Author Archives: Chaitanya Charan das

Gita key verses course 24 Can sex be spiritual – What is the difference between lust and love – Gita 07.11
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Podcast
http://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/ccd%20classes/desiretree/2020%20classes/06-20%20classess/Gita%20key%20verses%20course%2024%20Can%20sex%20be%20spiritual%20-%20What%20is%20the%20difference%20between%20lust%20and%20love%20-%20Gita%2007….

If bhakti is the conclusion of the Vedas, shouldn;t the Vedas be filled with bhakti?
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Answer Podcast:

https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/CCD%20QA/2015%20QA/08-15%20QA/If%20bhakti%20is%20the%20conclusion%20of%20the%20Vedas%20shouldnt%20the%20Vedas%20be%20filled%20with%20bhakti.mp3
Download by “right-click and save content”

 

Transcription :

Transcription: Suresh Gupta

Editing: Sharan Shetty

Question: If bhakti is the conclusion of the Vedas, shouldn’t the Vedas be filled with bhakti?

Answer: There are three different things – Summary, Conclusion and the Essence. Summary is more like a briefly re-telling of what has been told. Certainly, bhakti is not a summary of the Vedas because the Vedas contain a variety of things. Usually, conclusion is thought of as something which is spoken at the end but that may not necessarily be a conclusion. When things are told in a sequence, there might be some concluding points but sometimes concluding points of the class may not be the most striking points. For example, speaker may tell some stories and then conclude the class. Now within the story some striking points may have been told and that might have an emphasis, however, that might not be repeated again in the conclusion. If there is an explicit call for action given at the end, then we can say it is a conclusion otherwise the conclusion does not necessarily come at the end. There is chronological conclusion which comes at the end but what is to be primarily told that may not come at the end, it may come somewhere in the middle also.

Now, essence means that which is the crux which the speaker wanted to speak.

To identify the essence is very difficult. Srila Jiva Gosvami in his sandarbhas takes a traditional tool which is called as taatparya linga where linga means “symbol” and taatparya means “meaning”. Therefore, taatparya linga means “markers of meaning” and he uses it to explain how one can know the meaning of a book. They are:
i. Upakrama – Beginning or commencement
ii. Upasamhara – Conclusion
iii. Abhyasa – That which is repeated, reiteration
iv. Apurvata – Uniqueness or novelty, special example not told anywhere else
v. Phala – Fruit that is promised

Srila Jiva Goswami says that by looking at these markers, we can understand what the essential message of a book is. He does an elaborate analysis in the sandarbhas and first talks of Srimad Bhagavtam as the essence of Vedas. He says Srimad Bhagavatam is sarva pramanam chakravarti (emperor of all evidences). After that he talks about how Srimad Bhagavatam’s conclusion is pure devotion to Krishna. He uses these five tools to explain this point.

Apart from these five tools, the essence is something which requires our thoughts to understand it and guidance to do it correctly. It may even require Lord Krishna’s mercy in terms of revelation. To understand the essence, we see it from the perspective of the author and the originator. The author of Vedas is Srila Vyasadeva. It is known that Vyasadeva put the entire Vedas in written form but at the end he was not satisfied by it (explained in Srimad Bhagavatam). Finally, when he compiled the Srimad Bhagavatam in written form, at that time he became satisfied (yayatma suprasidati). Therefore, from the author’s perspective, we see that […]

The post If bhakti is the conclusion of the Vedas, shouldn;t the Vedas be filled with bhakti? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verse course 23 Can we be spiritual and rational – How can science and spirituality go together – Gita 07.07
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Podcast
http://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/ccd%20classes/desiretree/2020%20classes/06-20%20classess/Gita%20key%20verse%20course%2023%20Can%20we%20be%20spiritual%20and%20rational%20-%20How%20can%20science%20and%20spirituality%20go%20together%20-…

If a butcher is following their employer, as a soldier might follow a king, why does the butcher get karma, but the soldier doesn’t?
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Answer Podcast

http://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/CCD%20QA/2020%20QA/01-20%20QA/If%20a%20butcher%20is%20following%20their%20employer%2C%20as%20a%20soldier%20might%20follow%20a%20king%2C%20why%20does%20the%20butcher%20get%20karma%2C%20but%20the%20soldier%20doesn%27t.mp3

Transcription :

Transcribed by: Keshavagopal Das

Question: If a butcher is following their employer, as a soldier might follow a king, why does the butcher get karma, but the soldier doesn’t?

Answer: There is a difference. Other professions are in some way essential and there is a process of law involved in it. The criteria for getting or not getting karma is not simply dependent on external circumstances like somebody’s employer authorizing someone. The key is whether the action is dharmic such that it contributes to social harmony and practitioner’s spiritual growth.

Broadly speaking, although farmer may cut some weeds, such action is essential and integral part of the profession of farming. This needs to be done because one life survives on another (jivo jivasya jivanam). Therefore, some amount of killing is unavoidable. However, such killing needs to be minimized. When an executioner kills, there is a process of law involved which decides what wrong was done and how a person should be punished. When a soldier kills, he does so as a noble duty to protect the country from aggressors who may disrupt the kingdom and plunder people.
Beyond that, one also need to consider whether the activity contributes to one’s spiritual growth. One’s consciousness is also important. For example, quite often when soldiers win a territory, they plunder the property and exploit the women of the conquered. Such fighting is not free from karma.

The key thing is one’s consciousness. When one is not attached to the fruits of the results, the action is done in harmony with the principals of dharma, the action is according to one’s nature, the action contributes to society and helps in spiritual evolution, then such an activity is free from karma. Individual responsibility is never excused in the name of some subordination to authority. We are all responsible for our actions. In Bhagavad-gita, Lord Krishna tells Arjuna to contemplate and then decide.

With respect to butcher, the slaughtering of animals is not necessary for the sustenance of the society. Human beings can live without non-vegetarian food. On top of that, today’s meat packing industry is far more brutal than the workplaces of butchers in the past. The animals are not only killed, but they have to live in crammed quarters, be subjected to various bodily pains and distortions for artificial growth. Hence, if someone is employed in a meat packing industry, they will be hugely culpable.

In Srimad Bhagavatam, in the eleventh canto there is a reference to Vyadha-gita. Vyadha means butcher. There is a dramatic incident where a renunciate is instructed by a butcher. Here, Srimad Bhagavatam is giving an extreme example that if somebody has wisdom and devotion, even if somehow circumstantially someone is engaged in a particular profession, then people should not be demonized based on the profession alone. Spiritual wisdom can be present even in the unlikeliest of places, people or professions. This is to indicate the universality of spirituality and the danger of prejudgment. This is not to imply […]

During distress if someone turns away from Krishna and becomes an atheist, what is the role of God’s will in their misuse of free will?
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Answer Podcast
http://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/CCD%20QA/2020%20QA/01-20%20QA/During%20distress%20if%20someone%20turns%20away%20from%20Krishna%20and%20becomes%20an%20atheist%2C%20what%20is%20the%20role%20of%20God%27s%20will%20in%20their%20mis…

When scriptures depict animals speaking human languages, how is that to be understood?
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Answer Podcast

http://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/CCD%20QA/2020%20QA/01-20%20QA/When%20scriptures%20depict%20animals%20speaking%20human%20languages%2C%20how%20is%20that%20to%20be%20understood.mp3

Transcription by: Dr Suresh Gupta (Muzaffarnagar)

Question: When scriptures depict animals speaking human languages, how is that to be understood?

Answer: The question will be answered in three parts.

Firstly, the Srimad Bhagavatam, Ramayana and Mahabharata describe not just a life as we know right now, but also an expanse of life which is much broader. For example, the vanaras described in the Ramayana are not simply monkeys, the word “vanara” etymologically means “va” (or) and “nara” (human). That means when people see them, they appear so similar to humans that people have a question in mind – is this a monkey or a human.

Thus, the vanaras are considered not just monkeys but celestial apes. They have quite an evolved consciousness and are not like the present-day monkeys. Similarly, the birds like Jatayu are not ordinary birds. We see even in the epics that not all birds and animals speak and communicate. For example, when Sita was abducted and Ram was searching for Sita, Ram actually turns and asks the trees, the birds and animals, but none of them reply. This shows that these epics are not mythology where one imagines animals to be talking. There are certain variations of those species which were almost evolved to the level of human conscious and thus they could communicate, they could talk, not everyone but some of them. So, that’s one understanding.

The other understanding is that these are great souls who were already spiritually evolved but temporarily born in particular species. In the animal body, they might exhibit certain attributes which are not compatible with that species but that is because they already have an evolved consciousness from their previous life. One such example is Gajendra. In the Srimad Bhagavatam, we see that Gajendra, although an elephant, but offers great prayers. Gajendra was already an evolved soul in a previous life but somehow, got cursed and given an elephant body. We have heard in scriptures that if somebody grows spiritually then such advancement is never lost. If spiritual advancement is never lost, then why is it that sometimes such souls get a lower species? This may be as a result of the reaction to certain actions they may have done. Although they get a lower body, they do not get a lower consciousness. Gajendra was King Indradyumna in his previous life. He got an animal body but did not get an elephant consciousness. His consciousness remained more than an evolved soul. Although temporarily his consciousness was covered but still that consciousness was there at a dormant level. Thus, the second possibility is that not all members of the species are talking but some are as they are already evolved, souls.

The third possibility of animals talking in the scriptures is because it could be a miraculous intervention. Just like in the Chaitanya Charitamrita, it is described that animals started chanting Hare Krishna in the forests of Jharkhand. They were ordinary animals living in the forest and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu demonstrated miraculous potency […]

Gita key verse course 20 What is meditation. What are spiritual experiences. Are they just hallucinations Gita 06.22
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Podcast
http://www.thespiritualscientist.com/audio/ccd%20classes/desiretree/2020%20classes/05-20%20classess/Gita%20key%20verse%20course%2020%20What%20is%20meditation.%20What%20are%20spiritual%20experiences.%20Are%20they%20just%20hallucinations%20Gita%2…