts. Today, these examples could be seen as racially insensitive. Such cases fall into the realm of problematic content.
Points of Agreement and Contention
Most devotees agree on the need for grammar corrections (Category 1) and even for addressing obvious misquotes or misattributions (Categories 2 and 3). The real debate arises around the fourth and fifth types of edits—especially when they involve interpretation or what might seem like modifying Prabhupada’s intent.
There have been instances where editors have gone too far, though such cases are a minority—perhaps two to five out of hundreds. Still, these become the basis for significant mistrust.
Some major changes have sparked agitation, but when carefully examined, they often don’t fall under malicious alteration but rather result from correcting earlier transcription errors. For instance, in the early days, devotees sometimes transcribed Prabhupada’s dictations inaccurately. Later publications were based on these faulty transcriptions, leading people to assume that the first published version was the “original.”
However, the real original is Prabhupada’s dictated word (0D), and not necessarily the first printed edition (2P or 3P). So recent changes in the edited editions (4E) are attempts to return to a more accurate rendering of Prabhupada’s spoken words.
Institutional Handling and Divergences
Because of the sensitivity of this issue, the BBT (Bhaktivedanta Book Trust) formed a committee to review and regulate editorial policies. After much deliberation, they finalized new editorial guidelines. These are now being used to systematically review each change, chapter by chapter, starting with the Bhagavad-gita—a process that may take years due to its meticulous nature.
This initiative was undertaken primarily by the North American BBT. However, it has not been accepted by all. For instance, the ritvik groups insist on publishing Prabhupada’s unedited words and claim that some original dictations were deliberately erased. They argue that editing is being used to distort Prabhupada’s teachings and weaken his position, particularly concerning the guru issue.
There is also a historical conflict between the Indian BBT and the North American BBT. The Indian BBT has not accepted the American committee’s guidelines. They prefer to publish what they see as Prabhupada’s “original” words. But the question remains—what exactly is the original? The audio? The transcript? The first publication?
This remains a matter of ongoing discussion and debate.
Hare Krishna. This year Jhulan Yatra begins on Friday 5th August & ends on Balarama Jayanti, Saturday 9th August 2025.
All are welcome to participate in this blissful pastime of swinging Their Lordships after the 7am Shringar Darshan & 7PM Gaura (Sandhya) Arati at Sri Sri Radha Giridhari Temple.
Sri Balarama Jayanti - The Divine Appearance of Lord Balaram will begin with the morning Mangala Arati program followed by kirtan and an evening program from 6pm onwards.
Jaya Jagannatha! Join us at Sri Sri Radha Giridhari Temple (ISKCON Auckland) for the wonderful Ratha Yatra of Lord Jagannatha, Baladeva & Subhadra-Devi on Sunday 29th June 2025 from 12:30pm onwards. All are welcome to participate. We are located at 1229 Coatesville Riverhead Hwy, Kumeu. Hare Krishna!
On the auspicious occasion of Yogini Ekadasi be a part of the Divya Garuda installation at Sri Sri Radha Giridhari Temple on Sunday 22nd June 2025 from 11am onwards.
We invite you & your family to participate in the Maha Yajna & Divya Abhishek of Garuda for a donation of $251. All are welcome.
HE LIVES FOREVER IN FRANCE (and wherever he is present — in his books, followers, Deities, temples, and hearts…) The murti of Srila Prabhupada in these photos was lovingly moulded and produced by devoted members of the Russian yatra, offered as free gifts to every initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Thousands have been created so Read More...
Our Radha Kunjavihari temple is in the Klungkung area of Bali about 90 minutes from Denpasar. It is one of the eight regencies of Bali and home to the famous Klungkung palace, which used to house the old kings.
The temple is graced by the beautiful deities of Radha Kunjavihari and Gaura Nitai and worshiped mainly by the grhastha devotees. I regularly lead kirtan and give class here and feel blessed to have darshana of the deities and association of the devotees.
Nestled within the vibrant spiritual heart of ISKCON Los Angeles, the Bhagavad-gita Museum stands as a unique fusion of art, devotion, and transcendental storytelling. Located adjacent to the New Dwaraka temple, this museum—also known by its creators as the F.A.T.E. Museum (First American Transcendental Exhibition)—has captivated visitors for decades with its life-size dioramas that Read More...
Hare Krishna. So the question is, how can we see the current conflict that is going on from a Bhagavata perspective or spiritual perspective? Yes. This is currently raging in social media. And, I’ve been asked this question repeatedly.
And over the last month or so I’ve been reflecting on this. And so I’ll talk about this from four perspectives. First, a philosophical perspective. Then I’ll look at it from a psychological perspective. Then I’ll talk about it from a historical perspective in terms of how something similar has happened in other traditions also.
And then I’ll talk about it from an individual perspective of what we can do. Till now, most of the discussion has been at an institutional level with, a focus on trying to prove that, say, the ritwikks are wrong. I would like to take a broader perspective here. From a philosophical perspective, Krishna talks about the concept of Dharmasyaglani in the Bhagavad Gita. Dharmasyaglani is basically where dharma becomes disrupted.
And at that time, correction has to happen. So before we can understand this disruption of dharma, we need to understand what is dharma. So broadly, while the word dharma has many different meanings, so I’m right now talking about dharma in terms of the issue of, the role and position of the guru in the tradition. So dharma one meaning of the word dharma is harmonious belonging. That whichever larger unit we are a part of, we need to belong harmoniously to that.
And harmonious belonging is a two way street that we need to do our part in the larger whole, and the larger whole needs to do its part for us. So Krishna talks about we doing our part in to Arjuna asked that. That is the meaning of the word dharma over there. And fixing the larger whole is what Krishna talks about. And he said, So Dharma Seglani can be corrected in both ways.
Now in terms of the system of the spiritual master, the guru that is there, the the here the individual will be the disciple and the spiritual master is is the larger collector. That’s the guru system that is there. So the individual contributes. So if you apply this to the this particular model, if you apply to the guru system, then we have the disciple. And I’m putting the Guru here as a representative of the Guru system.
So the so the disciple, they is expected to offer respect and, obedience and worship. And the Guru is meant to give guidance, inspiration, mercy. And the Guru is expected to set an example of pure bhakti. And when both these are working together, then that’s where balance is there. That’s where the disciple also grows.
So now in the history of our movement, when Srila Prabhupada went to America, Srila Prabhupada was a exemplary guru and he was the only guru at that time. And what he did is extraordinary. Now after he departed, there were succ successor gurus who took up the role of guru ship following Prabhupada. How in the first decade, especially from ’77 to ’87, there was a lot of Dharmasya Gnaani. And as I said, Dharmasya Ghlani can happen in this context in both ways.
The disciple may not follow or the the disciple is not following, then disciple has to follow the standards, do the sadhana properly. But what can also happen is that sometimes the spiritual master may have some problems. So several of the spiritual leaders at that time, for various reasons, they had some moral challenges, they had some falls. And that shook and even shattered the faith of many devotees. Now when this happened, there was a lot of soul searching about what is to be done in such a situation.
So till then the idea was devotees have to follow, individuals have to be strict in their sadhana. But then those who were supposed to be representing Prabhupada and Krishna when they had false, then at that time there was a the Dharmasheglani at the level of the Guru. So there was an internal Guru reform in ISKCON. So what did Buddhist Guru reform do? Basically, post Prabhupada, if we consider 1977, ’80 ‘4 was probably the worst year in our movement’s history.
We had three big, spiritual masters having problems in falling and leaving. So at that time, basically after Srila Prabhupada’s departure, there had become in place something called a zoonal acharya system. Srila Prabhupada had appointed certain teachers, sir, some of his 11 some of his disciples as gurus. And when he appointed those disciples, basically, they became acharyas for particular zones. And everybody in that particular zone was expected to take initiation from that particular spiritual master only.
And International Society for Krishna Consciousness became divided into many zonal societies for Krishna consciousness. And these devotees became like super gurus. They became like a super GBC who had a widow power over the entire GBC, even above their own god brothers. So the guru reform that happened at that time, one of the main changes that happened is that the gurus may be gurus for their disciples, but the gurus are not gurus for their god brothers. So the gurus should not be sitting on a higher asana than their god brothers.
So the vote of the g b the GBC of the gurus and the non gurus both became equivalent. And basically, the understanding that after that, there are many other devotees who also took up the service of the gurus. So the Guru reform, what it did was, it the Guru’s position in relationship with the disciples of that particular Guru and relationship with others, That differentiation was made. And even for the disciples also, it is encouraged that it is not that you take guidance only from one guru. You take guidance from we are joining a tradition.
We take guidance from various people. And while this did significantly stop major problems, but still problems kept happening. Even after that, there was other spiritual masters who had issues. And then the second way to reform this that came was the rittvik moment. So when we talk about Dharmasya Ghlani, we could say that one is the disciple needs to fix themselves.
The other is the gurus need to fix themselves. So there was attempt made to fix the gurus, that the gurus were also accountable to the GBC. They so that certain amount of fixing of the guru system was done. But some devotees felt that this fixing is not working. And therefore, generally, whenever there is Dharmas Seglani, there are three things which we can do.
We can tolerate it. Okay. Things will change and improve on their own. We can mitigate it. Or we can emigrate from it.
We can just leave that system and go somewhere else. So the what the ritwik basically did was, they tried to emigrate out. So emigrate means that this thing, whole thing cannot be fixed itself. We’ll go out and we will create something new. So now when we create something new, what they said is that the problem is the object of faith and service, the spiritual master.
If that spiritual master has some problem and has some faults, then it can be very devastating for the disciple. So try to shift the object of faith to a place where that faith will never be disappointed or betrayed. So basically, they started saying that the rhetoric system was that Srila Prabhupada is the only guru And we serve Srila Prabhupada and Srila Prabhupada will deliver us. And everyone else is, representative of Srila Prabhupada. That’s the word, Srila Prabhupada.
They’re simply initiating on behalf of Srila Prabhupada. Now in our tradition, whenever there is Dharma Seglani, there are resources within the tradition to fix a situation. And there is Guru, Sadhu, and Shastra. So Guru, Sadhu, and Shastra are there. And all three need to be considered to decide what are the right measures to fix things.
And if we consider the broader tradition in Shastra, there is practically very little, no basis to the idea of a ritwik system being there continuously for a tradition. There are some occasions of some examples of some ritwik initiation here where the spiritual master may not be there and some through some is some mystical means some initiation can happen. But the the cornerstone of the tradition has always been a living guru training a living disciple. So basically, what happened is this is the normal system. So the ritwik said the guru alone is all that matters.
And sadhu and shastra are all also to be, seen through the guru, so guru is the supreme. And the Prabhupada’s words are made into the supreme words. Now based on sadhu and shastra, such system is very difficult to substantiate. It’s almost impossible. Now based on Prabhupada’s words, there is some attempt to substantiate the system and there has been a crossfire of, courts from this side and that side.
There I won’t get into that particular, battle of courts. But the broad point is that there is a emigration from the traditional system, which is the cornerstone of the Vedic tradition. It’s a personal relationship where the guru trains the disciple. And so when this is this didn’t happen, so the Ritwik’s, won a court case recently in Bangalore. And now, the current situation is that, is that this is being seen as not just a victory at a legal level, but also at a moral and spiritual level that the ritwik philosophy is right.
So, while it’s important to recognize that from a perspective Guru Sadhu Shastra, it’s it’s almost impossible to substantiate the ritwik system as an absolute system for all time in our tradition. At the same time, it’s not healthy to demonize the ritwik. Those who are following that, they are also following Shlapa Prabhupada, they are also worshipping Krishna. So this is where Dharmas Seglani, how is it to be addressed. And so that’s where I’ll go to the psychological level.
At a psychological level, when faith is there. Faith is a very precious, at the same time a very, fragile thing. So we always want to protect our faith. So what is happening is that currently that those who those who are ritwikks, at one level, there is a philosophical argument made for that. But along with that, to discredit the current guru system that is there in the moment, there is often a demonization of the present gurus.
Now demonizing the Gurus in the moment. And sometimes the past scandals are being brought about and, oh this happened, that happened. Some of them are true, some of them are exaggerated, some of them are distorted, some of them are concocted. But there’s a lot of, demonizing of the Gurus happening. Now it I would like to use here a military metaphor over here that why military metaphor?
Because Slapropad also said that it’s a war against Maya. And in the war, there are some people who may become generals, commanders, leaders. And sometimes even the leaders can get wounded. Sometimes the leaders may make strategic some of the military leaders can make strategic mistakes. And not if they get wounded, others get wounded by that.
And based on that, if somebody starts condemning, the leaders themselves and questioning their loyalty to the country, that would be horrendous. They were trying to serve the country, but maybe they got wounded. Maybe they made some decisions which turned out to be counterproductive. So saying that none of the Gurus have any standing because they have usurped Prabhupada’s position or that they have taken for themselves the credit that was meant only you know, that only meant for Prabhupada. And then highlighting their moral flaws or just concocting certain things.
This is, is a serious disservice to the broader tradition. Now at the same time, we can go to the other extreme, and we may demonize there can be demonizing the critics. The critics of the gurus or the critics of the guru system. Where he starts saying that those who are doing like this, they are all guru apradis and they are going to go to hell. Now when this happens, again, the problem is that there is a philosophical level of argumentation, but underlying that, there is a wounded heart.
There’s a insecure heart. That what is a safe and worthy object of faith for us. And unless that issue is addressed, the we will just be arguing at a surface level. The intelligence that we have been given, the human intelligence is powerful enough that it can go both ways. That we can we all have in our mind, there are certain conceptions.
The mind’s conceptions, we can use our intelligence to rectify those conceptions or to justify those conceptions. Now it’s up to us which one we are going to do. But when the mind has certain conceptions, those conceptions come not just at a rational level. They also come at an emotional level. So even now that if we are to correct the Dharma Seglani, there needs to be a deeper soul searching about how, the the system of Guru Shishya Parampara, which is a cornerstone of the Vedic tradition, can apply in today’s world.
Even now, is everything, hunky dory in the guru system right now? Not necessarily. That there are many devotees who feel that they never get guidance of their association with their spiritual master. There are times when the spiritual masters may give certain guidance which, which turns out to be, somewhat, unproductive or counterproductive also. Even if there are no moral flaws.
So the the point of the good disciple relationship is is a personal connection. So what would this imply? Unless we consider the faith faith cannot be legislated. Faith cannot be simply argued at a philosophical level based on court mining. That when there is vulnerability and insecurity of the faith, how can that faith be secured?
So there needs to be some deep deep soul searching about this. And that’s why rather than a philosophical level, we also need to look at a psychological level. We are not talking about psychoanalysing the motives of people because we can ascribe the worst motives to each side. And we can also consider that both sides may have noble motives. And both of the both sides are trying to search the Prabhupada, but there are serious differences.
So generally, at a psychological level, even there are differences of opinion, we may not be able to There are different levels. There is sometimes you may question someone’s judgement. That means you made a decision that was wrong. Sometimes you may question somebody’s ability. So for example, judgement means that, in a war, a general says let’s attack on that front.
And somebody says no, that is a mistake. So now the judge that the general may be a competent general, but there they made a judgement error. There’s judgement error, it’s bad. It’ll have consequences. But we can assume that, okay, this will learn from it.
Sometimes we question the ability of a person. I mean, you should not be the general self. You just don’t have the competence for that. That can be little more damaging. But if we go further and cons question the integrity of the person itself, then there is no chance for reconciliation.
So let us pray that neither side assumes the worst about the other side. Is it possible that there may be some people with those motives possible? But is it likely that everybody here is having those lowest motives in their side? Unlikely. So if you can give benefit of the doubt, Upanishu Nam Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita, aversion to fault finding.
Then there’s a greater chance that, a solution to the Dharmasiglani can happen in a way that addresses the current needs while also is faithful to the tradition. So I have no magic wand by which I can use such a solution. But Srila Prabhupada himself says that when we are preaching, when we are sharing scriptural knowledge, there is scripture on one side and there is there are the interests of the audience on the other side. So he says realization means to present scripture in a way that is interesting for the audience. This intersection zone is the realization.
So we have the tradition of the Guru Sushya Parampara. We have the current concern about the audience concern, interest is what that either the there are some issues with the guru system. How is that to be addressed? So a lot of prayer and deliberation and soul searching is required. And it can be that the parent situation can become a deliberation for that to see how maybe the guru system can be more decentralized so that gurus and disciples can interact with each other more on regular basis.
Maybe Shiksha gurus need to be elevated more so that the Shiksha gurus can provide guidance. There are various ways in which this can be addressed, but that’s the point of a psychological level. Now from a historical level, something similar happened in the history of Christianity. We consider Christians, originally, they were the Catholic church, but the Catholic church split into Catholics and Protestants. And that is called the Christian Reformation.
And when this happened, there are many reasons for that, but one of them was primarily many people many, church leaders, Martin Luther, who was the leader of the Protestants, he lost faith in the ecclesiastical authority of the church, especially church leaders. There were popes who were supposed to be the highest risk authority. There were popes who were quite immoral. There were popes who had illicit affairs. They had children to the fear affairs, and the popes had the church would provide endowment for taking care of those children.
And the church was selling indulgences. But the idea is you pay some donation for building a church. And just by that donation, your relatives and friends who have passed through who are currently in hell will get transferred to heaven. So there’s a lot of corruption and there’s a loss of faith and authority. So what the protestants said is they had a sola scriptura.
Sola scriptura means, scripture alone is the authority. We don’t need the church to understand the scripture. We don’t need the church leaders. So by that, they started focusing on we everyone will read the Bible, everyone will understand the Bible on their own way. Now the result of that eventually was that the protestants broke away from the Catholics.
But then if everybody can read the Bible and everybody can understand their own way, now there are almost 55,000 denominations of protesters. Because different protesters started interpreting, you know, this is the interpretation. This is the interpretation. This is the interpretation. It led to a lot of fragmentation.
And it became quite vicious. There’s a hundred years of wars because Europe became divided. Say, Spain and Portugal and Italy mostly were protestants. France and Germany and England became sorry. The other Spain, Portugal actually were Catholics.
And France, Germany, England became Protestants. And there is a hundred year war between them. And each side started ascribing the worst motives. So post reformation when the when the Islamic invaders attack Europe. So there are countries that were they are ruled by a Catholic king and they are protestants in that country.
The protestants were also there as soldiers. So Martin Luther told the soldiers, this attack by the Muslims is actually God’s punishment for the Catholics. And therefore, you should not fight against them. And the soldiers many soldiers refused to fight and those kingdoms were overrun, churches were destroyed. And then eventually, when the Muslim innovators started coming and attacking the protestant countries, at that time, Martin Luther King stood.
And he said that, oh, no, no. Actually, these are not agents of God’s God’s retribution. These are agents of Satan to destroy our church. They fight against them. The point is that this infighting led not only to mutual violence and fighting can also lead to further other external enemies attacking and we becoming vulnerable and destroying ourselves.
So we do not have sola scriptura, but we can say what the ritwikks are doing is sola prabhupada. That prabhupada alone. And we don’t have anything else. So in our own tradition, there is Guru Sadhu Shastra. So historically, this infighting goes on.
Sanatana Dharma has many far bigger threats. And we are already spend huge amount of energy, a financial level time, and now emotional energy. This will only lead to further fragmentation. Now there are some attempts after hundreds of years to try to bring the two churches together, Protestant and Catholics. But it’s it’s a lot of historical wounds are there.
So hopefully, we can pray that this is the last says, Dhruva Maharaj in the fifth canto, he prays that, Sastirastu, may all living beings become peaceful. So that a cooler head prevails and we don’t repeat the the tragedies of history, wherein fighting leads to vicious animosity. And the last part I’ll talk about is at a individual level. So what can we as individuals do? Each one of us, those of us who are trying to practice Bhakti, those who come to the Krishna consciousness movement, we may think who is right, who is wrong.
Now more than that question of who is right and who is wrong, let’s focus on the question of what is right for me and what is wrong for me. So what is right for me is that I came here for Krishna consciousness. So how can I best cultivate Krishna consciousness? So is there some Dharma Seglani? It is there.
Is there something I can do to fix it right now? It’s unlikely just by getting caught in the crossfire of the argument. This person is saying this, this person is saying this. No. We will only get more distracted.
And our it is if not our faith, our convictions, our intelligence, they will all get, confused. So let us focus on individually cultivating Krishna consciousness, and we can pray if we have the responsibility of the role, if we have the interest. Then if some of us want to be involved in bringing about some resolution, there are some kind of understanding. Those of us who have that the position or the disposition, the guna and karma, we may be able to do something. But for most of us, it is best to focus on our Krishna consciousness.
This is the international society for Krishna consciousness. So it is for Krishna consciousness. It is not of Krishna consciousness. What What that means is it’s not that intrinsically there is Krishna consciousness over here. It is a place for cultivating Krishna consciousness.
So I’ll conclude with the last metaphor, the metaphor of mining. This comes in the seventh canto in Prahlad’s teachings. That just as under the ground there is gold, we have to dig to get to the gold. So similar the soul exists deep below at the core of our self, but we have to excavate it. So like that.
Now if somebody has come for mining gold. Now at the gold mining place, many other things might be happening. Some peep miners may fight fighting with each other. Some other things might be happening. If we have come there for mining gold, we focus on mining gold.
If we have the capacity to fix other fight, we can fix it. Otherwise, we get caught, we don’t get the gold over there. So, yes, Krishna consciousness is very much accessible and relishable for everyone even now. And that’s what we focus on. And if we do this, then we are playing our part in fulfilling the purpose of Srila Prabhupada to cultivate Krishna consciousness.
Now the exact way in the when we say larger system is meant to function, that is not something we can fix. But getting caught in that will unfix us, will distract us from our Krishna consciousness. So Srila Prabhupada says in seventh canto purport that one should keep, one’s intelligence in mind. One should always be steady, healthy and stout in mind and intelligence to differentiate the goal of life from a life full of problems. In life, there are many many problems and we can’t deal with all problems.
So what which dealing with which problem will help us to pursue the goal of life? Let us focus on that. And that is cultivating our individual cons Krishna consciousness. So I’ll summarize. I talked about four broad things.
That at a philosophical level, there is Dharmasya Gnaani. That means that the individual is not contributing, the whole is not contributing. In the case of the guru system, the there has been a attempt to fix things at a collective level. There was the guru reform in ISKCON, and it was successful to a significant degree. But some people not satisfied with that, and there is emigration to a new system that is a rhythmic system where essentially, Dharma Selana is being addressed by shifting the faith, the object of faith, to a safe level where there is no danger of disappointment or betrayal.
So at a psychological level, there is a wounded heart and there is a fragile faith. That is what needs to be addressed. So, now, when we are trying to address this, if we go out of the system of the Vedic scriptures, rejecting the idea of Guru Sadhu Shastra, which is the Gushi Shapanampara, that is not a health sustainable scripture solution. But we need to find out what is the solution that is faithful to scripture and addresses the concerns of the audience. That is where realization will come in.
And then I talk about it from historical perspective, how this kind of insecurity has been there in other traditions also the Christians. They split into Catholics and Protestants because the faith in the authority was eroded. And that led to vicious infighting and it led to disastrous vulnerability to external attacks also. So let us pray that we don’t go in that direction. Learn from history that the different in fighting can lead to far greater casualties and dangers for Sanatana Dharma.
And lastly, at individual level, we focus on what is it that we can do. We focus on our Krishna consciousness. We have come here to mind our own heart that we can reach Krishna. We focus on that and we pray that Swastirastu that the larger whole become fixed in a way that everybody can pursue Krishna consciousness in a more peaceful and fruitful way. Thank you very much.
Zoom. How okay. How many of you okay. How many of you are not there yesterday? Two.
Okay. Thank you. How many of you are not there today? Okay. So, I will just do a quick recap of what I have been discussing yesterday then we will move forward from there.
So broadly, they’ve been discussing on the topic of Gita wisdom for hard times. How can the Gita’s wisdom help us face difficulties in life? And we discussing this using an acronym. Does anyone remember the acronym? FACT.
So F A C D F was what? Futility. Futility we discussed how that life is tough for everyone. We may powerful, we may popular, we may prosperous but life is tough for everyone. And no matter what we do whatever world view we have somebody may want to be atheistic.
I don’t have anything to do with God. I don’t care for God. I don’t believe in God. Atheism does not remove life’s problems. It only removes the whole, the possibility that life’s problems may have some purpose.
That there may be something higher happening in our life through the whatever is going on. So basically when we look at Gita wisdom, what is it trying to do? It tells us that our life is not just about what we are doing and what is done to us. There is a bigger picture. There is God above us and God has a plan for all of us.
So some in some way whatever we do is is a part of a higher plan and similarly whatever is done to us is also part of a higher plan and this vision that is there is more going on in life than what we can pursue. That is the basic teaching of the Gita. Now what is that more that is going on? That we discussed one aspect of this. What was a?
Analyze. Analyze what? Analyze how Karma is working in our life. We discussed how the principle of Karma means that action leads to some result, some reaction. However, it is not just the present action that leads to a reaction That could be present action plus plus past action that leads to the result.
So now how much the present action contributes and how much the past action contributes That can vary from situation to situation. Present Karma and past Karma. So sometimes you might be doing lot of good things. You might be hundred positive, but if the past Karma is 90 negative, then we might get only a result of 10. So because of this, there’s a bigger picture and we understand that if we are polite to someone right now, but we were rude to that person before.
Then our politeness may not be reciprocated immediately. And then we discuss this graphical analysis on quadrants of how our present actions can be positive. Present karma can be positive or it can be negative. And similarly, our past karma can be positive or it can be negative. Mhmm.
So, if you consider these four quadrants one, two, three, four that it’s best if our present karma is positive and our past is also positive. This is the best situation. Here will be super effective whatever we are doing we’ll get a lot of good results from it like the Midas touch or the Midas touch depending on which part of the world we are how it pronounced, but that whatever we do turns out into gold. Now, at least we don’t want to be in this either of these quadrants that we don’t want our present karma to be negative, because we are creating a darker future. So, we will try to now understand how to move forward and face life’s challenges.
First is okay, I would analyze and accept. Although life does not make sense, maybe there is some higher sense over here. I can’t. So now today, I I although I can’t make sense of it immediately. So one thing we discussed is that our vision of life is finite vision is not the final vision.
So finite vision is not equal to the final vision. So with this understanding, now let us move to the second part. So today I’ll talk about c and t. Those of you who have the book from yesterday, you can use that book. Otherwise, you’ll read from here.
So you can repeat after me. My dear lord. My dear lord. Let me remember. Let me remember.
Let me remember. That my life story. That my life story. Is a part of your story. Is a part of your story.
So let’s recite the words for those of you comfortable. Then Krishna and Arjuna standing tall on their chariots white seeds and all, blew their conscious loud and bright. A sound that shook the field with might. This Bhagavad Gita 1.14. So would you even like to read one of the paragraphs?
Yeah. Okay. Yes. Thank you. So the Gita is not just because of describing a historical truth.
It’s also describing a timeless truth. Our body is like a chariot and so we as souls are in this body chariot and right next to the soul is the supreme soul is Paramatma. So Atma and Paramatma together just as Krishna and Arjuna were together on the chariot. So the world is our Kurukshetra. We will not have to shoot arrows, but we all have to face challenges in life.
We have to fight battles in life and the understanding is that we are not alone over here. So let’s look at this. Now once we understand that okay the situation I am in right now is because of a combination of my present and past actions. So then how do I deal with it? What do I do about it?
So I said I’ll talk about three broad principles from the Gita. One was Karma, the other is Dharma and the fourth is Bhakti. So in ACT, a was associated karma analyze to understand how karma is working. Now c is commit to doing your Dharma and then t, I’ll talk about t is associated with bhakti tap the power of God through bhakti. So yes let’s look at commit.
Now the principle of karma has to be very carefully understood because sometimes some people think that okay whatever problems are coming in our life it’s because of our past karma. So therefore what should we do? Just suffer them. Well that’s an oversimplification. Why oversimplification?
Because success in life or life’s progress or success does not come simply by exhausting past karma. I’ll explain what I mean by exhausting past karma. Yes, we have a certain stockpile of past karma that we have to deal with. So it’s like if say we have spent a lot of money in the past, now we have debt. Now the debt has to be repaid, but the purpose of life is not simply to repay the debt.
Isn’t it? There’s so much more we don’t want to want to do in life. So the life success does not come simply by exhausting past Karma. It comes by executing present Dharma. What we are expected to do, it is when we do that, that is when we grow in life.
So the Vedic teachings in general are not so much karma centered as Dharma centered. So I’ll give you a few examples to illustrate this point. In the Ramayan when Rama is exiled to the forest, At that time, one person becomes very angry about this. Everybody shocked. Everybody is shattered, could see, but one person is enraged.
Can you guess who is that? Lakshman. Lakshman, and there’s a fascinating conversation between Lakshman and Ram at that point. Lakshman says, he’s so angry. He says, he’s so angry with Dashrath that he is not even ready to call on his father.
He said the king has become blinded by lust for his youngest queen, and that’s why he has lost his good sense. There is no need for you to obey such a king. So, at that time, Ram is very great, he says, oh Lakshman, I was there with my father and I saw his condition. It was not infatuation, it was obligation that he was obliged by his word, promise. So now when we are angry we want to direct our anger somewhere.
So then Lakshman directs his anger toward Kaikeyi, he says you have never harmed Kaikeyi anyway, you always respected her like a mother, how could she have done something like this to you? So Ram says that don’t be angry, don’t criticize you know her love for me was just like the flow of the Ganga pure and unceasing. Lakshman is still not yet done so he says that’s what I can’t understand. How did the Ganga dry up overnight? So at that time Lord Ram says that’s why when I heard these words coming from her, I understood that this is the will of destiny.
This is just not something normal the interaction between two people. When when what do we mean by destiny over here? That in general most people turn toward philosophy as a regular small talk when they meet each other on the train or a car or a bus or a plane. Is that right? Is this first thing we ask people so what is your philosophy?
We don’t ask such questions. Most people turn toward philosophy at times when life does not make sense. In fact, the simple definition of philosophy is or the purpose of philosophy is to make sense of things. To make sense of things when things don’t make sense. To make sense of things when things don’t make sense.
Normally if we are able to make sense of things, okay. I work and I get some results, and if I don’t get results okay this person is to blame, or this happened, or that happened. But when life just doesn’t make sense that’s when we turn to a philosophy. Now some people may have a philosophy itself that nothing makes sense. That is not really philosophy, but so one concept that is very commonly there in the in the Indian tradition, but it’s almost there everywhere.
The idea the idea of the evil, the evil or destiny is there. Now, in the Islamic tradition, there is the idea of Kismet, in the Egyptian tradition, the Japanese tradition, the Chinese tradition, there are equivalent concepts. Shakespeare also said that there is a tide of fortune. When we sail our boat at that particular time, we go a long distance, but otherwise we don’t go forward. So interestingly what Rama is saying is, when something bad has happened it just makes no sense.
That is destiny. Lakshman is still not done he said. He says, only cowards accept injustice as destiny. He says heroes fight against injustice. His rise against Dashrath, and I will be by your side.
The throne will be yours. At that time Lord Ram says that, oh Lakshman, it was as a duty to my father that I was going to ascend the throne. And now as a duty to my father for honoring his words, I will go to the forest. So he says my concern is not what is destiny. My concern is what is my duty?
What is my Dharma over here? So later on for example when Sita is abducted, Lord Ram doesn’t say oh you know it is probably destiny that Sita was abducted. If she is abducted later we abducted, I can’t do anything about it. No, the idea of destiny, now what is destiny? Destiny is basically like our baggage of past karma.
When we come into a lifetime, our life does not begin with birth. We have lived before, and when we come into this life, above us is a karma baggage from the past life. It is the karma baggage means, all the unprocessed karma from our previous lives is stored like a stockpile, and this karma baggage is essentially what is called as destiny. Sanskrit word is Daiva. Now, this past karma baggage is something which we all have.
Now some people have a carry on bag, some people have a check-in bag. So people have many check-in bags. We all have this karma baggage that we carry with us, and a major installment of the karma baggage comes right at our birth itself. A lot about us is determined at our birth. Now our ethnicity or nationality, our complexion, maybe our basic starting financial level based on the financial level of our family, maybe our IQ to a large extent, our it’s largely driven by birth.
We can improve it no doubt. Somebody can find one twenty can go to one thirty, one 30 five. But a person one twenty is not going to likely go to one sixty or one seventy, no matter how much they try. But a certain level of things are fixed. And like that, this past karma baggage keeps coming in our life intermittently.
Now sometimes it may give us something positive, sometimes it may give us something negative. But the karma baggage keeps coming in our life. So it keeps unloading at different times. So that’s how the past karma and present karma combined to give us the results. So the point I’m making is that the purpose of life is not simply exhausting past karma.
And okay, whatever may have happened was Sita’s abduction because of past karma? Maybe. But the was Rams exile because of past karma? Maybe. The point is not what am I supposed to do is determined by whether it is past karma or not.
The consideration of past karma is to help us to come to peace with what is happening. We analyze to accept. Like yesterday I discussed that life may feel unfair, and in the big picture what happens is, life is fairly unfair. Fairly unfair. What this means is that sometimes what we get is worse than what we deserve or what we have worked for, and sometimes what we get is better than what we deserve.
That’s because the past karma baggage is also unloading at that particular time. So but when we decide to accept something that is happening which seems unfair, we can say okay, this may be my past karma, let me let me come to peace with what is happening, but how to respond to what is happening? That’s a completely different ballgame. That is to be decided based on what is my Dharma right now? What is the right thing for me to do?
And this can have different approaches. So we commit to doing our Dharma. So I’ll explain this in two with two three different examples of what committing to Dharma means. So Dharma basically means doing the right thing. Let me always ask the question what is the right thing to do?
So to understand that I’ll have to become a little more conceptual, but I’ll take world conceptually then I’ll become a little more practical. The word Dharma has many different meanings. Now one of the most inclusive meaning is harmonious belonging. That each one of us when we say it’s duty. The word duty doesn’t really convey the full import of the Dharma.
What it means is harmonious belonging is say each one of us is a part of a larger whole. So when we belong to a larger whole that larger whole uses something and we have to give something to the larger one. So for example, now, right now, you have come for this talk. So then, if you are going to come for this talk, there is a dharma of how to belong to this talk properly. That would be if your phone is there, keep your phone in silent mode.
If you need to talk with someone urgently, don’t talk talk right now over here. If you’re going to sit for this talk, it’s not that you turn your back to the speaker and sit. You know that each one there’s a harmonious way to belong. Now that is from your side, but if I am representing the larger whole over here, then for me if you are giving your attention, then I also need to give something meaningful, something valuable. If you come for a spiritual talk, and I go on a political rant against a particular party or a particular community, then you may say I don’t want to be here.
I didn’t come here for this. So Dharma is both individual and collective. So the individual Dharma is whatever larger unit we are a part of we need to belong to that larger unit properly. So that is what Arjuna asked Krishna about. That I need to, I want to know what is the right thing to do.
Now, there is another meaning of Dharma which comes in say 4.8. Well Krishna tells Arjuna, That, I come here to establish Dharma, and that is referring to social order. The larger whole, has to sometimes be fixed. Sometimes the individual has to fix themselves so that things work out properly. Sometimes the larger whole has to be fixed, and both involve Dharma.
So it’s not just, so harmonious belonging means, the individual should do their part in the larger whole, and the larger whole should also be doing their part for the individual. So if we go on, if we drive on the road, then going on the road means we should be following the rules of traffic. That is we do our Dharma. We pay taxes, whatever taxes are required for using the road transport system. But then the larger whole that will be the government or the authorities, they should be keeping the roads proper, and they should not be pulling over people or fining people, based on discrimination of some kind, or people of a particular ethnicity they are pulled over more.
People of a particular group even if they do something wrong they are not pushed, they are not pulled over. So Dharma has both these aspects that there is the individual and the collective. Now, now in in politics there is the right and there is the left. These words are very common, but sometimes they’re not so easy to understand what they mean. So the right a simple way to understand this is that, the right is concerned with what is right in the existing system.
So the right is often focused on individual responsibility. That the system is right, it is working right, you need to work harder. You need to raise yourself up here by your bootstraps. You need to fix yourself. So in general, many religious organizations, religious traditions tend to be on the right.
Because this is something which has worked in the past, this is ancient, this is time honored, and it is you who need to fit into this. So the right is concerned about the individual contributing to the whole. So the right is concerned about what is right with the existing system. The left is concerned with those who are left out by the existing system. Every system will leave out some people.
So the left says, the system needs to change. So left is all about social change, social justice. Now who is right? Does the individual need to change or the system need to change? It depends.
It depends, isn’t it? That sometimes the individual needs to change to fit into the system. Sometimes the system is unfair, and the system needs to be changed. So Dharma can be both ways. It is not only one thing.
So what is the when we are facing a difficult situation, this this might seem to be tangent, but I’ll bring it back to what we are trying to say. The what we are trying to discuss over here. That, Dharma is not a very simple concept that, okay, you know, these are your elders, respect them. This is your this is the way society does function, this is the way you are to function always. That’s not necessarily Dharma.
Dharma involves harmonious belonging. Harmonious belonging means, that the individual and the whole, both need to reciprocate. Individual contributes to the whole, the whole contributes to the individual. So now, what does this mean? Let me give you some examples to illustrate this point.
Yesterday, I told about how I got polio because I was given a faulty vaccine. So I have a uncle in America, he’s one of the early persons, as this was nineteen seventies, ‘1 of the early people who came to America from India and he he had already imbibed the American spirit. So he told, he told my father, the first thing is that you should sue the doctor. The doctor who give the vaccine. Now, my father is one of the most peaceful persons I know.
His favorite was from the Bhagavad Gita is Sitapragya. This stay peaceful. He said the Indian legal system is such that even if we sue probably the court case will come for hearing by the time we have grown old. And he said already the polio has happened what can we do about it? He said let me focus on taking care of my son.
And they work very hard to try to help me recover, to do some exercises, so I am functional to some extent at least, but that is what he decided. So okay, this is the system, it fit into the system. But, I have a friend in Florida and, even he was, his wife was expecting a child. Some complication happened, so she was taken to the NICU. And then there was some medical negligence because of which when the baby was born, the baby had cerebral palsy and several other issues.
So he is my, he is my god brother. We have the same spiritual master. So he wrote Radhanath Maharaj, my spiritual master and asked him, Maharaj what has happened? Should I accept it as my past karma? Or should I sue the doctors, sue the hospital for what has happened?
So Maharaj told him that, yes, what has happened, you have to accept that. At the same time, you also need to accept the responsibility of taking care of your daughter now. And if you can get some support for taking care of your daughter, you should seek that support. So he sued the hospital and because it was a clear case of medical, not malpractice, but negligence, the hospital itself settled outside court and he has got a a fairly good financial arrangement for the care of his daughter lifelong. Now, of course, that does not undo the fact that she is she will have a very limited, ability to function in this life.
But the point is that in America, the legal system is slightly different. So where we can if the larger whole has done something wrong to us, it’s not just fair to tolerate it. We can fix it. America is probably among the most litigious countries in the world. I was in LA and I saw a big holding with only three words in it.
Who hurt you? Only three letters over there. So now that means that Dharma is it, the Dharma means okay whatever matter happened accept it. Dharma means whatever matter happened fight against it. Well it depends.
It depends on what the larger whole is and how we belong to the whole. So Dharma is that way, Dharma se tatvam nhitam govayam. It’s complex and it depends on many factors. But the important thing is that whatever larger unit we decide to belong to, we need to belong harmonious. So if say many of you are Indians over here, you may have felt that okay in India there’s not that much possibility for financial growth or other kinds of prospects are not, so career prospects are not that good.
So, you decided to come abroad. You came to Canada over here. So, you are a part of a one whole, now you come to another whole and whichever larger whole we are a part of we need to belong harmoniously to that. We do our part there in a larger whole does something for us. So Dharma is in that sense reciprocity.
So, the key point in this is that when the right says it is individual responsibility. So this this broadly aligns with two schools of thought in the Vedic tradition. What Lakshman and Ram were discussing. So, there are two schools of thought that one is Daiva vad, and the other is Karma vad. So, Daiva vad holds that you know we all have our destiny and everything is this time.
People sometimes say that everything is written in the finger in your palms. Well, that’s not completely true. We have a destiny no doubt, and that past Karma baggage is fixed. However, what happens in our life is not determined only by our past karma. It is also determined by our present karma.
So now the other extreme is Karma wad. Karma wad is everything is determined by our actions. By actions means our present actions. So you work hard and you will succeed. So now to a large extent in the Western world has more or less aligned with the idea of Karma Vad.
You work and you will succeed. And to a large extent the Eastern world was aligned with the idea of the Imbavad. Okay. What is the strand will happen? Now both of them are partly right.
See what happens is with Karma Wadh we can make a lot of physical change and physical progress. Right. Nothing is the stand you work hard you will succeed. That’s how we developed technology. We had made so many astonishing advancements, but the problem is if you adhere to Karma bath too much, then if somebody works hard and does not succeed, then it is your problem.
You are wrong. No, I did everything right, but still not succeeding. Then what happens is when we don’t get success, then we start beating ourselves up mentally quite a bit, But there is physical progress, but quite often there is mental regress. Regress means there is agitation. Because why if everything or success is determined by my own work, and if I’m working, I’m not getting success, then what does it mean?
So there’s something wrong with the world or something wrong with me, and both of them are very difficult to live with. So we see this paradox that although there’s a lot of progress in the world now at a physical level stress, anxiety, depression all these are increasing. But because when something doesn’t work we overreact. We think, oh, life is ruined. I am ruined.
Things are jinxed. Just come to the other extreme. That’s how people get into depression. Yesterday, I talked about remember, situations are reversible. Situations lead to emotions.
Emotions also reversal, but sometimes we may take decisions and the decisions can be irreversible. So we don’t want that. So for example, everybody will face loss in their life. Now loss, we may lose a job. We may lose a limb in an accident, we may lose a loud one, we may lose a relationship.
It’s painful, but we can process a loss in many different ways. I have lost. This is the most objective in the Gita’s philosophy Gita’s analysis will be satua. I am lost. This is much more disorienting.
Somebody invests their whole life in a particular career, a particular job, then just lose that, not just that particular job, but lose that career itself. What am I going to do? So this is much more damaging. This is Rajas. But what what am I talking about here?
How do we interpret loss? How do we emotionally process loss? Now the most damaging is, I am a loser. Now this is Tamas. Now when somebody starts interpreting things like this, now I am a loser.
That can be devastating. If we were in a relationship with someone who we thought was a loser, then we would want to break, break up and that relationship as quickly as possible. But if we think we are a loser, then can we break up with ourselves? We can’t, or can we? In many ways, suicide is a tragic attempt to break up with oneself.
And I often speak in, colleges and universities. So it’s tragic sometimes students because of too much pressure in their lives. Now while this whole phenomena is very this whole it’s a tragic thing, but broadly what I’ve seen in India, it is more because of academic pressure. That in that students may end their life. And as parents, we want our children to do well.
But at the same time, we have to make sure that we don’t let our children’s self worth become equated with only their marks. Because if they don’t do well, it’s it’s a problem, but it is not the end of the world. So we have to see how they are processing loss. So I am a loser in a very toxic way of processing. In the West, I have not seen Western student ending their lives because of academic pressure so much.
I think job and career are don’t seem to be that important. When I came to America, I’ve been coming here for ten years. It is I noticed that in India, if Indians lose a job, it has a huge problem. I don’t even want to tell my family I lost my job. But many many westerners, it’s like, they don’t even say I’m jobless.
I’m between jobs. Like, you know, okay, I’m here, I’m here, I’m between jobs. So it’s that, it’s important. And now there is a reason for it. Historically, India has had much more population, much more financial struggles.
In the West, there is generally some kind of social security or social agreement people are taken care of. It’s curious in America that the unemployed people are the most obese. Now, I don’t know how it is in Canada. There are many reasons, but one of them is that the food that they get is not a very healthy food. Through soup kitchens they get food and that’s quite fatty.
But anyway the point is that people can so in the West, if young people end their lives, it’s not so much because of academic pressure, it’s often because of romantic loss. They identify their self worth the relationship and if they are rejected if they are they say ghosted or something, I am a loser. So this is something sometimes what happens to us is not about us. We could say it’s our own past karma, but that’s a different thing. There’s nothing that we could have done right now to fix the situation.
So this is the extreme that Dharma if it goes towards extreme, oh everything is written by your present actions only. Sometimes, no. The system is such that you can’t do anything about it, and things just don’t work despite our best efforts. I need to accept that. On the other hand, Daibwaa, what it leads to is, it leads to physical regress or stagnation.
So India for many centuries did not really progress. There has never been in the history of the world anything like the British and British rule of India. What do I mean by that? So few people ruling so many people for so long. India had become used to being ruled by foreigners because of the prolonged Islamic rule, and when the British came, the British had even at the height of the British Empire there are only very few thousand British’s were there in India.
And these were millions. So what it is to a large is the Daigwad. Okay. This is what meant to happen. It happened.
But what happens with Daigwad is there is certain level of mental peace. Because we are not filled with resentment. Why did this happen to why this happen to me? Okay. It’s destiny it’s happened.
Now the ideal situation is that we understand it’s both. So what has happened to me? That is because of Daiva, that is because of destiny. So we accept that Daiva is also there, but karma is also there. So accepting Daiva will give us a certain level of peace.
What has happened it was because of destiny I accept it, but accepting karma will help us progress. It is not just because something has happened that I had to leave it. I have to let it stay like that all the time. No. We have a responsibility to do our Dharma.
So what does doing our Dharma mean? It means that we use our God given intelligence to decide how best we can face this situation. So I’ll make two more points about Dharma before we move ahead. That quite often the idea of tolerance is there in philosophical circles. Now tolerate, yeah, it’s in effect of your past karma tolerated.
Now tolerance is no doubt important. If you consider 2.14, Krishna says tolerate. But it’s important what to tolerate. It’s Krishna sorry. It’s Krishna telling Arjuna, oh, tolerate the Kauravas atrocities.
You know, they they dishonored your wife, they stole your kingdom. Just it’s all your past karma. Tolerate it. Is that what Krishna is telling Arjuna? No.
It is what he is telling is tolerate the pain of fighting Bhishma and Drona. I know you don’t want to do it, but this is what you need to do as of Kshatriya. So before we decide to tolerate we need to know what to tolerate. Because see just as we are imperfect whichever larger whole we are a part of can we say that we always do our part perfectly in the larger whole? No, we cannot.
And similarly whichever larger whole we are a part of that larger whole also has problems and that larger whole also, so we will all have to tolerate something. Like you say you came from India to America, now you Canada here now. Now, yes, maybe there is more financial prosperity, maybe there is more physical comfort, but then maybe then what the nowadays sociologist call us or cycle is called social capital. Maybe we don’t have an extended family with us. We don’t have a larger like minded community.
That’s why if you come to temples like this, then you get a sense of belonging to a larger community. Right? So maybe in India, we are tolerate the traffic, we are tolerate the logistical limitations, and here we may have tolerate a bit of loneliness, we might tolerate a little bit of social social distance that term came in, the pandemic, but even before that there is a certain level of social distance that is there. When I came to America for the first time, I realized that how are you, it’s not a question, it’s a greeting. It like people ask how are you, they don’t expect you to tell how are you.
Okay. How are you? So how are you? And then move on also. So it is people are polite, but it’s not that our relationships are very close and personal.
It’s not a criticism, it’s just observation. My point is whichever larger whole we belong to there is some things we’ll all have to tolerate. But the important thing is what to tolerate. So that’s where before Krishna talks about tolerance he gives intelligence. Intelligence in that context is what?
Arjuna you are the soul you are not the body he knows he talks about it. So, intelligence broadly means that we need to understand what are the big things in our life and what are the small things in our life. So this is intelligence And once we have intelligence then we have tolerance. So what is tolerance? Tolerance is to keep big things big.
Keep big things big. And keep small things small. So in one sense tolerance enables us to do our Dharma. So in Australia and I go, once a year I go there. So there’s one at one particular place is one young man who is quite analytical intellectual.
So after my talks, we have nice discussions that he gives me some, candid feedback of which points he found understandable, which he found not persuasive, whatever. So once he came for my talk, but he came a little late, so he’s sitting way behind. Then my talk at that time was on tolerance. So after my talk he came to meet me and says so what, how did you find the talk today? He said normally your talks are quite intellectually stimulating, but today I had an opportunity to practically apply your toggles.
Now I started thinking so my talk was on tolerance. I said do you mean you had to tolerate my talk? So he saw my expression and he said no, no actually what happened I came late I was sitting behind and when I was sitting behind there’s a person sitting next to me was constantly busy on the phone. The phone was sometimes beeping and the phone was sometimes ringing and this person was talking on the phone. Initially I got very annoyed and I wanted to speak something strongly to that person but I thought the class was on tolerance.
So let me tolerate, but because I tolerated I couldn’t hear any of the class. So I told him with all due respect, Normally anyone starts a sentence with all due respect what is going to follow is not going to be very respectful. So I told him with all due respect that is not tolerance that is importance. That is importance. Why?
That, because if you are coming for a talk, what is the big thing over there? You want to listen to the talk. Isn’t it? If you are not able to do the big thing, then that is that is we are not exercising, we are not able to do our Dharma. So what happens is, if you want to understand about tolerance, that tolerance is it can go off in two districts, two extremes.
One is when the big things become small. That means we are not able to do big things. This is importance. On the other hand, if small things become big, now that is intolerance. So for most of us, the problem would be say now right now you come here for a talk and maybe you are not habituated sitting on the floor and you might feel a little uncomfortable and you may think okay this talk probably will go on for half an hour, one hour more at the most twenty, thirty minutes more whatever.
So I can I can deal with it, I can sit on the floor for that visit? It’s a small thing. So if something is small, tolerance should be able to help us keep it small. But if suppose somebody feels so much discomfort in their back or their legs because sitting on the floor then find a chair, or request a chair, and there is a facility for chairs also. The point is, that if somebody just tolerates and their whole body is in pain and they’re sitting on the floor, And they say, I sat on the floor, but nothing went into my head, because all my consciousness was in my legs or my back.
Then that small thing has become a big thing. So tolerance is basically these two dimensions, that we keep the big things big, and we keep the small things small. And that’s why the concept of Dharma is important. The concept of Dharma is, what is the big thing for me, and what is the small thing for me? So if we are at a job, and maybe the work culture is not very good over there.
Maybe the boss is a little exploitative or abusive. See, I I would rather not be in this job, But then maybe we need the money from that job. So maybe that job is good for our career. So then we may decide that is the big thing for me. And because that is a big thing, this I’ll make it a small thing.
I’ll live with it. So now what happens is, if we do not do this mental mental prioritization of what is a big thing or a small thing, then we may keep complaining about the small thing in life. Oh, this is so bad. This is so bad. This is so bad.
Well complaining about that is so bad. Don’t do that. So there is, in life, there are small things, and there are big things. Let’s suppose somebody has decided, okay, I have experience of twenty third, twenty third, twenty years, and I don’t have to take this kind of work culture, but I’ll I’ll find some other job. That’s also fair enough.
It’s a moment that I don’t want to belong to this large whole because what it is giving me is not worth it. So in general we need to recognize that Dharma can take many different forms. Dharma means that we want to do the, we want the right way to belong, but sometimes what is that right way? For two different people it might be different. So, the in this context in mind that you know we all belong to some larger wholes.
So Dharma is commit to doing our Dharma. So we commit to doing our Dharma. Dharma can be done in three different ways. I like to use the acronym MET for that, m e t. What is it?
Sometimes we may decide to mitigate. This is wrong and I have to fix it. So we fight to fix the situation. Sometimes we may decide to immigrate. I don’t want to be here at all.
I don’t want to get involved in this and just leave this. Sometimes you may decide I’ll tolerate. Let’s look at the example of the Pandavas for example. Say initially when the Pandavas came from the they were born in the forest, from there they came to the kingdom. When they came to the kingdom, they now became a they were always a part of the family, but they’re not physically a part of the kingdom and the family.
And then, Duryodhan tried to kill Bhima. And then, at that time, when Bhima survived somehow miraculously by Krishna’s arrangement, he came back, he wanted to beat Duryodhan. How dare you do this to me? At that time the registrar told him, you know, we don’t have any clear evidence. It’ll just be your word against his word.
And we are new over here. We don’t know who will support us right now in the family. We don’t want to split our family. So it’s just, maybe he’s just insecure. Let’s be careful.
But let’s not do anything like this. Now Bhima did not want to do that. If you think of siblings, sometimes you know we have different difficulties in getting along with our siblings. You know you cannot think of a pair of siblings who are as different as Yudhishthir and Bhima. Now if you say Yudhishthir and Bhima, Yudhishthir was like a, both of them are Kshatriyas, but Yudhishthir was more like a Brahman Kshatriya.
You know, what does that mean? That he was more interested in philosophy, and then he bend backwards to try to avoid war. Now, Yudhishthira was like a Kshatriya Kshatriya. You can say it was a Kshatriya square. Itching for a fight.
Now, now who is right at that particular time? Was Yudhishthira right in that particular situation? Well time would prove that, that Duryodhan continued his own things. But then, then next time they did a bigger conspiracy. They had to burn all of them alive.
Then they decided that okay, this must be a bigger conspiracy. We will not evolve the part of it. So they decided to emigrate. They said to emigrate. Let’s leave it.
Now in fact they adopted the policy of emigrate repeatedly. Even after they married Draupadi and came back, Duryodhana pressured his father and they were given a wilderness, the half of the kingdom, but a wasteland like that. A forested part can’t have as their half, but they accepted that. Let’s not fight. So they immigrated.
Even when they were through a fraudulent gambling match they were exiled. They accepted. But after the thirteen years of exile, when Krishna came as the peace messenger, and they rejected Krishna’s peace proposal and they tried to arrest Krishna, then the Pandavas decided enough is enough. That is at the same place where Draupadi had been dishonored, the same place now Krishna was dishonored. This Duryodhana is never going to learn.
So this is where we have to fix the system itself. So now they fought the war and that was also Dharmayuntha. So if you consider in terms of our metaphor, so what happens is tolerate means that we are doing our part but the whole is not giving us good enough. We say, I want to tolerate. Mhmm.
Emigrate means that okay, I will just leave this and I will go to some other larger whole where what I give is properly rewarded for me. Let’s integrate. Now, mitigate is where while we are here, in one sense, we go over here so that what is returned over here is also proper. We fix the system. So now, which of this is the right thing?
That depends. So the focus should be on how can I do my part right now properly? And Dharma is. Dharma is not a simple thing, but the important point is that we need to accept that each of these will have its consequences. Thus, not tolerating is not suffocating.
To tolerate is not to suffocate. To emigrate is not to run away. And to mitigate is not to retaliate. When we what does it mean? Suffocate means, you know, sometimes, somebody tolerate something, but they’re constantly complaining, complaining, complaining, complaining, complaining, and they’re filled with bitterness.
Now, if if you’re going to be filled with so much bitterness, then don’t just do something about it. Tolerate means, you should feel that there is a greater gain over here, and that the big thing is good for me, and I need to focus on the big thing. And that’s what will help me to deal keep this thing small. So similarly, emigrate is not runaway. It’s not that we are in tariff in terror.
Oh, that we were that is so terrible. That is so terrible. No. I could deal with this, but I don’t want to get involved in this. I just want to go to some other place.
That’s immigrate. And mitigate is we want to fix the problem. It is not that we want to get even with someone. When the Pandavas fought a war, that was not so much for revenge, it was for justice. And that’s why the Pandavas, after Duryodhana and his brothers were killed, they did not, they did not retaliate against the Trastha, because Trashta was not a threat to them.
The system was more or less fixed. So in psychology, these terms are called as these are unhealthy responses, fight, flight, freeze. So these are not healthy. The idea is Dharma is that which enables us to grow in our life. So Dharma is in this situation, what is the best way ahead for me?
And especially if we learn to practice bhakti, we learn to pray to Krishna, then we’ll get greater clarity about what is the big thing for me, what is the small thing for me. Krishna says, And that brings me to the last part. What is the acronym we are discussing? Fact. So c was commit to doing our dharma, but then c was associated with dharma.
Now, t is associated with bhakti. So t is tap, God’s God’s power through bhakti. It’s not just that we are all alone trying to bear our karma. We are not all alone struggling to do our dharma. Actually, Krishna is with us.
We are not alone. So about bhakti, I’ll make two quick points and I’ll end end the session. So now what does bhakti mean? You say Bhakti may mean okay I come to the temple, I do some puja, I do some prata, I do some japa. It’s all these are important.
However, Bhakti has some very important meaning to it. That when we grow on the path of bhakti initially for us the world is very big and God is small. But as we grow on the path of bhakti the world becomes small and Krishna becomes big for us. So, the world becomes small and Krishna becomes big. So to the extent this is happening to that extent actually we are growing in.
Now, what does this mean? That the world becomes small? The world is always filled with ups and downs and like we discussed earlier sometimes if our mind is not stable the ups and downs become much bigger. This is, this is the situation and this is the emotion coming from the situation. So when the world is very big, we are subjected to the ups and downs very much.
But in the world itself becomes small, then it’s ups and downs also becomes small for us. So these are the two results of bhakti. What is it? When the world becomes small, we become externally or materially peaceful. Yeah.
This is bad, but it’s not the end of the world. This is important, but it’s not the most important thing. Say the relationship issues are there, some job issues there, some health issues there. Yeah. It’s it’s a concern.
I have to deal with it, but it’s not the end of the world. The material becomes smaller for us. And along with that what happens is, that our connect Krishna becomes bigger for us. We understand that Krishna through whatever is happening, there is a plan for me. So we become internally or spiritually purposeful.
What is the purpose? I want to connect with Krishna. I want to serve Krishna. So this is what happens as we grow spiritually. If you look at Srila Prabhupada’s life, Srila Prabhupada was given an instruction by his spiritual master that you travel and share Krishna Bhakti all over the world.
And that’s what Prabhupada tried to do. Now if you consider what Srila Prabhupada did, that was he wanted to share Krishna’s message. And he also did those three things, you know, and MET what I talked about. If you look at Srila Prabhupada’s life, that initially when he was trying to share Krishna bhakti in India from 1922 from 1922 to almost 1965. He was trying to share Krishna Bhakti in India, and it just didn’t work for various reasons then Prabhupada decided to immigrate.
He said that, okay. People in India are very infatuated by the West, so let me go to the West and let me try to share Krishna Bhakti in the West. Now when he came to America, he was staying at the house of Anasali Agarwal. Now, they had sponsored his visit, but they were not interested in becoming devotees. They had just done this as a courtesy to their father-in-law.
So Gopal Agarwal’s father and there’s a inter religious marriage or inter, cross cultural marriage. So Prabhupada saw that and when he was staying in their home at that time, he would keep this bhoga in this their fridge. At that time there’s a great protein myth in American history that unless you feed your children beef they’ll not get enough proteins. So, they had small children and they would give them liquefied beef. So Prabhupada had to keep his bhoga what he was cooking for Krishna in the same fridge in which the, meat beef was there.
Now, Sally Agarwal had some sensibility. She says, Swami, I’m sorry. We have only one fridge here. And Prabhupa’s reply was think nothing. Now, do you think if say twenty thirty years long down the line if ISKCON had been established, and Prabhupada came to know that there’s beef in the fridge, would Prabhupada think nothing about it?
He said, think nothing except this. How did this happen? Who allowed it to happen? Who did this? So thing is at that particular time, I’m not going to stay in this house forever.
I’m here as a guest, and I have a larger mission. So right now while I’m here, I’m tolerate it. Now later on, specifically, Prabhupada just emigrated from India. If you consider, he had tried to build a temple in Jharsi. The but he started a league of devotees.
When people didn’t support over there, he just left over there. But then, if you consider, so from Jhansi he immigrated. When he was in Butler, Pennsylvania, he tolerated. But later on when he was building a temple in Juhu, Mumbai, the the owner of that land was a double dealing person. He want to take the money and not give the land deed also, and Prabhupada wrote to one of his supporters.
If he wants to steal Krishna’s land, he will have to walk over my dead body, and Prabhupada fought, not just metaphorically, but even literally. There are thugs who attacked the devotees, and to fight, and finally, the temple was built. So even for the service of Krishna, Prabhupada had the bigger picture. So for Prabhupada, it was not that oh, you know everything that is happening is Krishna’s plan. Yes.
It’s Krishna’s plan, but Krishna’s plan means I should also be doing something, and what should I be doing? That is determined by our service attitude. So when we chant Hare Krishna, it’s not just a ritual that we have to meet a certain number of quota. The mood, please engage me in your service. What does that mean Krishna?
You are the ultimate large whole and how can I contribute to the large whole? How do I see how you are reciprocating with me? So for Prabhupada, he was he was internally or spiritually he was purposeful. He was always purposeful. Even when he was in 1965 he came to America, he had nothing to show for his forty years of attempts.
He did not have any money, he did not have any followers, he did not have institutional support. But generally if a person tries a lot and does not succeed the person often becomes bitter. Oh this person didn’t help me, this didn’t work out, that didn’t work out. But even if Prabhupada is unknown Swami working on the streets of New York, who had met him saw that he was so happy. He was happy speaking about Krishna, writing about Krishna, cooking for Krishna, singing about Krishna because for him always Krishna was the bigger reality.
And this is seen most dramatically in the large chapter of Srila Prabhupada’s life. As I said Prabhupada fought to build the Juhu Temple and does anyone know when the Juhu Temple was inaugurated? It was 1978, Jan ’14. That is Sankranti. Now when did Srila Prabhupada depart from the world?
’19 ’70 ‘7. November ’14. So just two lousy months. Now Prabhupada fought to build this temple and Prabhupada could have said to Krishna, Krishna please let me be here to see this temple.
But when one of his life one of his supporter asked him Swamiji do you have a last desires? Prabhupada replied, kuch ichani. I have no desires. How is that possible? Would you not have desire to see Krishna to to see the temple built for Krishna?
Of course, you are desired. But you know devotion means that we can and we should have desires, but the desires never become demands. And the desire certainly does not become an ultimatum. Krishna, if you don’t do this, I’ll stop worshiping you. That is not the mood of devotion.
So Prabhupada knew that this is not just his mission, this is Krishna’s mission. And Krishna had a particular role for him to play, and Krishna was calling his back Prabhupada accepted it. He had the confidence that Krishna would empower others to carry on the mission and that is what happened. So, by our practice of bhakti it is Krishna’s that it is not just that we do our dharma. Yeah.
We have to do our dharma, but slowly our worldview shifts. What we do in the world is important, but how we connect with Krishna is the most important. Because ultimately, no even if we do our dharma very well in this world, the world is temporary. Now we may be the best parents, we may be the best professionals, we may be the best citizens, still at the end we have to die. And what is going to be with us is our relationship with Krishna, or bhakti for Krishna.
So when we tap Krishna’s power through bhakti that means Krishna uses the higher sense of purpose. Krishna gives us that divine connection. Krishna uses inner happiness irrespective of life’s ups and downs. And finally, add when we depart from the world at the time of death of a devotee, a devotee does not leave home. And normally, when we die, we leave home.
But a devotee does not leave home a devotee goes home because for a devotee the home is where Krishna is So, in this way we all can make our life meaningful and successful through the dedication to Dharma and ultimately dedication to Krishna through bhakti. I’ll summarize what I discussed today. I discussed the last two parts of the acronym fact. It was, c was what? Commit.
C was commit. So commit, I spent a lot of time in commit to doing our Dharma. So now in this, I talked about four main points that we talked about how whenever action comes in our life, whatever is happening the two philosophies are, there could be Daivavad, where everything is determined by past karma and Karmaavad, where everything is determined by present karma. The actual reality is both. And both helps us.
If you understand both, we can have peace. And whatever is happening, I come to peace with it by understanding my past karma. But we also have a sense of progress and purpose, because we’re also doing our present karma. So we discuss stories from the Ramayana to illustrate this. Incidents from the Ramayana to illustrate this.
And then the idea of Daeva was what? That when we go through life, there is a baggage of karma that will come on us. That is Daiva, but our present actions also matter. So when we understand this, then I talk about what is the concept of Dharma. Dharma is that we belong to a larger whole.
And when we belong to the larger whole, we do something for that whole, and that whole does something for us. So it’s dharma is harmonious belonging. And when the belonging is not harmonious, then we need to decide how to move ahead in our life. So tolerance needs to be grounded in intelligence. The essence of tolerance is not we discuss how it is not we don’t let the big become small.
That would become importance. And we don’t let small become big. That would be intolerance. What we want is, we want to keep the big, big and the small, small as tolerance and that connection I discussed how do we practice Dharma. I discussed about these four things met.
That is sometimes we tolerate. That okay, even if the larger whole is giving me something less right now, But I am also getting something, so I will continue to contribute. So even if this feels a little less right now, that’s okay. I will deal with it because I am getting something else. Now, emigrate is where I decide this larger hole is not reciprocating with me.
So I will just go to some other larger hole, where I will be rewarded properly. And the mitigate is where we try to shift, so that we can fix the larger hole and what it contributes. So, all of these can be dharma and I discussed from the Pandavas lives how they did all of these in different times. And then lastly was tap through bhakti, what do you tap tap into tap into God’s plan, into God’s purpose, God’s power So, through Bhakti and in that I discussed that for us it by the practice of Bhakti is not just a set of rituals, and what happens is the world becomes smaller and God becomes greater. So, by our sadhana when this happens then we will become materially peaceful.
Materially peaceful is not materially passive. We will accept the ups and downs will come and they will go and we’ll become spiritually purposeful. That through the ups and downs, whatever I want to do, I will do whatever I’m meant to do, I’ll try to do for Krishna. And the other aspect of bhakti is that our desire for Krishna becomes greater than our desire for the world. Even our desire for serving Krishna in a particular way in the world.
So that was what we discussed with the example of Shruti Prabhupada that when he served diligently, but at the end he was ready to let go of even the Juhu project. So through salibhakti, death does not mean we leave home, but what happens? It means we go home. That is the this is how even through tough times, the Gita’s wisdom can help us to be a part of Krishna’s plan and achieve the ultimate perfection of life. Thank you very much.
Hare Krishna. Hare Krishna. Is there any one or there any one or two questions which anyone has? We don’t want to go too much over time. Yeah.
Yeah. It’s a tough thing. In general, our enthusiasm goes down with time. So there are two ways to deal with that. One is that make the enthusiasm very specific.
Now you could hear a lot of things, but try to take one or two points. So how to sustain the enthusiasm? Make it one is specific. That means this is one point I’ll apply in my life. And then revisit that regularly.
Then maybe once a maybe once a week or once in once a day or once in two, three days, whatever. We okay. How did I for example, if you found the point of tolerance and intelligence important. Keep small things small, not big things small. So think of how you could apply that.
Make it specific. And then what happens? Once we apply one thing and we say it benefits me, then we may decide, okay, now this has become a bit of a part of my system. I do it for one week, I do it for one month or something, then I can move to apply some other point. Thus, if we try to, it’s good.
If we can remember a lot of point that’s fine, But when it come to applying, we can’t apply everything at the same time. We try to we just get overwhelmed and we’ll end up applying nothing. So try to be make it specific. And the second part is that try to see what is relevant for us. Relevant means, you know, which is the area where I feel the need to change, where I will be benefited for changing.
So in general, when we talk about improvement, there are many areas in which we could improve. But improvement centers broadly on two factors that it is the on one side is the reward. The reward of change. How much is it? If that is high, that is good.
And the second is the cost of change. If that is low, that is also good. Now, sometime the cost of change feels very high. So okay, I’ll do this later. But is there we could say rather put let’s put another way over here.
Yeah. The okay. Let’s see. The cost of change only. So basically, we’ll have to see for each one of us which is the area where change will help me in a tangible way.
So say if we tend to tend to oversleep, then okay, then making a certain amount of regulation or if I don’t study Shastra so much, but then I also have to share scripture with others. Maybe I have to do some classes. Oh. And if I study scripture regularly, then what will happen is it’ll help me over here. So let me make a plan accordingly.
So try to see where ideally speaking both are there, where the cost is cost can be high, or the cost can be low, and the reward can be high or the reward can be low. So, in this case this is the best situation to be in. You know, this is where we are most likely to start a change and sustain a change. And then gradually from there as a confidence increases, as we see start the results, then we see we start seeing the results, then we can make changes in other areas also. Okay.
Thank you. Yes, bro. So do problems serve a purpose? It depends. I use this when we have pain or problems in our life, we can get a IAS degree in the problems.
Or the IAS, there are three kinds of problems. One is some problems are just inevitable. They are a part of life, and we just need to learn to live with them. So for example, if you come to a place like Canada it’s going to be cold, and if you go to some place in Central India it’s going to be hot, or you go to some, sir, there are some things you are just associated larger place. They are a part of life.
They are inevitable. So everybody has to grow old. Everybody has to get disease. Everybody has to die. So inevitable problems.
Now Krishna talks about these inevitable problems in thirteen point nine. But then there are certain problems that are avoidable. So many problems in our life are created by our own behavior. So for example, Krishna talks about this in 5.22. When we indulge in pleasures excessively, that causes pain to us.
And nobody has to if somebody start drinking alcohol and becomes addicted and has severe health problems, Those are not inevitable problems, those are self created problems. So, inevitable problems we need to we need to accept or we need to tolerate, we need to live with them. Now, avoidable problems we need to eliminate them. If not eliminate at least reduce them eventually to eliminate. But there are certain problems that are strengthening.
Strengthening means this Krishna talked about in 18.37 in the Gita. That he says, That which tastes like poison in the beginning will taste like nectar in the end. So if somebody wants to become healthier, develop a regular health, develop a regular health exercise routine or regular diet routine, that’s difficult. But if you go through it, we’ll come to a better place. Similarly, we want to learn to do our chant mantra chanting attentively.
Habit of studying Shastra, initially it’s difficult, but if you do it will come to a better place. So is it that all pain has a purpose? Well, you could say at one level yes, But some pain has a purpose that learn to live with it. Some pain has a purpose, don’t do it. And some pain has a purpose that through this pain you will grow and become better.
So this is something which you should actually commit to or cultivate. So now I’ve given these examples from a day to day to day to perspective irrespective of theism or atheism, but at a bigger per bigger level. At the end of our life, is there something more? Even during the course of our life, when we go through very dark phases in our life, is there something going on over there? Is there some higher purpose?
So we may not always know the exact purpose of every single pain. Although Krishna is with Arjuna, no Krishna does not tell Arjuna specifically, why does he have to fight against Bhishma and Drona? Now he does not tell, at all, Bhishma was so and so in the previous life and Drona was so and so in this life and you were so and so, and he did this, and you did this, and that’s why now two of you are fighting here. There’s no like a esoteric, karma flashback revelation. So in that sense, when we say there is a purpose, it is not so much important what is the purpose.
That there is a purpose. And sometimes we get a sense of that purpose as we move through our life. Now all of you maybe after you go back you could just spend a few minutes doing this exercise. Look back at something terrible that happened in your life. That time you felt it terrible, but then look ahead from that, did something good come out of it?
You can’t say everything terrible that happened good came out of it. But many things that seemed said that seemed terrible at that time, they brought some good out of it. So we all can see that there may be a pattern, there may be a plan, there may be a purpose which may not see at that time, but it will be revealed eventually. Okay? Thank you.
Okay. So, it is a very important question. I am going from here to Phoenix after this from here I am going to Calgary to Phoenix and there I am going to two part series on this whole topic. So, I cannot do that but I will just explain two principles mainly. See the idea is a common metaphor in the scripture is that of a river flowing toward the ocean.
So the river organ is high up in the mountain like a Ganga and in the river goes towards the ocean. So each one of us is like a river and the ocean is Krishna. Now of course the Advaitins hold that the river merges in the ocean. The Vaishnavas understand that the river keeps flowing toward the ocean. Like that our consciousness keeps flowing toward Krishna all the time.
But the key point here is that each river has to find its own path toward the ocean. So there is a there is a common universal purpose for all rivers but there is also a distinct individual path for each river And while the river is going towards the ocean, the river provides life sustaining water for hundreds, thousands, millions of life forms. Like that each one of us while we are going toward Krishna, which is the ultimate purpose of life, we have to carve our path. Your life is different from my life. Your life is different from his life or her life.
So we are each a river and that’s why there’s a very individual element in bhakti because it’s a personal relationship with Krishna and each of us has to find our path toward Krishna. Now how do we do that? That’s where our buddhi comes in. So how do we balance? Srila Prabhupada himself said that if I had met my spiritual master two years before, he met in 1922.
He said if I had met him one and a half two years before, I had not been married at that time. I had joined as a full time devotee over there. But he said now that I’m married, he said it would be unfair to my wife and my child if I leave them now. And Prabhupad focused on his brother, my build is business. He tried to build his business.
His hope was that he will contribute financially to his spiritual master’s mission. So we should not see all our dharmas as separate from bhakti. It is that is second point I will make with the challenges is that see each one of us has every part of many larger roles. We are part of a family, we are part of a community, we are part of a country. So now all such larger wholes, the ultimate whole which contains all other wholes is Krishna.
God is aham sarvasse prabhamo That he is the source of all holes, and he is the sustainer of all other holes. So now, ultimately when Krishna says Sarva Dharmana Prat Jama Meikam Sharla Nvaja. What he means is, you serve me and I’ll take care of you. But that does not mean we don’t care for all the other roles. So the idea is for a devotee, Dharma and Bhakti, they go together because we understand that dharma and bhakti how do they go together because each of the units that I am part of is also arranged by Krishna There’s a beautiful prayer.
Now what does this mean? Now it does not literally mean the mother is God or the father is God. If it meant literally that then if the mother and father argue about something, which God is the child supposed to follow. Isn’t it? It’s not that literally their God, but that when the mother takes care of the child, the mother is embodying God’s love for the child.
The mother it is mother’s love of course but it’s not just the mother’s love. When the mother offers her breast milk to her newborn baby, that is one of the most intimate acts of love. It is certainly the mother’s love, but is it only her love? She doesn’t do anything special to manufacture milk in her breasts at that time. The same God who send a child through her womb into this world also arranges for milk and herbivests.
So it is the mother’s love and it is also God’s love. So Dharma and bhakti should not be separated. We see both are connected. So like that as we grow sometimes our Dharma is too our father does a lot for us, our friends do a lot for us, our siblings do a lot for us, our wealth also does a lot for us. So all these are important.
So the idea is that Dharma is associated with Artha. Artha means meaning value. Bhakti is associated with Paramartha. Paramartha is the ultimate value. So the ideal situation is, extremist only artha.
Oh, I’ll only care for my family. I’ll not care for my God, for a God at all. Or it is only paramarth. That I’ll care for my family, I’ll care for my job, I’ll care for health, but I don’t care for God. Actually, what we see is artha for per month.
What that means is that I care for my family, I care for my body because this body is actually gift given by Krishna. I care for my family because this family is all the family members are not just my family members, they are parts of Krishna. These are not just my children, they are Krishna’s children interested in my care. So artha for paramartha. So we don’t have to have fragmented that way.
And depending on time, place, circumstance suppose somebody is sick then at that time they may have to spend more time on their body but what he care. Suppose sometimes somebody’s financially in a very difficult situation, they might have to spend more time with the financial arrangement. Sometimes there’s a big festival in March at that time, I’ll spend more time on my service to Krishna. So we we have to do a balancing act, but we don’t have to divorce that the material in the spiritual. Actually, all of it is meant to take us closer toward Krishna.
And we use our intelligence to see when I say this what keep the big things big and keep the small things small. Now what is a big thing and what is a small thing that can also change a call time place circumstance. At a particular time, one thing may become very big at that time and we have to give it that attention. Okay? So thank you very much for your you have question?
Thank you very much for your thoughtful participation. Let’s quickly conclude with this prayer. Already started. My dear Lord, let me remember that my life story is a part of your story. Thank you very much.
My dear Lord, please guide us all, so that we can understand the deep wisdom in your words and texts, and can align our lives accordingly. Hare Krishna. So today morning, we are discussing one of the most evocative sections from the Bhagavatam, which reflects a theme common in the Bhagavatam that is death. So, and I was speaking on a verse from the Bhagavatam, I try to use a three point framework. I call it chit.
Chit means consciousness. So we can look at the context of the words, and we can look at the implication, what all is going on over there. What does it mean? What is happening? And then take away.
What does it how does it apply to all of us? What can we learn from it? So I’ll use that same framework today. And now the context of the Bhagavatam here is that this is the drama after the drama, drama after the drama, or you could put it actually another way, it is the trauma after the trauma. What do I mean by this?
That the war has got over, and we could say the war is the real action, like in a, you know, if it is a typical movie, and there’s a climactic confrontation between the hero and the villain, and finally after a great fight, the hero defeats and destroys the villain, and then we expect the hero to be victorious, and now that we are victorious to celebrate, and to have joy, and there is a happy ending. But here, after the war is over, the drama of the war is over, but then suddenly there’s a new drama. Instead of a happy conclusion, here the king for whom the war was fought that King Yudhishthir is saying I cannot be the king. I I can’t I just can’t. He is burdened by guilt.
So, sometimes people, some people who make a lot of, issues about small things, like some people like, somebody that drama queen. You see, you know, they make a big issue out of small things. Now is Yudhishthir Maharaj ruling that? Not at all. He’s a virtuous king, but for him he just, this is an unexpected twist.
He doesn’t want to be the king. Now if you look at it from his experiential perspective, there is a trauma. What has happened for him? That the war took a very, very heavy toll for Yudhishthir. Now he always had second thought, should I fight or not fight?
He went along with the fight because he realized that Duryodhan was never going to learn. When they tried to arrest Krishna, they had tried to dishonor Draupadi first then they tried to dishonor Krishna. That is when the Pandavad decided. This far and no further, they had to draw a hard line over there, and they fought. But unfortunately the war took a heavy toll.
Now what was the trauma of the war? There is a term called a Pyrrhic victory. Pyrrhic victories where the victory costs more than what you gain from the victory, And the Pandavas felt like that. Why? Because all their sons killed.
And the whole war was fought at one level to resolve a succession struggle, And we succeeded, but there was no successor left to succeed after them. What why did we fight it all? What did we fight it all for? And among all the sons that were killed, Anushtira especially felt guilty about the death of Abhimanyu, because it was he who had requested Abhimanyu to go into the enemy formation. Drona had formed a chakra view to kill to at least arrest Yudhishthir.
And Abhimanyu had said you go in and bring the chakra view we will follow and will destroy from inside. But Abhimanyu went in and was trapped and he was killed. And then, what was the last blow for Adi? Abhimanyu was Karana’s identity. When his mother revealed that Karana was her first born son, Yudhishthir was shattered completely.
Now, he had always thought of Karana as a mortal enemy, and he said I celebrated my brother’s death. I danced in joy when he was killed. He said that, and my brother he had an opportunity to kill me, and yet because he knew I was his brother because he had promised my mother. He didn’t kill me. So for a for a virtuous person to do a bad thing, even unknowingly is bad, but for a virtuous person to discover that a person who they thought that was bad was actually good, and not only good, but better than them.
That is devastating. That is just completely shattering for the very identity of who I am, and who I am meant to be. Like there is a moral hierarchy where we are here, and say somebody else is over here. So, Indesh was not proud, he was always humble, but still, He thought that Karana was a bad person, and Karana had chosen to be the side of, of the Kauravas, and he was a virtuous person, but this was his conception. This is how the moral hierarchy was, but what he realized was that actually he at least this is how he felt.
I am down here, and Karna is somewhere up here. And Yudhishthir, his, his revelation or what he felt was the reality was like this, and he felt how can I possibly be the king? I just can’t, and nobody could make him see sense at that time. Nobody could make him change his mind, and finally Krishna got him to come to Bhishma. At one level, this seems to be the worst thing to do for him, because if he is racked by guilt already, then to bring him in the presence of a person who has been killed because of what he thought is his lust for war.
His, this is a blood lust or property lust or whatever. To bring him in the presence of that person seems completely counterintuitive and on top of that, Bhishma is not in dead. He is lying in pain and the pain Yudhisht would naturally feel that it’s because of me. So now Yudhishthir and Krishna, sorry Krishna understood Bhishma’s heart, and Bhishma understood Yudhishthir’s heart. So the first word that Bhishma speaks when he sees Yudhishthir is amazing.
This every single words in this conversation is just a gem of not just wisdom, but it’s also a revelation of the character of Bhishma. So normally if you go to a hospital, where somebody is having a terminal cancer, and they are in great pain. Normally our first question would be, how are you? We would have concern for them. Oh, it is so sad something like this happened, but you know, we will try to encourage them, but first we think they are in distress, but the first words that Bhishma speaks is.
He says, he is just seeing all you see what a bad situation I am in. He says to you this year, how many adversities and atrocities did you have to face? And then he basically talks about the the complexity of morality in the world. He says, he gives a list, you lost your son and your grandmother became a widow. Now you this still may think that, oh, no.
Actually I’m not suffering, you are suffering. So Bhishma notices that, and immediately he shifts his focus from when he says you, I’m not referring to you, I’m referring to your mother. Now, Bhishma is also trying to soften Yudhishthir’s heart towards his mother, because Yudhishthir feels extremely angry with Kunti, because of the etiquette of respecting one’s mother. He doesn’t blast out at her. But this is one place where he does still curse, that women will never be able to keep secrets, he says.
It’s more expression of anger from his part, but he feels, how could you have not told me that the person I was fighting against, the person I was plotting to kill, the person whose death I celebrated that person was my brother. How could you never tell that to me? He says, wasn’t I a stakeholder in this? So, he’s also trying to help Udish to soften his heart towards Kunti. She has suffered a lot, and in many ways, actually her suffering was more than the Pandava’s suffering.
As a parent, you know, we would be ready to do anything to prevent any suffering from coming on our children, and if there is we will be ready to do anything to protect our children from suffering, and if we are in a position where we can do nothing to protect our children who are suffering. That is most painful and that was the plight of Kunti. And in all the political intrigues that were happening, her sons were being targeted, and there is practically nothing that she could do at that time. So, so Bhishma is highlighting to Yudhishthir that actually everybody is being Yudhishthir over here. That, even if you think she made a mistake, even if you think you made a mistake, the life is messy.
And, in many ways, the Bhagavatam is spoken in the shadow of the Mahabharata. Whether in the shadow of the Mahabharata, shadow of the war that has happened. And in general, there can be many kinds of sufferings in life. But among the various kinds of sufferings, we could say there are different degrees. There is adversity, aho kashtamatasis, then there is atrocity.
So, the adversity is more natural. So, if our power supply goes off that’s adversity. Atrocity is more intentional done by someone. So if a power supply goes on, that’s adversity. If you come to know our neighbor cut off our power supply, that’s atrocity.
But for a responsible person, probably the greatest suffering is agony. Agony means not just bad things happen to us, or bad things are done to us. It is bad things have to be done by us. Sometimes life leaves us with just no good option. Now, one of my close friends is in HR, and he told me that the word, the part of his job that he just does not like is firing people, and especially when the pandemic came, they had to release a lot of people, and he’s just detested.
But it’s like, if I, we don’t let those people go, and the whole company will go under, and nobody will have a job. So what do I do? Sometimes life brings us into positions, where there is no good choice. And that is what burden the responsible person the most. So Krishna, a Bhishma is telling, you this day, he goes to various reasons.
Why do you think this happened? Then such suffering on you who is a virtuous person. Not only were you wise, but you also took guidance from the wise. You always try to follow Dharma. You always were sheltered in Krishna, and still such things happen to you.
So he goes on to say that, whatever happens, it is ultimately within the plan of the Lord. So we can visualize the scene. Bhishma is on a bed of arrows. When we use the word bed of arrows, that’s a euphemism which conveys the idea of something that is completely opposite to what you would think is a bed. On our bed, even if there is some small lump, we will move here and there to try to get that bump away.
If there’s small bump or lump, if there is something sharp, we will say I’ll sleep somewhere else. But he’s in a bed of arrows. So he’s in the middle of the battlefield, where all the drama and the trauma has happened. And now Yudhishthir is talking with Bhishma, he’s lying there, and Bhishma is speaking, and Bhishma says everything is the plan of the Lord, and he tells him that okay, now Yudhishthir’s problem is he’s feeling guilt right now. That I caused the death of everyone.
Now, Bhishma does not go into the specifics of the ethics. Okay. Was there to seem to fight right? Was there to seem to fight wrong? Because in many ways, right and wrong is very difficult to do.
And we all have certain frames of reference by which we decide what is right and what is right. So the implication over here is that how do you free a person from guilt who is who’s wracked by that right now, overwhelmed by that. So there is, so what he’s telling, there is a there is a divine plan. That everything is happening within the divine plan and that divine is not somewhere far away. This is here only.
He He said that is the worst we have come to be, then that Krishna whom you thought was your friend, was your relative, that Krishna is actually God. So he is telling, yes the divine plan is operational, sometimes you may say does God care? Is God even in charge? Is God not only cares, God cares so much that He is right. He says the divine plan is going on in your life.
Is going on in your life right now. And how does he persuade Yudhishthir? As I said, he does not go into an elaborate analysis of the ethics of war, because everybody else has tried that approach. If you look at the discussion before this, you know, Vyas Devas tried it, Krishna himself has tried it, Arjuna, and the Pandavas, and everybody has tried it. So he talks about dharma and bhakti.
So basically, because dharma is moral virtue, is morality. Or you can say ethics. Morality and ethics are similar, but ethics is more like a system of morality. But either way what he said is That ethics, and bhakti is, of course, devotion. So broadly speaking, the way the analysis is done over here is that if we consider, Dharma is the right thing to do, and Bhakti is the right mood in which we do the thing.
We do it for pleasing Krishna. So now sometimes there can be Adharma that can happen. And there then somebody can be Abhakti. Now Abhakti is not something that Abhakti is the word, but Abhakti is that no something is done without emotion. So if we consider these four quadrants in a clockwise sense, now which is the best place to be situated?
Fourth. Fourth quadrant that we do things to please Krishna out of love for Krishna, and we do the right thing. We are moral and we are devoted. In fact, this is what Krishna talks about in 12.12 to 19 in the Bhagavad Gita. He talks about, 12.13 to 19.
He talks about characteristics that embody that attract a devotee to him. And here devotees dear to Jesus. It’s interesting in those qualities, Krishna does not say a devotee who chants 16 rounds everyday, or a devotee who wakes up for Mangalarati, or a devotee who fasts in Jalani kadashi, a devotee who visits Vindavan. Krishna is not talking anything about devotional qualities. They’re important.
But there Krishna is focusing on behavioral qualities. That somebody who is compassionate and kind to others, somebody who is not agitated other, somebody who is who is who is calm, who is self satisfied, who is basically qualities that anyone can appreciate. There’s one time when Prabhupada was asked by a newspaper journalist, how can we know your followers? And Prabhupada said, they are perfect gentlemen ladies. They’re perfect gentlemen.
So the idea is, that this is the best quadrant to be in, where the dharma, and there is brukti. However, sometimes life is so complex that sometimes one may not be able to decide what is Dharma or sometimes one may do something which one considers as Dharma, but later on find out it is a Dharma. But as long as the heart is in the right place, he says that eventually Krishna will take care. So, now we could say, there is dharma and there is bhakti both are important, but dharma cannot be neglected for the sake of bhakti. So dharma means the morally or the materially right thing to do.
So dharma has both a moral meaning to it, as well as a functional meaning to it. I’ll talk more today about the concept of dharma, but the point is that dharma is that when we function in the material world, there is a right way to function in the material. If we’re driving, driving in the road, we have to follow the right side of the road. If we don’t, we may think I’m serving Krishna. I mean, we’re going the wrong side of the road.
Still we will pulled over, or we may be with an accident. So Dharma is the materially, the legally, the morally, the functionally right thing to do. Somebody may have bhakti, but if they don’t have dharma, then say suppose somebody is cooking for a big festival, and they don’t know any cooking at all. Then they may cook with great devotion, whenever the every cooking, everything they do is listen to cooking, they have a nice kirtan going on, they offer prayers to Krishna. They do everything right, and they but they just have no knowledge of cooking.
So what will happen is, Krishna will be pleased by their cooking, and only Krishna will be pleased. At material level things won’t work. So in the material world for functioning, Dharma and Bhakti both are important. Somebody has Bhakti, that’s wonderful. For pleasing Krishna, that’s wonderful.
Like in the Ramayana, in the story of the squirrel also bring some dust, some for building the bridge. Lord Ram said to the great monkeys that what you are doing and what that squirrel is doing. I am pleased with both of you, because both of you are doing your best. So from the Lord’s perspective, the Lord is Bhavagrahi, the Lord looks at the heart. However, from the practical perspective, the squirrel did not help in building the bridge much.
There were the giant monkeys who brought giant boulders, and that’s how the build bridge was built. So the point I’m making is, the material world is a harsh place. The material world does not care for our fine sentiments. The material world works based on some rigid realities. And if somebody is, does not have the right judgment, even if their heart is right, it doesn’t work.
That, so sometimes when good people can make bad choices, good people I mean, people whose heart is in the right place, whose heart is in the right place, they may also make some wrong decisions. So so now, if you consider among these four quadrants, that we could say this is there is no Dharma and there is no bhakti, that is the worst. That means that person is not doing anything material right, nor they are doing devotionally right. That means say if you consider this could be complete Tamas. Say there are parents, the parents have no spiritual conception themselves, they have no interest in raising their children spiritually, but the parents are not taking care of the children material roles.
Where the parents are high on drugs, and they don’t even know their child exists. So there’s no material responsibility, there is no devotional, attachment or connection that we could say is the worst. Now, somebody might have Dharma, but no bhakti. Like say we may say that there might be some parents who may not, care at all about Bhakti, but they care for the material well-being of the child. If the child is sick in a hospital, they will be ready to sell everything to save the child’s life.
Then we’re ready to move heaven and earth to take care of the child. So such so caring for dharma and not caring for bhakti. That is better than not caring for either. You at least you are trying to do the right thing, even if our heart may not have the right attitude. This is that our we are not really thinking of serving Krishna, being understood to Krishna.
Now on the other hand, if there is bhakti, but there is no dharma, that means material one does not consider what is the right thing, one does not use good judgment, one does not make proper analysis of things, then there will be material consequences. Now can Krishna intervene and protect from material consequences? Yes. Of course, he can, and sometimes Krishna does, But a devotee does not demand that. A devotee does not expect that.
There is suppose we have to catch a flight, and before we are we are having a program, and there is some very spiritually curious person. We spend a lot of time talking with that person, and we get late for the flight. I say Krishna please, Krishna please arrange for some problem with the technical details of the flight so that the flight gets delayed, and I reach on time. Now if it happens, wonderful. But we can’t make that as a pattern and expect Krishna, I won’t care for what is material right thing to do, and Krishna you take care of everything.
Now so a, now adharma can also refer to immorality. Now, when I am using the word Adharma over here, I am using it both in the functional sense and in the moral sense. Later on after this verse, Bhishma will make a remarkable statement. He says, So he says, just, and Prabhupada translates, because I’m a pure devotee. Because I’m a pure devotee, just see.
Okay. Krishna has come to rescue me. Okay. The mercy that the Lord has bestowed upon me, that he has come to free me from this material, as Prabhupada used the word tabernacle, from the material entanglement. He has come at my last noon, and I am about to leave my body.
Krishna has come to give So what is he saying? He’s saying that, even if I did something which is wrong, I fought against Krishna. I shot arrows at Krishna, and in spite of that my heart was in the right place. My heart was in the right place, and just see how Krishna has rewarded me right now. So now, you will see how Krishna has rewarded me.
You could say, Krishna didn’t reward you. You are lying on a arrow bed. You are in pain. You suffered. The only defeat in your life, you suffered.
Like somebody has a spotless record in their in their entire life. So sometimes players never lost a single match, and the final match they lose. So that’s a, it is, it is, it is at the very least it is a stain on their record. Now we could say Bheeshma lost before that at Virat also, But it was more of a, it is not, it’s not a war with lethal consequences. Arjuna did not want to kill Bheeshma, Bheeshma did not want to kill Arjuna.
He just wanted to come to a detent at that time. This was a war with serious consequences. So practically, this was the only time he lost in a major battle with major consequences, and he is saying that what how would Krishna protect? So the principle over here is twofold, that there is the spiritual, and there is the material. Now, the material will operate according to material principles, and there will be material consequences.
So if we are careless about material things, there will be material consequences. If somebody has diabetes, and they are given, say, Doctor has told them no damage sugar. They say this is not sugar, this is Maha Prasad, and they take the entire laddoo. Well, at a spiritual level, there’ll be spiritual consequences. At a spiritual level, they will be purified by eating that blood.
But at a material level, the sugar level will spike up. They may have to be admitted in the hospital. Even if you take it with a very prayerful attitude, doesn’t make any difference, because there are material principles over here. So what is he saying that Dharma and bhakti both have to go together. So at one level is to understand this point, and conclude with this point, and then go to last part take away that at one level is only bhakti, at another level is only dharma.
So dharma at the level of bhakti, or dharma at the cost of bhakti, or bhakti at the cost of dharma. Both of these are unsustained. What we need is in between is both. So only bhakti So now, Bhishma’s decision to stick to the side of the cover was turned out to be wrong. So, but still his heart was in the right place.
So, when there is only bhakti we will have spiritual good, but not material good. If you Srila Prabhupada what did he say? The last instructions about how will Krishna consciousness spread Prabhupada said it will through organization and intelligence. Prabhupada didn’t say just for chanting Hare Krishna or, worshiping the deities, yes all those are important, but we also need organized intelligence because we are in the material good. There is only dharma there may be material good by that, but not spiritual good.
So we need both. So in many ways, Bhishma is over here. Bhishma chose the wrong side, and a material level there are consequences, but Krishna did not overlook his bhakti. Krishna still rewarded him. And now what is he saying?
To you this year, is he saying you also come on this side, he said no. He’s saying, going back to this quadrant, so basically if you look at these four patterns, Bhishma’s life was more or less on this side. Now he’s telling Yudhishthir that even if Yudhishthir in war, he is telling him even if you are in this side, since now you have the opportunity to come here post war. Why? He says that there is the whole kingdom that is devastated, and for restoring the kingdom, for taking care of all the widows, taking care of all the orphans, is you are the best person.
That there are many people who are unarmed, people who are shelterless and you have to be the shelter for them, and for war, Bhima could have been a better, might have been a better commander, better king, but for peace, for restoration, Yudhishthaya was the best person. So he’s telling, don’t let your past guilt about whatever you did stop you from doing the right thing now. He says now, now it is not only your dharma as a king, but it is also what Krishna wants you to do. So just because in the past you might have been in the wrong place, does not mean you have to stay in the wrong place now. So he is not arguing with you this year whether in the past he was in the wrong place, because that argument is not going to work for Yudhishthir.
That an argument can be made that even the war was a virtuous war, and it was dharma and bhakti, but even granting that it was not Dharma. He says right now, what is the Dharma? He says, it is for you to take the responsibility of the king, to restore the kingdom to its glory, to bring peace and prosperity among the citizens, to set all of them on the path to spiritual growth. For all this, you are the right person, and this is the argument that Udishta accepts, and then after that, Udishta asked Vishma many questions. It’s and about how to room.
Raja Dharma is a discussion in the Shanti Parva and Namushasana Parva. Elaborate discussion. In fact, those that discussion is actually bigger than the entire Mahabharata itself. It’s a huge So the thing is here, what has happened is, Bhishma succeeds in consoling the dish, and that So this is the All this is the implication, and implicit in that is a takeaway for us. What is the takeaway?
Two main things I will say that. As devotees we try as much as possible to be in quadrant four. A is as much as possible is our top priority, or top preference we can say. That means we try to do the materially right thing also, or the morally right thing also, not just the spiritually right thing. That for us, we want to do we want to serve Krishna, we want to serve Krishna in a way that is also materially morally right.
We need good intelligence. Now, basically good intention is not the substitute for good intelligence. They are not the same thing. We all need good judgment in what we do. So a, there is no good intelligent, there’s good intention.
That does not mean that we will be protected. Yeah, we will be protected eventually by Krishna, but we will face consequences of the material itself. So once I was in Chicago Airport, 1 day I landed at the airport a friend and one day what he called me, and the day what he was going through some very difficult phase. You know, his child had been diagnosed with cancer. And I was talking on phone trying to console him, and then I got off the airport.
The wheelchair assistant took me along, and the devotee came to pick me up. And I said, I’m talking on phone, and I hung up my devotee, and then went along. When we got into the car, I asked the devotee, can I have my laptop? He says, what laptop? So what had happened was I had I had the laptop bag with me, and when the devotee came, I got up.
I put the laptop bag right in front of me. I put the right laptop right next to the devotee. But the there was a was suitcase which I was carrying. So that devotee picked up the suitcase, but he did not the suitcase was given by the wheelchair assistant to him. But I didn’t I kept the laptop bag right in front of him, but I was busy talking on phone.
I didn’t initially point to him. This laptop is here. And what happened was he forgot. We rushed back, and the laptop bag had disappeared. And that day, normally I keep my passport always in my pocket, but somehow that day I had kept my while talking with the devotee on phone, I kept my passport right in the bag.
And so now to be traveling in a foreign country without laptop is a big loss, but without a passport is a disaster completely. So I was feeling you know, I was feeling angry with myself, I was feeling angry with that devotee, I was feeling angry with everyone. I was thinking I was trying to serve this devotee. I was extending myself. I was extending myself.
I was talking with this devotee who was in great distress, trying to calm and console that devotee. And why did this have to happen to me? Now fortunately, I thought, you know, I do have to cancel all my America tour because I cannot go from one city to another without a passport. We’re thinking, should should I even go by car? But then you’re, arranging for a car and driving from one city to another city.
It’s all very complicated. So fortunately for me so, actually, I was in Chicago. Adhanath Nhanag also in Chicago. So he came to know my passport and told me what happened. He said that, you know, whenever you travel, keep your passport in a bag around your waist.
Don’t let go of that bag ever. He says, you know, if you whatever be the reason, I told Maharaj, I says, Maharaj, then whatever the reason, said you should not do this. And and fortunately, we have devotees in somewhat influential places, so and getting a new passport takes a long time, but some devotees, he found some contacts. We wrote to the Chicago embassy, and he wrote the document. It was three four days, three days in Chicago.
By the time I was supposed to leave just a few hours before that I got the new passport. So, by Krishna’s mercy the problem was solved, but the problem was still there. So my point is that as devotees, we can’t expect or insist that Krishna will protect us if we our intentions will be right. But good intention is not a substitute for good judgment. We have to use proper intelligence also in making decisions, otherwise there will be consequences.
So best is to be in the quadrant four, where we try to do the right thing, and we try to use the right we we try we you try to have a mood of service to Krishna, but also do the right thing. But if not, then the second point would be, don’t never don’t lose hope. It is not that because we make a long wrong decision, Krishna is going to abandon us and reject us and do us. No. Sometimes even the best of us may make errors in judgment.
After all we are finite beings. We are fallible beings, and no mistake should be considered fatal. That don’t think that some mistake, because of this mistake, I’m permanently ruined. Don’t let if we think my guilt is so great that I’m permanently doomed, And because of doing some having done something bad, we stop doing anything good right now, and that is only going to make things worse. So don’t lose hope means that don’t let past mistake discourage us so much, with so much discouragement that we end up making a present mistake.
The present mistake may be present negligence. So don’t let this happen. No matter how many mistakes you have made, still Krishna can bring some good out of it. This point, or how Krishna can bring good out of our mistakes, I will discuss more in today evenings class. But this is what Bhishma is assuring you this that Krishna still has a plan, and you be a part of his plan.
So, I will summarize what I discussed today. Today we discussed about the broad theme of how Bhishma guides, and that was the context, but our theme was broadly decision making. How do we decide what is right and wrong? How do we move forward in our life based on the decision making? So, I talked about three main points.
I took the framework of CHIT context implication and take away. So, the context was that here the is in agony, I talk about adversity, adversity atrocity and agony bad things happening to us is adversity that is itself bad enough, bad things being done to us that is far worse its atrocity, and a bad thing that we need to do. We just have no option, we just have to do that bad thing. That itself is agony, and Yudhishthir is in this situation. He he feels that I did something terrible when I fought a war, and because of that, he’s thinking that I will not fight.
So the implication of this as the Mahabharata described is that life is terribly complex, And we need to do dharma in the sense of the morally of Krishna right thing to do, and bhakti is our heart needs to be in the right right place. We want to be serving Krishna. So now it’s best to be in the fourth quadrant, but sometimes life can be so messy that even if our heart in the right place, we may do something wrong. Now here, there’ll be spiritual good will result, but at a material level some bad might result about this. Now, in dharma is there, but no bhakti material good might result, but they will not spiritual good won’t come that spiritual bad.
Here really what if there is no dharma and no bhakti, then what will happen there is materially and spiritually both will be bad. Best means here really materially and spiritually both will be good. So we discussed how, you Bhishma himself lived most of his life in this quadrant, and yet he is assuring that when he is saying I am a pure devotee he is not bragging over there. But he is saying that Yudhishta even if you think that in the war you are in this decision this quadrant. Now, what is the right thing for you to do?
You need to fight. You need to actually take up the kingdom and restore the kingdom. That is what Krishna wants to do, you to do that is bhakti, and that is what the responsibility right thing to do is for you. And the takeaway for us is that no that good intention is no substitute for good judgment, Good intention is to compliment it with good intelligence both are required, otherwise there will be material consequences for us. So, best is that we try to stay in stay in quadrant four as much as possible, but if we can’t then do never lose hope.
We should not become hopeless that no mistake is fatal that our past mistake should not be our make us so discourage that that leads us to a present mistake, that even through our past mistakes Krishna’s plan can work, and Krishna can take us to a better place. Thank you very much. Rene Krishna. Any questions or comments? Yeah.
Thank you. So, firstly, about Indeshya itself, I would like to clarify a little bit. See broadly the sacred texts can be approached at four different levels. One is the literal level, this is where this is what happened at entertaining story enjoy the story. So, at a kids tale popular retellings, movies there at that level.
And the second is the ethical level, this is where we consider what is right, what is wrong, we deliberate on the ethics of the situation. Then the third is the allegorical level. Now, not everything is an allegory, but Prabhupada sometimes says that, never be discouraged if you are practicing bhakti, because you have handed over the reins of your chariot to Krishna, and Krishna will take care. So allegorical, the scripture itself is not a allegory, but some aspects of scripture can be understood at allegorical level, and then there is the devotional level. So for example, in the Bhagavad Gita itself, Prabhupada sometimes says Arjuna’s illusion is Krishna’s arrangement so that the Bhagavad can be spoken.
So Prabhupada is speaking at a devotional level, but then Prabhupada also says, see Arjuna is a thoughtful person. Arjuna is thinking about the consequences of his actions before deciding, and this thoughtfulness shows that Arjuna is ready to receive the Bhagavad Gita, But Prabhupada is talking at an ethical level. This is in the first chapter. And the second chapter immediately Prabhupada seems to change mood, and he says, Arjuna is in tears. Tears are sign of ignorance and attachment in the skin disease, and everybody suffering from such ignorance attachment in the skin disease, and Krishna is speaking the Bhagavata to remove such universal ignorance attachment in skin disease.
So is Arjuna thoughtful or is Arjuna ignorant? So that’s that’s why when we talk at the ethical level, our focus, especially when you’re talking about sacred characters, or any exalted characters, the focus is not on who is right, or more importantly who is wrong. Our focus is more on what is right. It is we are not in a position here to judge these characters and say that they are wrong. Yes, you can say at the level of Leela, everything is a plan of the Lord, and everybody is like a puppet in the Lord’s hands.
But if you focus only on the devotional level, then there’s nothing for us to learn. And in this situation this kind of action is good, this kind of action is bad. So, Prabhupada himself does not always comment on the devotional level, although Prabhupada doesn’t ensure that we do not forget the devotional level that is all the nila of the Lord. But the same time Prabhupada also says this character did like this is not good, this is good. So, there are multiple levels at which we approach scripture.
So, that is the first point of the that when we are saying the additional actions or bhisma’s actions at the ethical level were questionable, that does not mean that at a devotion level also that they are whatever they are doing is a part of the lord’s plan. Both can be true at the same time Now, having said that now is it that we are not of never a part of the lord’s plan No. That doesn’t happen. And we will always be a part of the Lord’s plan. But we may be cooperating with the Lord’s plan, or we may be obstruct not obstructing.
We may be we may be delaying the Lord’s plan. So this is so even if somebody is in quadrant three or quadrant four, when there are nothing to do with the Lord, it is not when Krishna abandons anyone anytime. So we are certainly not at the level of the dish chair. We are not done that level of ethical deliberation also. Based on which we think that, oh, I did something wrong and therefore I am doomed because of this.
See what happens? This is a important concept. Let me see how much I can explain this quickly. In the Vedic sense, then this conception of artha. Artha is value, and there could be many artha’s.
Our parents are arth, talent is arth, wealth is arth, arth, but when any arth is made into a param arth, param arth means it is made into the supreme arth. When any artha is made into the paramartha that means to an artha. So an artha does not literally mean no value. An artha it can mean that also, but an artha means that when something of lesser value is made of supreme value. So for example if money is made into paramartha, then that leads to the anartha of greed.
That the male female attraction is a natural principle in this world. It is through that principle that, the human race continues. But when that attraction becomes the sole basis for all decision making, when Tartha becomes the Paramartha, then that leads to an earth of lust, and the lust can be destructive. So similarly, ethical deliberation is very important, but when ethical deliberation becomes the supreme, that when I want to do the right thing, I pride myself on my ability to do the right thing, and then that become the supreme, then sometimes what happens is, our adherence to ethics can become more important than even our devotion to God. So then that can lead to an earth.
For Yudhishthira, the Artha that has become the Paramartha is his ethical rightness, or righteousness you could say. That he always wants to do the right thing, and that’s important, but if that becomes a paramartha, then that can also take one away from Krishna. So ideally speaking, Artha and, all that morality. So we could say Paramartha is ultimately bhakti and Krishna. It is bhakti that will take us to Krishna, Now dharma is an artha.
So dharma should not be made more important than, bhakti. But the same time, that is not dharma is unimportant. Dharma is an artha. But dharma itself does not lead to Krishna. Dharma when used in the service of Krishna will in a mood of bhakti will take us to Krishna.
So have I confused or have I made this clear? Okay. Thank you. So any other comments or questions? Of course, see what I am saying is two different things over here.
Yeah, like I took that, I had saw had the pendulum over here that we don’t, we don’t neglect dharma for bhakti, nor do neglect bhakti for dharma. Now in extreme situations, if you have to choose between the two, we need to choose bhakti. Like the gopis when Krishna called them, the for a woman to leave her family and go away to be with an with a man who is not a relative at night, that is not right, but because it is Krishna calling, the gopis did that. That is sarva dharmaan parite jama me kam sharva namraj. So in extreme situation, dharma can be given up for bhakti, but Krishna takes care that actually they don’t give dharma.
What Krishna does is that he arranges as if there are that the shadow gopis are there, like chaya gopis are there, and the family members think that they didn’t the gopis didn’t go only. So in that way Krishna protects them. So I am talking only of extreme situations, but in general as devotees, we should have dharma and bhakti going together as much as possible. Okay. Not in this book.
I have another book called Relishing Bhagavad Gita. In that I talk about it. See, Arjuna’s question is, Arjuna is overwhelmed. Arjuna has suffered a lot previously, but never has he got overwhelmed like this. You know, even when his wife was being dishonored, he’s angry, but he was not overwhelmed.
Even when they lost the entire funeral, it’s not overwhelmed. Why? Because that’s a sign of a responsible person. Bad things happen that’s bad, but when I had to do a bad thing, I would rather die than do something. That’s what life puts us in.
So agony is very, very difficult. See sometimes in India, with respect to the Bhagavad Gita, they say Gita sa, summary of Gita. Whatever happened was good, whatever is happening is good, whatever will happen is also good. They They They They They This is summary of the Gita. There’s no words in the Gita which actually says this directly, and more importantly, that is not the emphasis of the Gita.
The Gita’s emphasis is not what is happening to you. It is what you are doing. Arjuna’s question is, what is the right thing for me to put? What is the right thing for me to do? So in that sense, Arjuna’s whole pay is because he feels that he is put in a situation where he has to do a bad thing, and he doesn’t want to.
Yeah. Definitely. Will you be there for today evening’s class? Sorry. Will you be there for today evening’s class?
Sorry. Will you be there for today evening’s class? So I’m talking more about this. You know, when should suffering that happens be accepted, like, as past karma? Or when should be suffering suffering be embraced or now we may do something to call suffering to others.
When do you do that? So yes, sometimes if it’s going to lead to a greater good, then that is required, and that can see the part of bhakti. But then we have to do it as carefully as possible. Like, sometimes the truth is bitter. We have to speak the bitter truth, because otherwise the person will stay in ignorance and illusion.
But just because the truth is bitter does not mean that the truth has to be spoken bitterly. That time also we can try to speak as sensitively as possible. So, sometimes pain may have to be caused to others, but we should not make causing pain into a virtue, Sometimes out of necessity pain may have to be caused to others, but we should not make causing pain as a worth trying of our virtue. Okay? Thank you very much.
Teachers’ Sanga at Gurukula Monday, 9th June – Gurukula – The Hare Krishna Primary School, located near Bhaktivedanta Manor, hosted a special Teachers’ Sanga (gathering) focused on spiritual growth and insight for educators. The highlight of the event was a talk by His Holiness Svayam Bhagavan Keshav Maharaj, who graciously accepted the invitation to speak
By Hemo Krsna dd On Sunday, 8th June, Nottingham’s Market Square hosted its second annual Ratha Yatra festival. Around 1,000 people came together to celebrate this joyful occasion, as Lord Jagannatha, Lord Baladeva, and Lady Subhadra once again graced the city with Their presence. The chariot, brought from London by HG Parasuram Prabhu, was beautifully
This article describes the higher potential for the development of civilization that is offered through Vedic culture, and some of the tools for doing such as found therein. First of all, we should understand that the development of civilization, which means the upliftment of consciousness in society, should not be a fight or competition between
Thousands of people are expected to join a procession as part of a Hindu festival in Leicester later this month. The Festival of Chariots, known as Rath Yatra, will take place on 22 June. The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) Leicester – a Hare Krishna branch of Hinduism which organises the event – said
Śrimad Bhāgavatam 4.8.53 | HG Pancharatna
The Chida-dadhi Mahotsav, also known as the Chipped Rice Festival of Panihati, is a yearly celebration of the pastimes of Srila Raghunatha dasa Goswami and Lord Nityananda Prabhu. Thisastonishing pastime took place on the banks of the Ganges atPanihati, which is just north of Calcutta. Lord Caitanya and his associates enjoyed many transcendental pastimes here.
The new temple building will be modern and functional and will be accented with elements of classical Vedic architecture. The following are the key components of the planned temple: • Vedic Temple Architecture • Spacious Darshan Hall (3,500 sqft) • Educational Facilities • Community Hall and Auditorium • Commercial Kitchen • Library • Vedic Books
We have gathered at the lotus feet of the Pancha-tattva on this most auspicious occasion of Raghunatha dasa Gosvami’s cida-dadhi festival, the background to which can be found in his early life. Raghunatha dasa’s uncle and father, Hiranya and Govardhana Majumadara, were wealthy landlords in Bengal—almost like kings—and had a huge, opulent riverside palace, with boats that plied the river. Hiranya and Govardhana were generous and devoted to brahminical culture, and they practically maintained the entire brahman community of Nadia with their charity. Raghunatha was their only son, so naturally they put all their hopes in him to carry on the family dynasty. But from a young age, Raghunatha was attracted to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. The Majumadaras’ spiritual master was Yadunandana Acharya, a disciple of Advaita Acharya (of the Pancha-tattva) and an intimate student of Vasudeva Datta, and their family’s priest was Balarama Acharya, a dear associate of Haridasa Thakura and close friend of Yadunandana Acharya. Balarama Acharya and Yadunandana Acharya used to host Haridasa Thakura, and when Haridasa stayed in their village, Raghunatha visited him daily and received his mercy. Balarama Acharya also invited Haridasa Thakura to speak in the Majumadaras’ assembly about the glories of the holy name. Thus Raghunatha dasa had the association of these great souls, followers of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, who would tell him about Mahaprabhu and encourage him to chant.
In his last days, the disciples in the room with Srila Prabhupada heard him make a statement that beautifully sums up his mission: “Just go on discussing Srimad-Bhagavatam among yourselves and everything will remain clear.” He also enshrined this idea in one of the last purports he dictated: “Thus the more we read Srimad-Bhagavatam, the
Ekadasi is one of the regular celebrations in the Vaishnava calendar. It is observed eleven days after the full moon and eleven days after the new moon of every month. Even in the thirteenth, or leap, month, called adhika-masa, or purusottama-masa, which comes every three years, during which no other festivals are celebrated, Ekadasi is observed. Ekadasi is known as the day of Lord Hari and is said to be the mother of devotion. Keeping the fast on Ekadasi is one of the sixty-four items of devotional service listed in Srila Rupa Gosvami’s Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. In fact, it is one of the first ten.
In 1973, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Founder of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), arranged for several of his disciples to go to Mayapura, West Bengal, to study the traditional art of putul (dollmaking). These unfired clay figures are composed of raw materials gathered from the riverbank of the Ganges, traditionally created for holiday
HE LIVES FOREVER IN FRANCE (and wherever he is present — in his books, followers, Deities, temples, and hearts…) The murti of Srila Prabhupada in these photos was lovingly moulded and produced by devoted members of the Russian yatra, offered as free gifts to every initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Thousands have been created so
Nestled within the vibrant spiritual heart of ISKCON Los Angeles, the Bhagavad-gita Museum stands as a unique fusion of art, devotion, and transcendental storytelling. Located adjacent to the New Dwaraka temple, this museum—also known by its creators as the F.A.T.E. Museum (First American Transcendental Exhibition)—has captivated visitors for decades with its life-size dioramas that