Teamwork in Ramayana 1
→ The Spiritual Scientist


Hare Krishna. Sir, thank you for coming today. And we’ll speak on the topic of teamwork based on the Ramayana. Broadly, I’ll talk from the Sundarkand, which is the time when the monkeys go out in search for Sita.

And we’ll talk about how Hanuman emerges as a natural leader despite not being the appointed leader. See, whenever we work in a team, at that time, there are different people with different abilities, different people with different levels of maturities. So to get all of them to work together is a challenge. Now one way we might say that in a team let’s let everyone be equal. Our current age is the age of egalitarianism.

Everybody be equal. Now functionally, conceptually, equality sounds very good. But functionally, equality can be chaotic. Or at best, it can be unproductive. Say, if you want to cook food and if you decide let everyone be equal.

Let everyone play equal roles while cooking. But some people might naturally be better at cooking than others. If somebody is more talented, more knowledgeable, more experienced, more talented, then it makes sense that they lead the effort. So then if they lead the effort, naturally, a hierarchy is formed. So we could say there are 2 things.

There is equality, and there is hierarchy. So whenever there is any problem that we need to face, and life gives us many, many problems throughout. So whenever any task is to be done, whenever any problem is to be faced, not everyone is equally competent at dealing with all problems. So in the interest of solving the problem and ultimately in the interest of everyone, it is best if those who are good at solving that problem, they are allowed to lead. So they then a natural hierarchy is formed.

So equality in concept sounds very attractive, but in practice, hierarchy is required. However, a lot depends on how the hierarchy is formed and how it functions. If somebody who’s at the top of the hierarchy is there not because they are really good. It is because somehow by some factor apart from competence, Maybe just power. It could be brute power, physical power, political power, whatever.

Financial power. By that, they get to the top of the hierarchy. And that does not lead them to actually doing the responsibility that comes at the top of the hierarchy. Then that hierarchy tend towards tyranny. So when we long for equality or when we want to avoid hierarchy, it’s often because there is this fear of tyranny.

That whoever is at the top of the hierarchy, they may exploit us. They may further their own interest instead of the team’s interest. So in any team, broadly speaking, there is there is a tension between these two factors. Every team member needs to be valued, and in one sense, there’s a longing for equality. But, also, for the team to function, there has to be a hierarchy.

But sometimes in the hierarchy, there can be tyranny. So either way, teamwork becomes tense. Normally, also there are, when people have to work together, there is some tension. Because different people have different opinions. But especially teamwork becomes difficult when there is a hierarchy that is formed.

And in that hierarchy, there is naturally some resentment. Why is this person at the top? Now suppose if we are cooking and we only have to eat the food. You know, I say sometimes simplified version of the law of karma is what you cook you will have to eat. So like that, if we consider that if we are going to eat the food and we are in a team cooking, then we would agree.

You are a good cook. You take the lead. Not that I want to avoid work, but it will not be good enough. So when the results of not functioning in a hierarchy are very immediately apparent to us. Say, for example, if we are going in a car and, say, we are not very good drivers, and it’s a tough road.

See, you drive. Basically, we are giving power to that person. But because there, what happens? The result of not functioning according to hierarchy are immediately visible. The car may be with an accident.

But quite often in life, the results of not working on hierarchy may not be so immediately visible. And then we may resent why is this person here? Say, I am here. This person is here higher up than me in hierarchy. Why is this person and some especially if we feel that we are more competent than the person who is higher up in the hierarchy.

That’s when it becomes very difficult to have a team spirit because, you know, actually, we are meant to do this, and I can do this better than this person. And why is this person giving orders and I’m following orders? And of course, it is very easy to think that we can do things better than the way they are being done. But actually, when you start doing things, everything is complicated. Everything seems easy till you start doing it.

Even cooking might seem simple, but when we cook and we burn food, I have eaten to cook food thousands of times, but I realize it is not easy. We may say, I speak all day. But once when I have to speak in public, hey, I freeze. Maybe it’s not that easy. So when whenever somebody else is doing something, it’s very easy to criticize it.

If this is not being done well, it should be done like this. But everything seems easy till we do it ourselves, till we start doing it ourselves. And then we start realizing the challenges. So often there may be a tendency to reject the hierarchy. But if the hierarchy is rejected, we may not have equality.

What we may have is chaos, or we can have even disaster. If say in a plane, if we say the pilot and the passenger are equal, anybody can Google the pilot. Nobody will want to sit in that plane eventually. So we can’t we if we look at our life itself, everywhere there are hierarchies. Now we agree to be a part of a hierarchy if we feel that our that whatever position we have in the pecking order, whatever position we have in the hierarchy that is beneficial for us.

Say for example, you come for a this class now. So in a sense there is a hierarchy. There is a speaker and there is a audience. You feel that maybe by coming for this class, you’re going to benefit something. So we participation in the hierarchy, we continue it voluntarily as long as we feel it’s beneficial.

Sometimes, of course, even when you feel it’s not beneficial, we might be obligated to be a part of hierarchy also. Then there is resentment. Why do I have to be here? Why do I be here in this position? So so this is the broad background about how hierarchy So, there is the desire for equality, but there is also the need for hierarchy.

And how do these two go together? That is the universal tension in every interpersonal interaction. Whether it be, in a family, between husband and wife, between parents and children, between, teams in a professional setting, between devotees working to do seva, do service, that there is a hierarchy, but there is also there is a desire for equality. There is also need for hierarchy. So, basically, now there are some natural hierarchies.

Natural hierarchies means it is parents who give birth to children. So, parents are in a controlling position. Children are in a obeying position. If there is a there is a law of the government, then there is the, say, traffic officers. They are at the top of the hierarchy.

All the people in the, who are driving, they have to follow the rules. So, there are some natural hierarchies which are essential for functioning. But whenever a particular task is to be done, say we form a team for that task, and then within that, a hierarchy is to be formed. Now, say we are doing this task for the first time, We may not even be sure how good who is at a particular task. So, then there might be what you call appointed hierarchy, and there might be an emergent hierarchy.

A pointed hierarchy means this person is at the top. This person is lower. But then as things are done, gradually, what happens? Oh, this person actually better. So let them take care.

Emergent hierarchy. So, for example, if we consider a team, say, a cricket team. Now in a in a in a cricket team, maybe there is some batsman who is very aggressive, and that person can score runs very fast. And then other players just play the anchoring room. They’ll just be there, give the strike to the player.

So that will be natural natural hierarchy. This person scores a lot. That person just feels the strike and gives the strike. But suppose on a particular day, so that that is you could say the appointed hierarchy. You be the attacker and the other will be the, anchors.

But then maybe on a particular day, the player is in a very good form. And although that player normally plays the role of a sheet a sheet anchor is anchoring the innings that person is in a very aggressive mood playing very well then even the person who normally aggressive he may say that okay. If you are adding well you 2 be the aggressor. I’ll play the sheet anchor role. So, what that means is there is an emergent hierarchy.

So, natural appointed hierarchy is the way things are planned. Emergent hierarchy is how things actually work out. And sometimes the hierarchies may change. So at one level, if the team is to form in the beginning itself, there has to be an acceptance of the appointed hierarchy. Okay.

This person is the leader. These are all follows. But if the so without that the team will not form itself. But once the team is formed, for the team to function, there has to be the willingness for emergent hierarchies. You might find, oh, actually, this person is better.

This person really knows this stuff very well. Somebody might be a team lead, but in a particular area, if a particular person is expert, they know about say, if it’s a software, you’re making software, and this person is really good at this particular area. Then although that person is not the official lead, they may become the emergent leader. So how these tensions are to be dealt with? First, the tension when an appointed lead is there then the tension when an emergent lead come emergent leaders emergent hierarchy comes up, an emergent leader comes up.

That’s what we will discuss how based on how the team was formed to search for SITA and how the dynamics within the team changed gradually as things moved forward. But at this point, this is the background. Any questions or clarifications or comments at this point? Yes. Just one question about the hierarchy.

The hierarchy is not fixed, but can it change when circumstances change? Example, let’s say, let’s say with the cricket, let’s say, when it’s very cold, for example, maybe someone else Yeah. It should be changed. It should be allowed to change when it is necessary. That’s what I’d say.

Basically, can hierarchies change? Yeah. See broadly speaking, there are 2, you could say, schools of thought. You see the liberals and the conservatives, or you could call them the left wing and the right wing. So the left wing, the liberals are generally against hierarchies.

So for example, communism had the idea that there are the capitalists, there are the owners of the means of production, and there are workers. And the owners exploit the laborers. So down with all destroy all the owners. So the in general, the left is against hierarchies. But they are you could say broadly speaking the liberals.

See, you know, let people do what they want. Be liberal about things. So they say that this is a hierarchy. Let’s see how we can bring it down. How we can, make things little more equal, horizontal.

Then there are the conservatives, which is the right. Now the right has often got a negative label because we often associate with that with the say right wing religious extremists or whatever. But in general, the idea of the right is that the right wants to stick to hierarchy, stick to order. This is how things have been done. Let’s continue the the area.

So now who is right? Well, it depends. Sometimes the hierarchy needs to be maintained for things to move forward, and sometimes the right is right. You know? Although there are problems in this hierarchy, every hierarchy has some problems.

But if the hierarchy is functioning and is delivering the goods, then move on. So, sometimes disrupting hierarchy can create a lot of problems, bigger problem than what we thought we were going to solve. So, but sometimes the left is right. The hierarchy is leading to a lot of people at the bottom of the hierarchy being exploited, being abused. Then things have to change.

So, you could say that both the Left and the Right, the Liberals and the Conservatives, they have to interact with each other. They have to talk and understand each other so that what is right for that situation can be understood. Generally, whenever there is any conflict, you know, there’s there is people tell their own story. So every story has how many sides? What do you think?

As many people as you know. Yeah. As many people. If there are 2 people who are in conflict, then how many sides of the story? 3.

My side, your side and the right side. So it’s not the right side doesn’t mean necessarily that see our memory even if oh this person did like this this person did like this When when one person tells the story and another person tells the story, it’s not even if both peep neither of them is, is manipulative consciously, but still our memory at a subconscious level tends to be selective. And that’s why we often remember the things which show us in the good light and which show others in the bad light. And if we have done something wrong, often we forget that. Not that you consciously want to forget that.

It happens that way. So actually, memory is a tool for the past. History is also a tool for the past. But, you know, memory and history are non interest are often not entirely overlapping. There are many things in history that are not in memory.

That means they happened, but we have forgotten them. And there are many things in memory that are not in history. That means they did happen, but we imagine they happened. So that’s called false memories. And the point is that whenever there is a conflict, both have to discuss.

So sometimes the hierarchy has to be maintained. This was the appointed hierarchy. This is how we will do things. But sometimes, the hierarchy can be adjusted. This is how things will work better.

So the emergent hierarchy comes up. Okay. Now now if you want to do this, this this is how it will work better. So, that’s so hierarchy in principle, hierarchy is required. In practice, whether the pre appointed hierarchy is the best way to move forward or we need to have a more of a horizontal structure or we have we have a new hierarchy that has to be seen.

So what will keep both the left and the right together, the liberals and the conservative together is not the focus on the practice, but focus on the purpose. Focus on the practice means this is how we have been doing. Zah we’ll keep doing all the time. No. But is this doing this leading to the result?

Now this is unfair. Let’s not do it. But this is producing the result. So let’s continue it. So if we get too caught in the practices alone, should it be done like this or should it be visible like that?

Then often the conflict can become interminal. But if we focus on the purpose, we are doing this. Is this the right thing to do? Is this the right way to do things? How do we decide that?

It depends on, the the purpose. Where do we want to where do we want to go? What do we want to do? Say, like, a say, before the pre GPS time, if we were driving a car, and now we know a particular way. And, say, okay.

I’ll lead I’ll drive the car. I’ll take it along. But then that road is blocked as heavy traffic. And then somebody else says, yeah. I know that way, and that will be free at this time.

Oh, okay. Then you take the wheels. So the original hierarchy of I’ll be the driver, but no. Should you be the driver or should I be the driver? The appointed hierarchy might be there, but the hierarchy will change.

Instead of I driving, you drive because the purpose is what needs to be focused on. So, if we keep focus on the purpose, then we can adjust things. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions?

Yes, please. One of my questions. Yeah. Because, I have the problem when I was studying doing the dance, and we have mixed syllabus. Right?

People who will stay in dancing and less experience dancing. So when you have a technical class, what they’re doing is That’s true. Yeah. You know, it depends a lot on context. Say for example, sometimes if, if a class is there, a lot of interaction in the class.

Now if it’s a philosophical technical subject which is the focus is more of educational, then maybe the speaker needs to speak more. But if it is more practical, then maybe there are group tasks, there is more interaction, then little things become learned more. So how the thing should function, that lot depends on purpose. Okay. Thank you.

Any other questions? Okay. So let’s start. The, in the Ramayana, when the monkeys are called by Sugri, they all assemble in different parts of the earth. They come and then Sughri tells him that all of you need to go and search for Sita.

And he appoints a group to go to the south because south is most likely where Sita is to be found. Let’s see Ravan flying the southern direction. Now, of course, it could be that, Ravan might be deceiving also. Sometimes, you know, you go in a particular direction and then you change directions. That’s how sometimes you say if somebody is is a car chase and somebody is pursuing someone, you create a decoy or a deception.

That is all the that’s why they, he send people in all four directions but but still direction, it was more likely that Ravan would be in the south because he also knew that Lanka, Ravan is king in the most on that side, broadly speaking. And even if that that awareness was not very clear, but still, of course, even if you say Lanka is there, whether he she’s gone to Lanka or gone somewhere else, you don’t know. And at that time, when Ravan was flying high above the sky, he did not perceive these monkeys down there as threats. There’s no need for him to deceive them. So so he formed the most, so Sugri, considering that Rahul was most likely to be Lanka, he formed a team to, search for Sita in the south.

Now in that team, there are many members, but 3 were prominent. Who were those 3? Hanuman. Hanuman? Anyone else?

Angad. Angad. Jamaban. Yes. Thank you.

Neil and others were also there, but these 3 were prominent. Now each of them had something, to commend them. Jamba 1 was senior. He was the oldest, most experienced, wisest, you could Then, Angad was royalty. He was the son of the previous king, the nephew of the current king.

And although he was young, he was also valiant. Now, Hanuman till this point has not really manifested his power in a big way. Till this point, Hanuman is primarily like assistant of Sugri. He has not fought any major wars. Does anyone know why Hanuman is not prominent till now?

Because he he was cursed to forget his own powers. Yes. He was cursed to forget his own powers. When he was a small child, at that time, he was very mischievous, and then he was cursed. So the sages didn’t want to curse to punish him, but they wanted to curse to curb him.

Because they said, you have we won’t take away your abilities but we will take away your memory of your abilities. So now, it’s interesting that he still had some abilities. That’s how when he wanted to approach Ram, he changed his form and he took the form of a brahmil. A wise person and first time approached brahm and they had a talk at that time. He still had some of his powers but it was not like a dazzling display of powers.

So Hanuman was also an important member, but Hanuman was not like the official leader of the team. Sometimes a I’ll because for most of us, cricket is familiar. So I’ll use some cricket examples. In America, if I use cricket, the first thing they think about is the insect. So anyone unfamiliar with cricket here?

Okay. Unfamiliar? Unfamiliar? Unfamiliar. Familiar?

Yeah. Okay. Unfamiliar. You are unfamiliar? Unfamiliar.

Familiar. Okay. Not familiar. Okay. Sure.

Okay. So, say, sometimes the star player in a team is a captain but sometimes the star player may be a great individual performer but might not be a good captain. When somebody says the captain, the star player is the star. So there are different ways in which things function. So now, among all the vanaras, the the first vanara that Ram had met was Hanuman.

And they had naturally bonded. Of course, at a spiritual level, we can say Hanuman is the eternal devotee of the lord. And, that’s true. But even at that functional level, they had bonded very nicely. And Ram had that indication or faith or whatever that Hanuman will be the person who will find Sita.

And thus, among all the people who are going in various directions, Ram gave his signet ring only to Hanuman. It’s interesting that Anghad was the leader, but Ram gave this to Hanuman. Now Angad was made the leader because he was born in royalty, and Angad was in a peculiar situation. At one level, his father had recently been killed, and it was like he had to be working with the person who had caused the death of his father. Now Angad did not in any way blame Ram.

Although Ram had shot the arrow, which led to the death of Wali, he knew Ram had no personal enmity with Wama with Wali. It was Sugri who had asked Ram. So he still had some resentment towards that. After all, his father had been killed. It is difficult for him to work.

But before dying, Wale had told Sugriyu that Angad and Tara, they are blameless. Angad was too small when all this happened. And Tara, my wife, she told me repeatedly to patch up to reconcile with you, but I did not listen to her. So please don t take out any of my anger again your anger towards me against them. And he told both of them to live under the shelter of Sugareem.

So, although there was some resentment, but because of that submission, because of the instruction of his father, that was like that was like his last wish. So Angad was living in living with Sugri and doing his will because he was also, although his royalty, still he was not the king. He was subordinate to the king. So, Sugri also knew that Angal had some, reservations about his leadership, about his position. So, sometimes he had to give people space.

So, he made Angad the leader. You are going in a group, although he was young, so you should become the leader. And everybody accepted that Hanuman as well as, Jambowin and others accepted that, and they started searching. Now, they were told that all of you have to return within 1 month. And normally, it’s whenever any service is given, accountability is required.

How well is the service being done? I say sometimes people work from home. And it’s difficult to keep track. Now, whether you are working from home or you are working for home. It’s difficult to keep track.

So any service accountability is required. Imagine you are in a plane and suddenly this is a pilot speaking, today I am working from home. Really? The The passengers we also want to go home now. We don’t want to be there.

So any service, some amount of accountability has to be there. So what Sugri, you said is, now when you’re going for searching, it’s a big task. So he any big task can become like a elephant. It can become like a whale. It can become huge.

So he said that all of you should search and come back within 1 month. Because, you know, any task that we do do, it has there has to be a cap on it. Because otherwise any task can become infinite. So if we are if we decide that, okay, you know, I lost my phone. Phone.

I want to search for my phone. Okay. Now you can search for it. But how much time do you spend searching for it? If you spend one day, you spend 2 days, you spend 5 days, then you think, you know, maybe it’s not worth spending so much time.

Better luck to get a new phone. So any task can be expanded unlimitedly. So he said all of you have to come back within one month because searching, it’s a phone lost in the places where we go that also is difficult to search. But somebody whom whom most of the monkeys had never met, somebody who don’t even know where they are, the search for that person is a very difficult thing. So come back within a month.

Now, generally what happens among kshatriyas, when instructions are given or when words are spoken often, there is a kshatriya spirit. You know, 2 warriors are fighting when say, today I will send you to the abode of death. Today your body will become the food of vultures. So there is that, rhetorical intimidation which is a part of Kshatriya culture. So as per that, Subhriya said, anybody who comes, who delays coming back, who’s a laggard, who doesn’t come within 1 month, they will be executed.

That is not that he’s going to execute them. But there has to be some fear, some threat you know, things have to be done. So now the Vanara started, with Hanuman carrying the signet and they all knew we had to come back within 1 month. And they went south They went toward the south. South, south.

And they went down, down, down. They searched in caves, they searched in forests, they searched in, wherever they could. They couldn’t find Sita anywhere. Eventually, they started feeling hungry, thirsty. They couldn’t they were they’re in such a wilderness patch that there was no water available.

They came near a big mountain and then they saw that over there, oh, from a cave, some birds were coming out and their wings were dripping with water. Oh, maybe there’s water here. So they decided to go. They peeked in and they saw it didn’t seem like a cave. It seemed like a catacomb.

It seemed like a whole network of dark paths inside. So, I thought outside their search, they couldn’t find any water anywhere. So, they decided, let’s go in. And then Hanuman went in the front and all of them held each other 1 by 1. Sometimes in the dark, it’s they are searching for something or going somewhere, but one possibility is gonna get lost.

So they all held on to each other, and they formed a long queue, and they went in. And then and then and then and then. Sometimes when you go into a dark place, when is it going to end? Is it going to end also? So as they’re going deep, of the monkeys are worshipping.

Hey. Now maybe we shall go back. Oh, I don’t know. We’ll we’ll find something over here. No.

But now we’ll be so tired that we will not be able to go back also if we don’t find anything. So naturally, some dissension started happening. Generally, when things are working, then people don’t complain. But when things stop working, then everybody starts complaining. You see what happens after the event, everybody is expert of how it should have happened.

Like recently, there’s a cricket world cup and India was expected to do very well when India lost in semifinals. And after India lost in the semi finals, like there are 100 of people you know saying, oh you know this batsman should have been sent first. This ball should have been given the ball. This one should have done like this. So everybody is expert about how things are to be done.

So the things don’t work, that’s how it is. So then they said, no we should not go, we should go, we should move on, we should not move on. But Hanuman kept relentlessly moving forward. And finally in the distance they could see some light. Now when they saw that light, what is it?

They came forward and then they saw it like a mystical place, there were trees which seemed to be luminous And those trees had beautiful lush, lush fruits or lush greenery over there and juicy fruits. And it seemed like a mansion over there along with well taken care of gardens with orchards with fruits and lots of food to eat. The monkeys became jubilant. He said, let’s go eat. Hanuman said, wait, wait, wait.

He said, whose is this? What is this? This is so beautiful, it just can’t be existing automatically over here. It must be belonging to someone. And he looked around and then as he looked around, he saw in the distance there was, somebody sitting and the body was effulgent and he looked forward, looked carefully and he saw that it was a it was a female, it was a yogini.

And as they went closer and closer Hanuman saw that there was effulgence coming from her body and he very respectfully approached her. And he told all the monkeys, monkeys are restless, and they’re already hungry, which makes them even more restless. But he stopped stopped here. And then he approached and he said that, no. Oh, lady, who are you?

And what are you doing here? Doing meditation over here? And what is this place? And then he introduced himself. I’m Hanuman.

I am the servant of Sugriva, and we are on the mission, given by by Ram. And this is he said, I am swayampraba. Swayampraba means self effulgent. And she said that, I’ll stay here as the guardian of this place. And this place is actually constructed by the architect, the celestial architect, Mayada now.

And it was used by him, but eventually, there was a fight between Indra and Indra Indra took it over. And Indra had a Apsara whom who used to live here. And then Indra asked her to come. So so he won this. And then he, Indra gave this to his this Apsara who was very dear to him.

But after that, Indra wanted that Apsara to be with him. So he took her to heaven. And then she asked me to be here as the guardian. And now Hanuman, sometimes when you speak something, people don’t voice a question but there is a question which is a question mark on their face. Yeah.

So Hanuman, how are you thinking? You know, this is a this is a forest, this is a big place and how is she going to guard it? And she said that, I have been so then she noticed that question, that thought, how are you going to guard this? She said that, actually, I have been blessed with yogic powers. It is by my yogic powers that I protect this.

Oh, Hanuman, if any of you had eaten the fruits without my permission without taking permission from me, you would have died. The protection was that nobody could disrupt things over there without being harmed themselves. So Hanuman’s maturity was when you see something wonderful, when you see something great, don’t presume it is for you. Don’t presume it is for you. Ask whose it is?

Hai. He said, oh, because you are in a cultured way, ask me. And because you are the because you are serving Ram, you can have these fruits as much as you want. And then, so here we see Angad was the leader but Hanuman was known to be good at speaking. Hanuman was expert at speaking in a way which could connect people.

Often, when we get upset, then we think we speak to give others a piece of our mind. Yeah. I’ll tell you what what you’re doing. Actually we should give we should speak to give others peace of mind but we give them a piece of our mind and then we take away their peace of mind and then they take away our peace of mind. Degenerates.

So at that time, Hanuman because he was expert at speaking and everybody knew that Hanuman was a good speaker. So, that’s why even earlier, when Ram and Lakshman were going through the forest and Subhiri noticed, who are these 2 people who come? He said, Hanuman, you find out. And when Hanuman spoke, at that time, Ram said, oh, he’s so learned. His speech is so sweet.

Just by hearing him speak, oh, all my anxiety of the mind has gone. All the tiredness has gone away. Some some people’s speech is very jarring. Some people’s speech is very soothing. So, his speech is very soothing and very sweet.

So now, here, with respect to this, although Angad was a leader, Angad also knew. Hanuman is expert at speaking. So, Angad naturally allowed Hanuman to speak. And Hanuman, because he was there, he was not an appointed leader, but he was in the in this particular ROCE per case, he was an emergent leader. As emergent leader, he saved the day for them.

He without even knowing they could have rushed into dangers. In this world, often pleasure seems to be present at many places. Nowadays especially on the internet, so many things thereis so many things free available. You know whenever any product is free, that means that we are the product. We are the real product.

You know. They give something free so that they will catch our consciousness. So, some programs some say say movie streaming channel or something they will say, 15 days free. And then in free, people watch so much and they get hooked to it. And then they become ready.

I have to pay this. So what happens, in this world, nothing comes free. And whenever anything seems too good to be true, it is probably too good to be true. Some things there must be some catch somewhere. So in this forest, in this wilderness where they were starving and suddenly, like, a magnificent, lush greenery and lavish natural abundance came up.

How did it come up? He says, this is not by chance. Probably this is. So Hanuman had that maturity. And then when Hanuman and Swaha Prabhava spoke, Hanuman said, okay, you can eat now.

And they all went and they drank water and they ate abundant food, and they rested and they got rejuvenated. Now the search for Sita. And so then Anupam turned towards Swayampraba, and he said that, how do we now, thank you for providing us this hospitality, this food. How do we go out from here now? See, in general, in our life journey, wherever path you want to go, there are broadly it’s an individual journey or a team journey.

There are 2, you could say, kind of obstacles that come. 1 is temptation and the other is tribulation. We are going on this particular path. Temptation means just go off this path, you can get some pleasure. Tribulation means that, oh, this path has so much trouble in it.

Why do you want to go? This path you can’t move on. In anything we want to do in our life, say, we want to we want to study for an exam. Then Then the temptation might be while we are studying, suddenly our phone gives a notification. Your friend has updated their Facebook profile photo.

Oh, let me just see that photo. And you click and see that one photo and maybe one more photo. And then what without will be 1 minute, may be 1 hour will go, 3 hours will go in that. So temptation, that’s one distraction. The other is tribulation.

Yes. Studying is too difficult. It requires too much effort. Maybe I shouldn’t be doing this. Maybe this is never going to work out, and then we may stop.

So this can happen at an individual level, this can also happen at a team level. So now the vaanaras, they face this temptation that, oh, just pounce on those foods and eat them. And that could have been the normal monkey tendency. But Hanuman said no. And they were protected from the danger that came because of the temptation.

Then now a tribulation came upon them. What was that tribulation? Sayyampraba, you see, when Hanuman asked, what is the way out from here? So she said, there is no way out from here. What?

He says, there is no way out from here. Now as soon as the monkeys heard this, they became angry. You know, see, it’s it’s good to be comfortable, but nobody wants to be confined. Somebody said, there’s no way out of there. What?

Tell me the way. There must be a way. So the monkey started advancing aggressively. And Raman said, stop, stop, stop. He says, what do you mean?

He said that those that when Indra asked me to guard this, one arrangement he made for protection was that even if those who could enjoy the fruits and luxury facilities over here, if they go out, then they will tell everyone else that there’s so much over here. And then people will come and plunder and ruin this. So for the protection of this place, Indra has arranged that anybody who comes in can never go out. Now this can be very scary to hear. Come here.

You can never go out from here. Hanuman just maintained his car. He said, okay. But then when we saw that there were these birds, they were flying out of here. And there wings with water, so they had also reached the water.

So so emperor Vasily said, yes, but they are not a threat to me. They are not a threat. So Anwan said, we are also not a threat. He says, No. You may tell you may tell other monkeys and they may come over here.

He says, no. No. We are not going to do that. He says, we want we are here only to serve Lord Ram. This is far away from our homes.

We are here on a mission to serve Ram, and we need to go urgently. So Anuban earnestly begged her. I told her that we are no threat to you. I’m sure there must be a way out. He said, yes.

The only way out is that you I can take you out, but then you will not know you have to close your eyes. If you cannot see. You will go out and you will not know how you the path out the path in. Back from this. He said okay.

He told all the monkeys to close your eyes. They closed the eyes and then Swayamprah Bha used their mystic powers. And they suddenly opened their eyes and they saw they were near a mountain and it looked, magnificent. They’re seeing the bright light of the sun, the big sky, and they said that now I brought you out. And as they were looking out here and there, they noticed that they had not come out with the same place they were in.

And so emperor Prahara said, now I am going back. And he says because they had this sincere desire to serve Ram, So what Swaimpapa did was, this big mountain range inside this cave was there. So they came in from this side and Swaimpapa brought them out from the other side. So that now they don’t have to go through the labor of scaling the mountain. And thus they came closer to their destination.

So again Hanuman s careful speech saved the day. We all can get angry. We all can get provoked. Now all of us would like to say give good speeches if we are called upon to give. And if you generally if you give a bad speech, we will regret it.

Oh, I didn’t speak so well. But if we get angry often when we get angry we will give the best speech that we will ever regret. Anger often makes us shed all our inhibitions. We might be shy we might be stage scared and whatever but if you are angry we will go out and speak. I will do the best speech that we will ever regret.

So we will speak without any reservation, but often we will speak something many things which you would regret afterwards which we should not have spoken. So for Janaka Pandita also says for a warrior, for a king who wants to conquer the world, the first skill to learn is the skill of the tongue. Not the skill of the sword, the skill of the tongue, skill of speaking. Because a king might be a great warrior and it is important for a king to them himself be good at fighting. But a victory does not depend only on the king fighting well, the king has to inspire the army to fight.

And that requires skill of the tongue to speak. So we see Hanuman’s expertise here where he naturally emerges as a leader. And then as they have emerged out, they start searching again. So, this is I will be talking about 3 main incidents. So this was the first incident where Hanuman starts emerging as a leader based on his speaking skills, his maturity, his emotional maturity, his verbal expertise.

The second incident, I will talk about my interaction Sampati. And the third interaction is our third incident will be about Hanuman preparing leap across Sri Lanka. So any questions at this point? Yeah. Well, are leaders born or are they made?

I’ve addressed this in I have written a book on 10 leadership uttas from Bhagavad Gita. I’ve addressed that in that. See there is, you could say 2 kinds of leadership. There is public leadership and personal leadership. Public leadership means, the ability to inspire others, the ability to lead a team per se, a group of people.

And that requires a certain set of skills maybe that as I said it requires eloquence verbal expertise that requires organization, delegation, accountability, keeping track. There are certain skills which are required for public leadership. And some people may have it those skills, some people may not have those skills. But more important than public leadership is personal leadership. Personal leadership is that means we should be able to lead ourselves according to our principles, according to our values.

We should be able to lead our mind, our senses in a way that is consistent with who we want to be. If somebody is a public leader without being a personal leader, they may lead for some time, but sooner or later, everything will collapse. So they might be very powerful like a like a king might be very powerful, good leader in terms of public leadership, good warrior, good speaker. But say the king is not able to have personal leadership, then the enemy might send some seductive woman and the king might just fall for her, and then she might poison and kill. So if the if there is public leadership without personal leadership, then there might be success for some time, but things will collapse.

But if there is personal leadership, then even if a person is not an appointed leader, still that person can inspire others. All of us through our day to day actions, actions, whatever we do, it influences others. Every action that we do has its influence, has its impact. So, therefore, personal leadership is something which every one of us can do. In terms of public leadership, there are certain skills which some people may be born with.

Now, can others develop it? We can, but it may not come naturally to them. And they may not develop them to as much extent as those who had them in born and had those coming naturally. So some people might be very good speakers, but they might not be very good delegators and organizers, strategic planners. Some people might be strategic planners, but they might not be very good speakers.

Some people might so these skills can be developed? Yes, they can be. But there is, an innate talent which, which cannot be replaced by a large amount of practice alone. So, personal leadership is something which every one of us can develop. Public leadership is something which, we are largely born with.

And that can also be developed, but not in a significantly dramatic way. May not be. So in that sense, we all can be leaders whether we whether we become public leaders or not that will vary from person to person okay thank you yes Which intelligence? Then? Emotional intelligence.

Then second one? Raw intelligence. You know, like, analytics. Okay. Raw intelligence.

Okay. Is emotional intelligence more important than, say, raw intelligence or analytical ability? Yes. It’s difficult to compare the 2 in the sense that both have their utility in their particular fields. So, if somebody is a mathematician and that is the field they are specialising in, then without having adequate IQ, without having adequate raw intelligence you cannot function in that field.

So, in certain specific fields, the raw intelligence is also required, and IQ is required for certain areas. But, emotional quotient is something which emotional intelligence is something which everyone needs. And especially if somebody is going to work in a team, work in a community, then emotional intelligence is more important than than intelligence. So, I just could say raw intelligence because raw intelligence may enable us to become to excel individually. But it is emotional intelligence, which will enable us to excel while working with others.

Okay. Thank Okay. Good question. So even in personal leadership, say, some people naturally are maybe more self controlled. They’re already born in goodness.

So then what is the difference between personal and public? Yeah. See, there are there is a soul, there is the mind, there is the body. Now you cannot rigidly differentiate between the mind and the body in terms of, what is an ability coming from where? Say somebody has singing ability.

Is that ability of the body or the mind? You could stay at one level of the body, ability of the body. Your throat is it produces very sweet sounds. But it’s not just that. The mind also has to be attuned to speak that, to to sing that way, to do what it takes to sing regularly.

In general, you could say that the, so you could talk about but still you could differentiate between abilities and qualities. Abilities are more functional skills to do certain things. Qualities are more character centred virtues. One way to differentiate it is you could call it talent and temperament. So talent, you could say it’s more physical.

Say somebody is, you know, an expert batsman. They just can hit shots which other players can’t even dream about. So that’s But temperament means to know when I should hit that shot or when I should display defensively. The maturity to choose, that’s temperament. So in general, achievement requires talent and temperament both.

So, based on our past karma, we get both the body and the mind. And among the body and the mind, which is more changeable? Mind. Yeah. You could say it’s more difficult to change, but it is more changeable if you work on it.

If, say, somebody has white skin and they wanna change it somebody has dark skin and they wanna change to white white hair. It’s s quite difficult, you know. If somebody is say 4 and a half feet and they want to become 7 and a half feet. Well, that s almost impossible. So at the level of the body the kind of physical attributes we have and the physical abilities we have.

Some voices are naturally sweet. Some voices may not be sweet. Now still you can speak in a sweet tone but speaking in a sweet tone is not the same as actually having a sweet voice, Isn’t it? So when I talk about, public leadership, I was talking more in terms of the physical abilities. So, of course, you could say that, speaking is it physical or psychological?

That’s why I said, it’s not a like a rigid differentiation, but it’s a broad indication of the differentiation. It’s a so that there are certain you could say certain things, which we get from the past, which fall more towards the ability side. And there are certain things which you get from the past evolved from which fall more towards the quality side. Now again, you could go into a hair splitting difference between what is the ability and the quality. Let’s not go into that direction.

But what Iim saying is that purse whatever is required for personal leadership, there is there is a greater possibility to change that. But what is required for public leadership, there there may not be that much possibility to change that. So, certainly, some people might be more suited to be personal leaders than others and that difference can also come from past lives. But the capacity for changing is more with respect to personal leadership than public leadership. Okay.

Thank you. Any other question? Yes, please. Charisma. Yeah.

Charisma is a gift. It’s a special gift, which some people have, which some people develop also over time. And that can be a very powerful tool for attracting leadership, charisma. It’s almost mysterious what concomprises charisma. But it’s also a challenge that leadership is, based on charisma.

It can be very powerful but it can also be very meteoric. It goes up like a meteor and it comes down. Often after a charismatic leader say their tenure ends or they depart, then everything can crumble. If everything is based on the charisma only, things can crumble. That is why in many ways, whenever any organisation is based on a charismatic leadership, then, then the succession becomes very turbulent.

And succession requires what is called in organization theory as the routinization of the charisma. That means the charisma has to be passed on to the structures of the organization. And that is often very difficult to do. So charismatic leadership can be very commanding but it it is not very sustainable. So, if you have charisma we use it if you don’t have still we do the best that we can.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. So before we go to the second and third instance, do we need to have break now? Should we have after 10 after about half an hour more?

What would we prefer? How many of you want a short break? 5-ten minutes? 12? Bells.

Maybe then. Because if I start the incident, let him go to 12:10. It’ll take a 25, 30 minutes. 12:10 is okay. 12:10 is okay?

Okay. Fine. So now after they emerged from that cave, they again started searching. And although initially they were lated, now they were nourished. They were having food, water, they were energized, but still they were no closer to actually finding Sita.

They started searching, searching, and soon they realized that they couldn’t find her anywhere. And despair started setting in. And as the despair started setting in, that is a time when the monkeys said, what to do? We have searched for so long. They had been in that Sohimbraha’s cave also for quite some time.

Before that also, they had been searching. Now 1 month had already got over. Some of the vanaras said that, let us go back and inform Bali of what has happened. He says, no. No.

No. We have come so far. Again, for us to come here will be difficult. Let’s keep searching. Let’s keep searching till we find.

So then, as they would keep searching, but eventually nobody was finding anything. They kept searching, kept searching, and then gradually, despair started spreading further and further. And he said, where are we going to find Sita? Let’s go back. And Angad said Angad became even more desperate.

You know? It’s like, say, he is young, he has been appointed the leader of the team, and the team is filled. It like, say, you have a new captain of a team and the captain goes for a cricket team and you go for a tournament and you just fail this money. Now sometimes, especially in India where people are very emotional, if you win there will be thousands of people welcoming you if you lose thousands of people will garland you with chappals with shoes. Now there can be a lot of disgrace and humiliation when you lose so Angad felt mortified thinking that, oh, if I how can I go back?’ He said, ‘I failed over here, and if you go back, we’ll be disgraced.’ And Angad’s imagination started working now?

See, imagination is a very powerful tool we have. But we need to know how to use imagination. If our imagination is channel constructively, then we can envision things and then we can get the inspiration to actualize those things. So, imagination channel constructively is very powerful. But imagination running wild can be very dangerous.

It can just we can conjure up all kinds of horrifying situations, and we can paralyze ourselves with fear. When this starts happening, you know, the mind can say, you don’t know the future. This may go wrong. That may go wrong. That may go wrong.

And it just becomes so fearful at that time. So when the mind starts conjuring fearful scenarios, and what happens is none of us know the future. So we will say, oh, this can happen. This can happen. So we can get overwhelmed by fear.

One way to deal with that fear is, yes, we acknowledge that we don’t know the future, but then our mind also doesn’t know the future. So just as we can’t forecast it, even the mind can’t forecast it. And if the mind can’t mind is forecasting it, that is also speculative. So we need to check that fear. So how do we so what did Angad started thinking?

Angad said that actually, Wali had Sugri had said that anyone who comes late, after 1 month, they’ll be executed. He said, no. No. That was that was not literal. Many times certain statements are made and just the context tells you that they are not literal.

But, you know, like, but sometimes people might take those statements are non literal literally. And then we all have this, there are so many metaphors that we have which if we take them literally, they can they can, they can be completely out of place. I was in Lester, I think, last last year. And I gave a class and there was a nice question answer after the class. It’s a call I think it’s a college program or something.

A lot of young people. And after that, the devotee had organized the program. He just came to me with a big smile on his face. He said, Prabhu, you killed it. What did I kill?

And why are you so happy about it? So then, I realized that he was using that in a non literal sense. So that phrase comes from the hunting metaphor. Either somebody shoots, you kill it. That means you you shot very well.

You did very expertly. So he was appreciating, but it was confusing for me. So this is not a literal statement. But what happens when we want to when our mind catches a particular narrative, mind going to a particular track, it starts finding everything to support that narrative. So just Surya said he’s going to kill us.

We’ll be executed if we don’t come back. And he said, actually, you know, Sugriva, he will already be seeing me as a threat to him. And he’ll just he will use this as a even if he doesn’t execute all of you, he will use this as a as a pretext to have me executed. And rather than being considered a failure in front of all my family and citizens and being humiliated and executed, better I’ll stay here itself. I’ll not go back.

It like, say, the Indian captain says I’ll not go back to India only. It’s No. You know, that’s too much. But he’s no. Nobody is going to so Hanuman, he naturally he heard this.

Angad was the leader. And when Angad started speaking like this about their king, that naturally causes concern. What we speak matters but what position we speak that matters even more. Now if if somebody has got a say may be some kind of swelling on their hands or swelling on their body somewhere. And I come and tell you you got cancer.

What? If I am not a doctor and I say you got cancer, you are pessimistic. And your doctor comes and says you got cancer. Oh, really? No.

So So what is being said matters but who is saying it also matters quite a bit. So if there is a hierarchy of leaders. So Angad is 1 leader and sugri with another leader. Sugri with the leader above the leader. So So, what happens is if in a hierarchy of if there is a team and if in the hierarchy of leaders, one leader speaks against another leader who is above them.

The result is what? People get demoralized. People get confused. So when Vali when when Anand was speaking like this, Anuman realized that this is going in a terrible direction. Let’s stop this.

So how do you stop it? He said, actually, Wali says, Sugri will never do like this. He is virtuous and you are his nephew. Now Angad was already desperate and Angad said, no. He said, you say Sugri is virtuous, but he had his own brother killed.

Had the first opportunity just to get the kingdom. If he killed his own brother, then what is what stops him from killing his nephew? Now, when he started speaking like this, he said that he said why Sugreen is so hungry for power that he can go to any extent. Now when he spoke this, all the monkeys became agitated. And Hanuman said no.

Now Hanuman was naturally very concerned by this. It’s like anger, this sowing, is accusing the king of grievous, horrendous things, and he is he is actually actively fomenting rebellion, insurrection against him. What do you do? What’s your time? So one man was trying to persuade Rama.

He says, no. Actually, Sugri will never do anything without Ram, without Ram’s consent, and Ram will never allow such a thing to happen. He said, no. No. Sugiri was very cunning.

You know, he influenced Ram to kill Vali, so he can influence Ram to kill me also. This is all his imagination going. At this point, going. At this point, hunger had faded. I am going to sit here and I am not going to go back.

And I am going to do prayabrata. Prayavrata is. Does anyone know what is prayavrata? Fast till? Till death.

Till death. Yes. Tomorrow Ekadashi would do Ekadashi Vrata. Isn’t it? Prayavrata is ought to be tried.

But, see, that’s a traditional way. If somebody feels my life’s mission is over, then let me end my life now. So he said, I’ll do Prayavrata. And Angad just sat down. And when Angad sat down because he was the appointed leader, what to do?

Many of the monkeys, they looked at Hanuman. They looked at Angad, and many of the monkeys sat down near Angad. Now somewhere left with Hanuman. Hanuman said, no. We’re going to find Seeta.

Why did you sat down, Praivrath? It’s like a big division. Now, you know, if Prabhupad said you love for me will be shown by how you cooperate. Now the most basic level of of cooperate is at least cooperate. You know, you operate here.

I will operate here. Well, let us both operate. Hey. What is really bad is if I I criticize you and you criticize me and most of our energy goes in that itself. We sing every morning samsara.

In the mangalati, there is samsara, dawana, liddalok. In the material world, like a forest fire. And bringing Krishna’s mercy, the spiritual master’s mercy, we are going to extinguish that forest fire. But quite often, when we are living in a community, we find most of our energy goes in extinguishing the fires that we ourselves have set. That means it is internally only so many problems come up.

So dissension is a big problem. Now what does one do at that time? Hanuman had tried his best. He tried to persuade Angad. Angad’s point, of course, he was very unreasonable.

From his perspective, it might seem reasonable, but it was not. This fear was just a wild imagination, but he couldn’t see it that way. Sometimes when we are faced with a problem and we’re trying our best, and nothing seems to be solving the problem. As devotees, we may remember the Lord. We may pray to the Lord.

So in the Nam Brahmayat, he said that Let’s recite recite this 2 words. Kapiwara santatta samsmrth rama. Can you repeat this? Kapiwara. I’ll just explain that because you’re kapiwara.

Kapiwara is monkeys. Wara is the best of the monkeys. Santat is always Samsmooth is remembered. So kapi var santat Samsmooth Rama. Var santat Samsmooth Rama.

And then he says, tudgati. In their progress, wignu. Is obstacle. The obstacle that came in their path, they were destroyed by whom? Rama.

So now what happened? Hanuman was praying. Hanuman was, you know, remembering Ram, what should I do in such a situation? Sometimes we have a problem and we’re not able to deal with the problem. And then we pray for help and then a bigger problem comes.

This is what happened? I already had a problem and I prayed for help. Something instead of a solution, a bigger problem has come up. So what happened? Something similar happened over there.

There, as they were as they were talking and discussing, and I was remembering the lord and thinking what to do? Pray? And suddenly they saw a giant vulture marching over there. Who was that? Yeah.

Yeah. And this vulture didn’t have wings, so he couldn’t fly. And he was just walking along and say, oh, providence is very fortunate. Providence is very kind to me. Today, I will get to feast on all these monkeys.

And all these monkeys were sitting in prayavrata and sat next to them waiting. Now it is one thing to know to know that I am going to die and to even agree to I will fast to death. But its quite other thing somebody is waiting for you to die then they are going to eat your body. It’s so all the monkeys became agitated. And now, Sampati was also very powerful.

It was big. The monkeys became alarmed, and they didn’t know what to do. And, actually, among all the monkeys, 1st person who had sat down was Angad. So Sampati went and sat right next to Angad. And Angad’s despair became even greater.

And then he said, alas, it seems that despite my best efforts, despite our best efforts, we are all meant to fail and die in the service of Ram. Our fate seems to be like that of Jatayu. Just as he died by serving Ram in vain, we also will die in vain. And there’s Sampatthi. What did you speak?

What did you speak about Jatayu? Angad has lost his own thoughts. He says, what? He says, what did you speak of Jataayu? And Langar repeated what he has spoken.

Says, Jataayu is dead? He he said, yes. Who is Jataayu to you? And there is giant bird suddenly started crying. I said, Jatai, he was my younger brother.

He said, I lost my wings because I was protecting him from the heat. Both of them had flown high into the sky to go near the sun. And when Jetayu started becoming very scattered by the heat, Sampati Sampati had spread his, wings, and his wings had got burnt. So he said, I sacrificed sacrificed my wings to save the life of Jeta Yu and Jeta Yu did. Tell me what happened?’ Then seeing this intense emotion, they all told the story of what had happened.

And somebody started crying, and he said, please help me go near the, river. Let me offer some water for my brother. And then he offered the water. And then they were all very moved to see his great distress and then they started thinking. Angad at this point, oh, if you had flown up to the sun, that means you must know where Lanka is, isn’t it?

Sampati had been Sampati had been Sampati had looked very dejected. He shrunk, and suddenly he pokes it up. Oh, he realized that there is something he could do about the death of Jatayu. He said, long ago, when my my wings had been lost, I wanted to die. But a sage told me that in future, you have an important service to do.

You will do a service for, for the servant’s servant. He says, now is that he realized that now is the moment for me to do that service. And what is that service? So I can tell you. He says, although my body has weakened, my visual is my sight has not weakened.

And he rose up, and he says, across the ocean, there is Lanka. And and he peered carefully, and he said, in Lanka, Sita is right now there. Lanka is across the ocean, and Sita is there. And as soon as the monkeys heard this, they all became jubilant. Yes.

Now we’ve got a clue. Now we know where to find Sita. So you see how rapidly fortunes changed. At one moment, the monkeys were ready to die, and they were even though they were not ready to die, they were cut utterly confused, not knowing what to do. Sometimes when we face a problem, at that time, we may ask for help.

But as I said, sometimes we ask for help and a bigger problem comes up. That’s what happened. But if we are having a sincere, desire to serve, sometimes to that bigger problem, our attention gets shifted from the smaller problem. So, 2 people might be quarrelling with the other, but then a bigger service comes up, a bigger challenge comes up, which is a common project, then they forget their difference. So, in this case, anger somehow you know, how things can work, we don’t know.

Anger needed to have spoken about Jataayu. Anger that, at that time for him to think about Jataayu and speak about Jataayu and to speak it exactly at the time when Sampati was right next to him. That, you could say, it’s a coincidence. But it is that coincidences are god’s ways of of remaining anonymous. So when we keep trying to move on, how things will work out, we don’t know.

Nobody could have predicted that Sampati would come there and Angad would speak this and Sampati would turn out to be a little jata yu and Hampati would know well, Anka is. They didn’t know it all. But and we are facing difficulties. Rather than letting ourselves get consumed by those difficulties, we just get out and try to move on. When we pray for help, sometimes help comes, but not in the way we had expected.

In fact, sometimes it may come in the opposite way itself. Like, in the, Mahabharata also, it happens that Draupadi, that when the pandas in the forest, Indurvasamuni comes, and he says he wants food. And Akshayapatra has already been washed and kept. So they say that, what do I do? So all the pandas are panicky, and Draupadi says that, let us let us pray to Krishna.

And she prays to Krishna for help in getting some food, and what happens? Krishna comes and tells her, I’m very hungry. Give me food. Now it appears like a bigger problem. Because once you couldn’t feed the priests feed the sages, and now I can’t feed our lord also.

Like one problem and a bigger problem. But through the bigger problem, sometimes Krishna solves a smaller problem. So, you know, when we are dealing with difficulties, we needn’t focus so much on the size of the problem. We can focus on the strength of our purpose. If our purpose is to serve Krishna, how big the problem is doesn’t matter.

The problem will be solved not it’s not because the problem is solved, we can solve it. Problem is small, so we’ll solve it. And because the problem is big, we can’t solve it. Actually, we have certain abilities, but far bigger than our ability is Krishna’s ability. So if we have a strong strength of purpose, then Krishna will make the arrangement.

How it will work out, we don’t know. But the strength of the purpose, strength of our purpose is what will help us move forward and deal with problems. So here we see it was in one sense Angad’s failure his losing losing of heart but although at one level he had lost his will or he had become dispirited. But still, within his heart, he had the desire to serve Ram. And it is only because of the desire to serve Ram that’s why he could compare himself with jumbo.

And he could say, oh, he I was not successful. I was successful. So sometimes, practically, we might not be able to do a service. But that doesn’t necessarily mean we have to just give up our spirit of serving. Just because some services are not possible for us.

So we may, we may be uns we may not be able to do a service, but we needn’t lose our service attitude. So doing a service successfully is not always in our hands. But maintaining a service attitude is in our hands. And if we maintain that service attitude, then we will find that we all can move forward. The doors will open we didn’t even knew existed.

And thus we can move forward. So we’ll have a break now. And whatever questions you have, we can discuss. And then we’ll go to the last part about Hanuman’s emergent leadership.

Thankyou

The post Teamwork in Ramayana 1 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Teamwork in Ramayana 2
→ The Spiritual Scientist


If we see that some of our leaders are making a mistake and we are juniors, what do we do at that time? A lot depends on specifics, what kind of mistake it is, what is our position related what is our relationship with them, what is, likely to be the consequence of that mistake as compared to the consequence of what we are going to do. We see this in the, for example, in the Mahabharata when Bhima is first poisoned by Duryodhana. So at that time, he survives by a miraculous arrangement. He survives by a miraculous arrangement.

He is thrown into the water but the the whole cross story we won’t go into that but he survives and comes back. Now when he comes back he is furious and he wants to head out at Durovan. And Yudhishthir says no. He says we have just come into this kingdom. We don’t even know who is actually favorable to us, who is unfavorable to us.

And, we don’t want to create a whole dissension in the whole community. And Biyushma, although he is very kind, he is bound by vow to the ruling king. So he says, let us keep quiet and be more cautious. Now Bhima just can’t I just he said he tried to kill me. How can you just stay silent about that?

Now Yudhishthir takes this decision but if he uses it by nature, although he is a shalsar kshatriya, he by nature is a person who tries to resolve things as peacefully as possible. Mhmm. But then things seem to go worse. And eventually what happens is that they try to have them all burnt alive in Varanavath. And this time they have to flee and escape.

There are too many life items, they don’t just emerge back, but then they wait. In the forest, what happens? There, they go to Drupadhi Swyamvara and they get then their alliance is formed with Drupadha. Now now they are not just orphan boys against the ruling king of Khuru. Now they are the sons sons in law of another powerful kingdom.

And those who had gone out, you know, and apparently had died, apparently they come back victorious. And they are welcome and Nitraashtra used their kingdom back in that time. Time. So the point is that was what he did at that time a mistake? We you Bhima could have felt that it was a mistake, but in the long run, you could say that it was success because they were allied with the powerful kingdom.

Others, you could also say it was a mistake. It was a because Durudan only became more aggravated. Maybe Durudan’s evil tendency could have been nipped in the bud at that time. We don’t know. Life doesn’t come with such a clear guarantees of this is right and this is wrong.

We just use our best intelligence and do the best that we can. So if if there is a particular way to act and somebody is acting in a different way, then we have to basically decide whether this is a battle I want to fight. There are many things wrong in the world and, even in Krishna’s movement, there can be many things which are not right. This is so I am the first point I made is that sometimes we cannot even be sure whether something is wrong or not because in life it’s not so clear what is right what is wrong. But let’s assume that somebody is doing something wrong.

But, then even then whether it is our position to correct it. We have to decide that. Sometimes we may decide this is so important for me that I’m going to fight for this. Sometimes I may decide that, you know, this is this is not good, but this is not what I want to be involved in. I cannot get involved in this.

There are there are other more important things which I want to do in my life. Then we may decide that, okay. I just live with this but I focus on, my service. And if in my service, I’m dedicated, then I grow by that. And maybe in future, Krishna will give me the power to set something right.

Prabhupada saw saw so many saw so many things wrong in Gaudiya Math. He spoke out also in one of the vast puja ceremonies of Bhakti Vedaakur. He said that, what are we doing? We’re just running our mathas and feeding our bellies. What are we doing for the mission?

Relatively speaking, in the Gaudevan hierarchy, Prabhupad was a was a grastha and a junior godbrother. So many of his godbrothers didn’t appreciate his speaking like that. Yeah. But they didn’t, he spoke it out and they didn’t listen. And eventually Prabhupada continued doing what he was doing and he came to America.

And then he may he was empowered to do a lot. So he couldn’t set things right in Gaudiya Math at that time, but then he did something right separately. But when in ISKCON only things would sometimes go wrong, Rupad would come down heavily on some devotees. No. This you should not be doing like this.

Sometimes you just let them do what they’re doing and gradually learn a lesson. So, of course, Prabhupada is in the position of authority over here. But I’ll give you an example. Prabhupada in Gaudiya Math. He tried, but when it didn’t work, he just moved on.

So basically if something is clearly wrong, then we have to decide whether this is a battle we want to we want to choose. And if we decide this is what I want to fight then we should we have to do it in a very respectful way. This is a technical subject, but I’ll just give that quickly as an example. In our tradition, the first major commentary in the Bhagavatam which we have is by Shirdar Swami. Chetan Mahapu very respected the commentary of Shirdhar Swami.

But Shirdhar Swami in his commentary has on several places given impersonalistic interpretations. And Chaitanya Mahapu said that Bhagavatham is our primary book. Bhagavatham is, the ripened fruit of the Vedic literature and Bhagavathamathir says that. And Goswami Shirdar Swami’s commentary is the authority commentary. Now, what do you do?

Bhagavad Gita is the authority to your book and the authority commentary is impersonistic. Not everywhere, but some places. Now Shirdar Swami was a very, very exalted devotee, but he sort of, he was officially affiliated with the impersonalistic Sampradaya, Advaitabad, and he brought bhakti into Advaitabad from inside. Like, there’s Advait Sampraday and there’s Bhakti Sampraday. They’re 2 opposite.

But but he was inside nominally or officially affiliated with Advaita Sampraday, So he had to give some Advaitic interpretations. But for the Advaitans also, he showed. Actually, this Bhagavatam is bhakti. So he had a particular purpose when he did it that way. But Yuga Swami had another purpose.

So Juga Swami while explaining the Bhagavatam has to explain many places which is not just different from but opposite to what Shriya Swami is saying so how does he do it Whenever he can. If Shirdar Swami has given a devotional commentary he quotes Shirdar Swami and he treats Shirdar Swami like the authority commentary. He says Bhashya iti. Bhashya means by default it is the basha at that time the basha was a tudar swami. But whenever Shridar swami has given some impersonalistic interpretation so he doesn’t mention Shirdar swami by name.

He says according to an imaginary interpretation. And he said like this. But this is the problem. This is this this and this is how it should be. This is the right understanding.

So what he does is he does not personally name and target Shindar Swami. So that is the way he is respectful. He quotes him when he is right and he avoids the name when he is wrong or when when he is giving a giving a impersonalistic interpretation. Similarly, if we are going to challenge something which the senior is doing we have to be respectful. We shouldn’t be dismissive.

And respectfully we can express a different opinion and see how things go. Sometimes if we do it respectfully it may be that they also understand yeah this is right and they may change. Does that answer your question? Yes. Thank you.

Any other questions? You had a question, Yes. Normally, people, sometimes they ask, like, you know Okay. I got I remember the question. I remember the question.

So, if we go to hell or if we suffer for our bad karma, we don’t remember it, then what is the use of that suffering? Yeah. It’s a Sorry. Say it again. I don’t I don’t know.

Yeah. You can repeat. In hell, people suffer, but then when we take this book, we forget all everything about that. Yeah. See, the purpose of the material world ultimately is spiritual evolution, to help the soul learn to grow toward Krishna, to allow Krishna, and to ultimately attain Krishna.

And everything within the world is meant for that purpose. So even the law of karma is meant for prompting the soul to turn toward Krishna. Although the law of karma, we say it is a law of cause and effect, it is a law of actions and reactions, but the point of the law of karma is not vindictive. Vindictive means you did this, so you suffer this. It’s the point of the law of karma is educative.

And it’s the education is not so much about specifics. See, the specifics have been told in broad principle in scripture. ‘If you do this, this will happen, if you do this, this will happen, broadly. But real life is complicated. It is when we get a particular reaction, some reactions, normally we say action A leads to reaction B.

That’s a that’s a very simplified understanding of karma. Sometimes action a might lead to a series of reactions b, c, d, e, f, g, h, I, j, k. So many things can come because of one action. Conversely, a reaction d might be because of action c or reaction d might be a combined reaction for a b c, all actions. So one action can lead to many reactions.

One reaction can be the result of many actions. In real life, things are complicated. So if somebody gets a lifelong disease, it’s incurable. Now is that for one particular karma that they have done or it’s it’s going to stay lifelong? We don’t know.

It’s complicated. So if we start looking for, you know, why something happened, ‘okay, this suffering came upon me because of this.’ It’s so complex we’ll get lost in the past. It’s because at every moment something is happening. Say, if I’m walking along, I slip and fall. Now should I know why I slip and fall?

Then, you know, if we start thinking about which action led to which reaction, or then at what level do we stop? At what level we do we stop thinking about, okay, this, let me just move on. You know, I’m driving the road and I get a lot of traffic today. Is it because of my past karma? Is it because of my present karma only?

And I chose to go at a time when I’m travelling when it’s crowded. So it’s complex. So if you start getting as the Bhagavatham says Bhagavata says rather. So it’s very difficult for us to know and it doesn’t it will just get caught in technicalities. In, in, specifics where the ultimate purpose is not so much that you have got this suffering because of this karma.

The ultimate purpose is to basically get the soul to evolve in consciousness toward Krishna. And that purpose, the principle of karma, serves in a generic way. So when the soul goes to hell and returns, or the soul goes to hellish suffering and returns, whichever and comes out, there is much that is impressed at a subconscious level. All of us have a sense of conscience. The specifics of their conscience may vary, but all of us understand that there are some things which weill just not do.

It’s not to be done. These things, yeah, I’ll do. These things I should not do, but maybe I’ll do it. If I’m pressured about this, unacceptable. Out of question.

So we have where do we get that from? It’s not just from our culture or our upbringing. It also comes from our previous lives. So you could say that the prince the the purpose of suffering is reorientation. It is not just it is not education of particular cause of the suffering.

That reorientation happens not necessarily through recollection of specific the code of human specific rights and wrongs, but rather assimilation about the like or rather assimilation about assimilating the nature of reality. So suffering so even pleasure what purpose does it serve? It’s it’s very it’s very difficult to be discreet about these things. Even in day to day life, if if somebody falls sick, did they feel fall sick because their immunity is low? Did they fall sick because the weather was bad?

Did they fall sick because they ate something in appropriate? Did they fall sick because they were with somebody who was infected and they got an infection? It could be a, b, c, d, or it could be a, b, and c, and d. We don’t know. So usually, doctors we need to try to analyse the cause to some extent.

But, you know, when we are analysing the cause, the focus is on taking the treatment. We start getting into specifics. How do you know? Why did I get this? Why did I get malaria?

Oh, mosquito. But where did the mosquito bite me? Where did it bite me? You can’t know the specifics. So we shouldn’t it’s it’s difficult to expect the way we we function in the world.

Some things we understand cause effect in specifics. Some things we don’t understand. And that applies to karma, the principle of karma and the suffering because of that also. Okay? Any other questions?

Okay. So let’s move on to the 3rd part. So, till now, I discussed about the Ramayana, and they have come till Angga Ang because of Angad’s incidental speech, they have now come to the banks of they have come to know that Sita is there. And all the monkeys, they charge, rush towards the ocean delighted. Oh, we’re gone.

Now where Sita is? And they are jumping in joy and they come to the coast of ocean and then suddenly they look at the vast ocean and they fall silent. And they start looking at each other. We know where Sita is, but how are we going to get there? How do we get across the ocean?

They realize this is unscalable. So at that time, as they’re all waiting, they think, what do I do now? And they start talking with each other. Angad tries to again boost the spirits. Angad is the leader still, and he has somehow it seemed that the day was lost, but he he saved the day.

His his accidental words saved the day. So he still feels such like he says, I’m sure many of you will be able to jump across the ocean. Oh, monkeys, please speak. How far can you jump? And they all start speaking, and none of them can jump as far.

It’s geographical specifics are not important, but the principle is that they are not able to jump across. Now here is a very significant point that all the monkeys are they are servants of Ram. They all want to serve Ram. They all have a sincere desire. Not only they have a desire, but they have been instructed by Ram ultimately to go on this mission.

But still, not all of them have equal abilities. Just because somebody is devoted or somebody is instructed doesn’t necessarily automatically mean that everybody will be equally empowered. And the monkeys here, the Vanaras have the honesty to admit their limitations. And if you don’t have that, say somebody is not good at handling finances, and they decide we’re gonna do a we’re gonna build a big temple for Krishna. And then they get get finances, but they don’t handle it properly, and they will lose the money.

Just because we are serving Krishna doesn’t mean that we are automatically qualified to do every service for Krishna. So sincerity is, of course, important, and Krishna is bhava grahi. Krishna sees, the sincerity of our intent in terms of how eagerly we want to serve him. But that doesn’t mean that we will be able to do anything and everything. There are certain things which we can do, certain things which we can’t do.

That’s possible we may say Krishna can empower us to do anything. Yes, but Krishna empowers by his plan, not our plan. That means we may say, oh, Prabhupada is one person, and he was so empowered that he preached all over the world.’ Yes. That is true. Prabhupada was extraordinarily empowered, but he was empowered by Krishna’s time plan.

And for you could say now can I just can you say that that means for if Robal was empowered, why was his preaching not successful in India? From 1921 to 1965, practically, 2022, more than 40 years, there was not much happening. So even a pure devotee like Prabhupada, he was empowered by Krishnais plan. So now if we find out that certain service is required, and we don’t have the ability for it, what do we do? It is that it requires humility to admit our inability.

Many times people just, you know, brag about their abilities, especially in today’s competitive world when people have to promote everybody has to promote themselves. So then one of my friends was in IIM and he said that one of the major IIM is a top top management institute in India. He said that we learned a major part of how to make your CV as attractive as possible. So one of these days is if you are walking along the road and you see a tap is on and you switch off the tap, you see you can write that I am an environmental activist conserving water on the planet So sometimes in today’s competitive world, we might feel that I I have to I have to to promote myself. And, yes, we don’t we need to have a proper presenting ability, but if we pretend to have the ability that we don’t have say, I talked earlier about hierarchy.

Hierarchies which are based simply on on privilege or, genealogy or wealth, this can be exploitative. But a hierarchy that is based on competence, that is desirable. There’s somebody who can somebody who wants to get to the top of the hierarchy, but they don’t have the ability that is required at the top of the hierarchy. And all that will happen is they will hurt themselves and they will hurt everybody else in that hierarchy. So if one of the monkeys who had said who couldn’t jump across the ocean, that monkey said, I want to jump across the ocean.

And he would have gone, and he would have probably fallen the ocean and perished. And even if he had not, somehow he had survived and come back, all the other monkeys would have been waiting. They would have lost. They would have, lost time. They would have lost so much, of, maybe lost somebody who lost life at this risk life.

So, you know, if we don’t have the ability to be at the top of the hierarchy, that doesn’t mean that we are useless. We all have our opportunities where we can do some services, but an aspect of bhakti is at one level we have faith that Krishna can empower anyone to do extraordinary things. But to think that I am empowered or think I will be empowered, now that might be presumptuous. So we have to both be open to Krishna’s Krishna’s potential to empower us. We can’t I I will never be able to do this.

No. We might be able to do more. But if we can’t do something right now, acknowledging it is important. When we acknowledge it, then we can work to fix it as it is required. So now when the monkeys spoke like this, at that time, Angad said that I I could conceivably jump across, but that’ll drain me so much that I won’t have the energy to leap back again.

Jambavan said that when I was young, I could have jumped across the whole earth, but now I can’t. So as they were thinking like this, there’s one person who was silent. Who was that? Hanuman. Hanuman.

So Hanuman, he is silent, and then Jumbo and turned towards him. And he says, oh, Hanuman, why are you silent? Hanuman, it was almost like, you know, this is out of question for me. So he was not even speaking his voice. But then Jambavan, he started speaking about the glories of Anuman.

He Anuman had been cursed with forgetfulness, but it was like a not a permanent forgetfulness. It was you see, the point was that he had ability, he had powers, but at that time, he was abusing the powers. He was as a small mischievous child, He was, troubling the sages. Sometimes he would take all the sacred paraphernalia and just carry it away. Sometimes he would, extinguish their yagna.

Sometimes he would just basically do all kinds of mischievous things. And because he had mystic powers, so nobody could catch him also. And then the sages told sages told his parents, but sometimes, you see it so much young some so much childish, impetuous energy that even his parents couldn’t do anything. And in that sense, Hanuk, that energy was so much. See, there is, children always have energy.

But if you give them power that is disproportionate with energy. And if a child is given like a automatic machine gun, hey, that’s dangerous. The child may not intend to harm anyone, but they don’t have the maturity to understand. And therefore, their power at that age with him was not wise. So they took away the power from him.

And they said that when somebody reminds you of this power for a cause bigger than yourself, then you will remember. Then you will come back, and you’ll gain this power back. So Jambavan started glorifying. And as you started glorifying raha glorifying Hanuman, slowly but surely, what happened? Hanuman’s memory started coming.

And as his memory started coming, his his confidence started coming back, and his confidence started manifesting in terms of his increased physical size. Jambavan was speaking to him, and Hanuman and Jambavan were the same height. But as Jambavan started glorifying Hanuman, Hanuman started becoming bigger and bigger and bigger. And Jammu became more and more jubilant. See, Hanuman becomes bigger and bigger.

Like, you’re talking with someone and you look up. Hey. What happened? So he started becoming bigger and bigger and bigger. And then Hanuman spoke in a thunderous voice.

He said, yes. I will jump across the ocean. I will find Sita, and I’ll come back. And Hanuman ran and leaped up to a nearby small hill, and then he poised, and he leaped into the sky. As he leaped into the sky, the by the pressure the hill just moved back, and trees flew out of the hill.

The pressure was so great. And Hanuman leaped into the sky. And as Hanuman marched like a missile through the sky, He flew like that. All the monkeys cheered. The monkeys, as they’re fly as they saw Hanuman flying, says, our best wishes and prayers for your well-being.

And he said, we can’t help you. We can’t be there with you, but we will be praying for you. And Angad said, and all of us will perform tapasya to give the credits of that pay austerity to you. What are the austerity? They said they will stand in yogic posture on one foot with their hands upraised praying like asana.

They said they will stand like this for as long as you back, as long as you’re away. When you come back, till that time you’ll be performing this austerity. So they couldn’t be the lead player, but that doesn’t mean that they said, okay. You do everything. We’ll relax.

They were in their own way offering their good wishes, the the results of their mystic mystic austerities to Hanuman. So Hanuman, he later on so Hanuman the whole story of Hanuman going to Lanka and finding Sita is itself a big adventure. But without going into the specifics of that, we’ll focus on the team spirit. So now when Hanuman comes back, he tells his what he has achieved to paint as alone going into the enemy kingdom. And not only finding Sita, he finds Sita, and then he decides that let me do some more service.

So he decides he wants to give a warning to Ravana and he also decides that let me do some reconnaissance to find out how what the military formations in Lanka are and thus he starts disrupting the garden in which Sita is there. And then he’s able to finally go before Lanka before Lanka, as king Ravana give him a stern warning, and then he sets half of Lanka on fire. And he comes back. Now when he comes back, at that time, he’s just roaring in joy, in exaltation. He’s flying back, and the Manaras are waiting for him.

They hear him before they see him. And they’re all jubilant. But just by the sound, they you know, if somebody is speaking itself in a very cheerful tone. So wherever they’ve gone, it was even successful. So they become happiest by hearing that.

And then Anubhrant descends, and they all surrounding him and tells his whole story. And he says, when they hear finally how what all he has done, they’re stunned. They’re delighted. But when they hear that Sita has only had 2 months remaining, Ravan has given her, 1 year’s period. He says, if you don’t give yourself to me, then I will I’m going to take you.

He says, I’m going to have you. If you don’t give yourself to me, then I will have my rakshis cook you, and you’ll be my breakfast. So he is a he’s a demon. He’s a rakshis. He’s a cannibal.

When they hear Teshita is in great danger, the Vanara say, oh, no. We need to go back immediately. And they all rush back. Now when they rush back, at that time, they’re also delighted that when they return to Sugriva many incidents in between or a few incidents in between but they return to Sugriva it is Sugriva who is told Angad tells we have found Sita we got information and Angad is so delighted. So we so it’s Angad who gives the first information because he’s the team leader.

But then when they say, let’s go to Ram. And then Ram tells, Ram asked, what happened? And then Hanuman tells the whole story. And, when Hanuman tells the whole story, Ram is astonished and distressed to hear about Sita being afflicted, and then again delighted to hear about Anuman’s chastising and burning Lanka. And finally, when, Anuram, when Anuram completed the whole story, Ram says that, oh, Hanuman, now you have done such an extraordinary service for me.

What can I offer you in return? He says, I have nothing. I am in the forest, have nothing. Therefore, he says, I will offer you myself. And he invites you.

Embrace. And Hanuman many of you may see this picture of Ram embracing Hanuman. So there, when Hanuman receives that embrace. If Hanuman is embraced, but through that, all the Manas are also blessed. Hanuman does the outstanding service, but ultimately, they’re all successful.

And when Ram embraces Anuman, it is for Anuman, that is the perfection of his life, to be and to be blessed by the Lord in that way. Ashri Vaishna commentator on the Ramayana says that actually that Ram is the same as Narayan, and on Narayan, his body, Lakshmi, resides. So when Hanuman embraces sorry, Hanuman is embraced by Narayan, and then that Narayan, who is the supreme wealth in the universe, who is adorned by the source of all the wealth in the universe, by the goddess of fortune, That lord, he embraces him. That means that actually Hanuman becomes supreme enriched by the tongue. Hanuman gets the supreme wealth because the ultimate attraction in the world is the all attractive supreme.

And that we want to get attracted to the supreme, but if somebody does a service, by which the supreme becomes attracted, there is no greater attainment than that. And that is the culmination. So this is the mission on which this team had gone is a stupendous success. For all of this, not only Sita found, not only is Ravan born, not only is Ravan given a demonstration of Ramis power, but also those who have gone on this mission, especially Hanuman, who has been spectacularly successful, heis personally and profoundly blessed by Ram. So this is the success of this team.

You could say it’s a team of monkeys, but it’s a team of those who are devoted to Ram. And they are not ordinary monkeys. They are great devotees, although they are manana bodies, but they work together, achieve this success in the service of Ram. So to summarize, I spoke on this team of teamwork in the Ramay, started by talking about how every team requires a hierarchy. No.

We live in an age of egalitarianism where we like equality. But to do anything in life, some people are better to do doing it than others. So, if a higher functioning hierarchy is formed then those who are good at it are best to best positioned at the top of that hierarchy. So, when any hierarchy is there, a team involves equality because every member is there in the team and every member is to be valued. But at the same time, for the team to take a particular task, there has to be a hierarchy.

So, how that hierarchy is used to serve the purpose that is what we discussed. So, I talked about there are there may be how Hanuman emerges a natural leader. So, there is appointed leader and there is an emergent leader. So the appointed leader is Angad because he is the royal prince. But although he is young, he tries his best to lead the team.

And he discussed about how the hierarchy is formed based on any purpose other than competence. And then it often becomes exploitative. It can become tyrannical. But if competence is not recognized and hierarchy is disjected because of that, then we will have chaos. We can even have disaster.

We can’t have equality between the pilot and the passengers. The plane will crash then. The pilot is is the lead over there. So I talked about how the left and the right need to be in dialogue. The left wants to flatten hierarchies because hierarchy, they say, becomes exploitative.

The right wants to maintain hierarchy because hierarchy leads to productivity. It gets things done. So now sometimes the hierarchy is exploitative and the left is right and things to be adjusted. And sometimes the right is right, and, hierarchy has to be maintained if we have to get things done. So, it s only when there s a discussion that things can move forward.

And then I talked about the first challenge was that when they were starving, they came into the they went into the cave where, Anumahan emerged as a natural leader by his speaking ability. So he ensured that the Anaras didn’t pounce on the fruits when they saw it. He waited and pleased so Emperor Bha with his words and then they were able to eat without any harm. And then because of the mystic arrangement of the cave, they couldn’t come out. Then Hanuman persuaded Prayampraba for the sincerity of his purpose and then she not only took them out but brought them out further south, closer to their goal.

So there both temptation and tribulation can be obstacles on the spiritual path, on any path we are pursuing. Then we need to persevere through both. And Hanuman leads them both through that leads them through both of these. Then eventually searching and they can t find and they become discouraged. The month is over.

So Angad especially is his first assignment and he s he has failed so he becomes demoralised. He starts casting aspersions on Sugriva. And he has residual resentment because his father has been killed because of Sugriva. So, at that time Hanuman doesn’t openly threaten or criticise Sugri. How dare you?

Sorry. He criticise Angadha. He say. He doesn’t say how dare you speak like this about Sugri. But he tries to gently persuade Angadha.

There’s a problem, and Angaida is so disheartened that he says that I’m going to fast to death. And, Anuman is remembering the Lord, trying to, resolve the issue at that time. Help comes in an unexpected way in the form of a bigger problem. So, if we men if sometimes we are not going to do a service, but if we maintain our service attitude, Krishna will give us a way ahead. So, circumstantially, Sampati comes over there, and Andhada speaks, oh, our fate is going to be like jitter and that’s how the Sampati reveals his identity, relationship with and Sampati reveals where Sita is across Lanka.

So rather than losing hope when things are not working out, If you just keep doing what we can, Krishna can open doors if you just maintain the service attitude. And then we talk about how the vanaras couldn’t actually jump across. Although they were instructed by the lord, although they were devoted, although they were eager to serve, but still sincerity is not always a substitute for ability. They acul humility means to acknowledge one’s inability. They acknowledge it, and then they couldn’t move ahead, and then they allowed.

Then that’s how the focus shifted to Hanuman, and Hanuman was reminded by Jambavan. And that’s how Hanuman came into his own, assumed a large form, and jumped across Lanka. And then eventually, when Hanuman came back and revealed the whole story to Ram, Ram blessed him by his personal embrace. And he who is the supreme shelterer, the supreme treasure of the universe, gave himself to Hanuman. And, thus, their mission was supremely successful.

So, thank you very much. Hare Krishna. So any questions? Sometimes in Krishna consciousness we might find ourselves in a position of leadership in a field that we don’t feel ourselves confident or we don’t feel ourselves, good at? So what do you so if we are made leaders in a field where we are not com good at, what do we do?

Yeah. It’s good to admit our inability but sometimes, it’s like we don’t have an option between a good choice and a bad choice. The only option is between a bad choice and the worst choice. So what do you do at that time? So if many times we have a severe shortage of devotees And in the situation, we might be the only person available, you know, Prabhupad.

When the, when the Juhu land controversy was going on at that time he the devotees were going to being threatened by the person who was surrendering the land, Mr. N and the devotees were getting, intimidated by him. So they were thinking that he said that they’re thinking of just cancelling the whole contract. And Prabhupada Prabhupada was not a person who talked much on phone. So Prabhupada sent Vishakha Matanjai at that time.

He said, you go. And Prabhupada wrote a strongly worded worded letter, and he said that you go and personally deliver this. So he did that, but by that time it was too late. And the the devotees already cancelled the deal. Prabhupada was furious.

He says, who gave who told you to cancel the deal? Why did you do that? At that time, the devotees some of the devotees who were involved in their whole they come so disheartened. So they said, Prabhupad, we resign. Prabhupad said, why are you resign?

He said, I don’t want you to resign. He says, you made a mistake, but that doesn’t mean I don’t want you to do your service. So Prabhupada, was angry with them for the mistake that they had committed, but that does not mean that he didn’t have trust in, trust in them or he didnit want them to be leaders. So now at that time if you see it was very difficult for them. They were probably in their twenties and they were in a foreign land.

And Indians always think that anybody from the west has a lot of money. In fact, Indians think that if Indians have gone to the west, they also want a lot of money. Now it may be true, it may not be true. The devotee is they were they were being taken for a ride and they were you could say that they were not the most competent people for that, but there was no one else. They had to take up the leadership and they did that.

And, we see the Krishna consciousness movement as quite vibrant in India also now. So if we have to take up a service which we are not good at, then we can express our inability, express our, our feeling of inadequacy for that service. But if we are told to do that, then we move we do our best and move on. And sometimes we may need more regular guidance than somehow somebody who is expert. Sometimes if you have to take our services which you are not good at, we might not take it in a big way.

We can start in a small way so that even if something’s go wrong, it’s not not a big negative result. It’s, there are different contexts. If it’s a service where nobody is there and the service has to be done, then we move forward and do it. But usually those are services which are often things which we do learn. The services which we have are not life and death situations.

It’s not like if we are going to war, if we don’t know a weapon, we will be killed. It’s not literally like that. So, if we can’t do something, we learn from it and we either do it ourselves or maybe Krishna will help somebody else after some time. We see how we move on. Thank you.

Any other questions? Yes, miss? Yes, ma’am. How would you approach if someone is trying to sort of push Yeah. That’s true.

If somebody is trying to push themselves up in the position. So it happens sometimes that some devotes some people in general they are a bit too self promotional. So it’s always good to give people benefit of doubt. That means rather than thinking that this self promotion is because of ego, we could say that they just have a service attitude and they they want to do more service and if they have more position, they can do more service. So we don’t wanna be naive but we don’t have to be hypercritical also.

So if that is not if their self promotion is not really hurting anyone or harming anyone, then we will just give them a benefit of doubt. Maybe they just want to serve more. And if they’re given more more facility, they can do more service. That’s what their longing is. That’s it if, what they’re doing is not hurting anyone.

Just that they keep speaking that. And and everybody also, learns this is how this person is, and he’ll live with that. But sometimes in trying to promote oneself, people start pulling others down. Oh, he doesn’t know how to do it. I can do it better.

She doesn’t know how to do it. I’ll do it much better. And then they start pointing out all this wrong. This is wrong. That is wrong.

That is wrong. Then we have to be a little careful about it. We don’t want to start gossip and backbiting and criticism. You know, gossip, when does it happen? It happens when we hear something we like about someone we don’t like.

When we hear something we like about someone we don’t like. Oh, really? I wanna tell everyone about this now. It becomes like that. So we don’t want to have that kind of backbiting starting in our moment.

So if they are pulling if they are pushing themselves up, that’s just we can give them the benefit of doubt. But in pushing themselves up, they start pulling someone else down, then they may have to take a stand over there. Right? They are doing, don’t criticize others. And sometimes some people just have to learn by experience They push themselves up, they try to do some service which they they are not qualified for the thought, they are not qualified for, but they think they are qualified for, and then they they crash, and then they learn.

So, sometimes it might just be that somebody doesn’t know a ticket. So we don’t have to be self promotional like it is in the outside world. Then if we just tell them as devotees, you know, we don’t promote ourselves like that. Today morning Chaitanya Chaitanya Mahaprabhu actually places himself as a student of his followers. So in devotional service there are times when we can talk about our qualification but there are times we can also talk about our lack of qualification.

But it is mostly that qualifies us. So, sometimes if we help people to understand the devotional etiquette that also helps them to choose better. Okay? Thank you. So thank you very much.

Thankyou

The post Teamwork in Ramayana 2 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Mandodari s lament after Ravana s death 1 – Are some people incorrigible?
→ The Spiritual Scientist


Hey, Krishna. Hi. It’s a big thrill to be here amongst all of you today. And recently, I was So it was a specific movie trailer. And then I saw the trailer, and I said that after that trailer, my clap off me with 90 climax.

So after Adi Shankh, something which is just there with us? It can’t be changed? Or is it changeable? And, in this section, I’m going to talk about and today I’m in scientific, wearing clothes to the person who was, extremely thin. So now but she stayed by him and on the words that she speaks, it reveals what she thinks about him is living with someone and you know that person is in you.

And then hope springs eternal into an art. We hope that that person will change And we keep trying. So Manodari kept trying it and ultimately, when Rama had skill, could say her machine is unsuccessful. But at that time, how does she see this? So this was it was you did not understand the power of Sita.

And, see, this is the you are fortunate. You are greatly fortunate, but you didn’t understand the power of Sita. Has become a destination for the animals to eat and your soul is going to go to them. So in one sense, it’s a very distressed and gloomy over now. Now everything is lost.

Whatever she had lived for, it’s gone. But even in these verses, her wisdom comes out. And what was it that drove her on? Three sons through her. So Indrajeet, Athikara, and then there is I just Akshay.

Now Akshay is killed by Anima. He also knows that because of the curse, I cannot, force the virus. Of course, Sita doesn’t know that. And he basically adopts And then finally, Sita says that I will not even save these files because I met my husband with Ram, and as long as Ram is exactly seeing the forest, I’ll also see the forest. So she also she stays in the forest.

And at that time also sees that, you know, unless you unless she gives a consent to. So take a strong stand over there. So there are times when we have 2 options. And the first option is bad and the other option is worse. So there there the good and bad option is easy to choose, really easily.

But the only option that is bad is a worse option. And what do you do at that time? So Mandudari, she keeps trying to at least minimize. And she gives advice, but he never listens to it. So basically, this is the background.

And here what she said in this verse is was his. Now you’re doing this. So we can say that Ravan made the just desserts of his actions. But could he have chosen differently? In the Sunday class, I think about how, you know, Ravan had 10 different people gave him advice.

So he had 10 heads, and each of those 10 advisers he rejected, then he lost 1 by 1 all the heads. You know, the fire of your lust for Sita has now burned everyone. He says it has now burned your own son, so I can live no more. In the fire that will cremate my son, let it be balanced. Is how many more people with you, burn in this fire of yours?

Just give her up. It never happens. So if now when somebody is so obstinate, they’re not able to not change they’re not able to change at all. And you may say that some people are just So broadly speaking, if we see there are 2 broad theories of human nature. Because they remain, but we talk too broad.

So there is the Judeo Christian And everybody is remaining sin. Now this theory is opposed by communism. Communism is a whole body of thought. Socialism is there. But the whole they say that actually people are immediately good.

It is society that makes them bad. And their solution is, so the Christian solution is that it’s only god’s grace which can save us from our innate simple words. Whereas the, the communist theory is that it is what we need is social engineering. The evidence, if somebody is behaving badly, it’s because society treated them out. And change the social conditions, give them better conditions and then they will start living.

So now if we ask the general cross section of people, adults, surveying companies and colleges, No. No? Okay. Are some people immediately bad? Is it with all those nobody says are people immediately bad?

Nobody says let’s do that. But as soon as you say are some people mentally bad, how some people make you mad. Almost everybody will raise a bat. There’s some people getting mad. And you can think about psychopaths, you can think about sociopaths, you can think about terrorists.

Now the people were horrible. So I was that one person who a Jew who was the committed voting. So he was telling me that his grandfather, he was a part of the he was a part of all those people who were killed in when in Nazi Germany, he had Hitler Hitler was had the background, killed everyone. Jewish. But he had them harmed not normally the rope.

He hung them with, like, plastic bags. And what happened with plastic plastic the rope was wet. It kept cutting their neck for 11 days. So they have hung for 11 days in mortal pain. And so the you could say to produce suffering simply for the purpose of producing suffering.

So basically, when we see the way most of us, we live in a very sheltered world. So, of course, the world is not a place of shelter in the sense that everybody gets struggle. But to have somebody target us, that just target us for no reason except the cause of ignorance. That can actually shake your shake one’s feet in the very, very nature being that means, why do I exist? Why do women exist?

But even a little encounter with real life will expose us to people who are actually many tabular I do. We can’t we can’t make sense of what is happening with it. So basically, so these two theories are there. That the Christian theory that people are immediately bad. Anybody is a part of god.

In the sense, they’re not not really part of god. That’s how we are seeing it. They’re very bad. Everybody’s very damaged in god. But still, although we have made the image, but we are covered over by this.

But the problem with the communist worldview is that where it says that there is nothing innate about people. It is situations that make them aware. Then you’ll see that 2 people may go to the same situations, but they may respond entirely differently. 2 people may be born in poverty, they may be born in they may go through abuse. And still now one grows up to grows up to become a very bitter and hateful person, and the other grows up and grows beyond that chip, beyond what they’re told.

So neither theory is actually all, is supported by evidence. That inside us is the soul and that’s the body. So there’s the mind. And beyond that is the body. So when we talk about inside others, there is immediateness.

So what are we referring to by the need? So at the level of the soul, because every soul is a part of God. Because every soul is a part of God, so we can say we all have an innate potential for I’ll explain why this word potential. But then beyond that, there’s another level of lateness like the mind. And the mind carries impressions from the past.

And because of these impressions from the past, they also affect how we behave. And if those impressions from the past are bad, The 16th chapter that Krishna decide the divine and demoniac nature. Where now the what analysis is profoundly contemporary and profoundly scary For example, that that is boy. So this is the name, the those who are born with demoniac nature have these qualities. Arrogance, ignorance, ignorance, anger, whatever.

And like that is the best of it, the divine qualities. So now, you know, what does this mean? If it if you’re born with it, then it become innate, isn’t it? Then is it changing? So, of course, if it were if we were just programmed machines, then we couldn’t cheat, then Krishna’s instructions That some people from their past bring impressions which will make them even.

And some people may have impressions which make them good. So I have to listen to words over here. See, we all have a potential for good, but we also have a propensity for evil. And the potential for good has to struggle against the propensity for evil, and only then become manifest. So it’s so by default, is it that people people are good at it, act in good ways?

Maybe. Most likely not. Most likely not. Because bad things happen to everyone. Now we may be good people, but a bad thing sample, it’ll take you start feeling bad thing and return to those people.

And the dark side in us comes out. So there is a potential for goodness within us, but there’s also a propensity for bliss. And the essential human struggle is for the potential for goodness to manifest in spite of the propensity for voice. And do we extend it take on this struggle to that extent the confidence will manifest? But e a somebody doesn’t take up this struggle.

Raghavan’s Mahabharata, and how he is able to, how he does how he face the good watch. But essentially so we all immediately even? Yes. In the sense that some people may have very immediate negative consciousness. It may be lust.

It may be anger. It may be dream. It may envy. Whatever it is. And that you might need them behave in terrible ways.

So we cannot deny the set of past impressions, but we can also see beyond those past impressions. So the the way we reconcile the two inside, actually, like I said, the problem with the Christian worldview that if people are immediately evil, then why have some people good? Well, some people are good because the impressions within them may not be bad. And when we struggle and succeed, that’s how we fulfill the purpose of human life. So how does struggle can be done successfully?

I’ll talk about it in the Sunday slides. As long as you know, you can have few questions. I spoke on this topic of, are people in eating good or in eating bad? I started by talking to how she had a close view. That’s the her view of ramams.

Choice. She was already there in that situation. So she kept minimizing the especially egregious choices that That at the level of the soul, everybody has a potential for goodness. But at the level of the mind, everybody has different impressions and you have a propensity for once. And essential human struggle is for the potential for goodness to struggle beyond and rise beyond the propensity for wise.

So when we learn to do that, then we can confirm about this for human life. Any questions or comments? Yes. Thank you, sir. Thank you for, missing that.

My question relates to, you know, when we deal with people mostly in that circle, So how do you see such people? That’s my first part of the question. The second part is the same as the difference. We also, at least, have also sometimes, you know, closely seen and some colleagues or people who have been dealing very closely for many, many years So what that means is that when we take scripture, now scripture helps us to make sense of the world. But then, the world is very complicated.

Scriptures also. We just take one point from scripture and impose it on all of the world. And it doesn’t work like that. So let’s get the basics. Right?

Actions have consequences. So if somebody is doing something wrong right now, it is going to have some results. But if somebody is presently manifesting some virtues mhmm. Now one of the I was in America and there’s one, Canadian intellectual who’s taken the world by storm currently. He’s he’s he’s quite conservative.

He accepts the existence of actually, accepts the existence of god and draws from biblical teachings. But his diet is only wheat. So but he’s actually bringing a lot of people to Satwa and bringing people a lot of look, towards spirituality. So now, obviously, the particular diet he’s having, we wouldn’t recommend that. Forget my It could be that somebody was what were was what in the garden and someone was putting over.

There could be other possible. Unless you can say that a is the only cause of it. Cannot say that just when b is present, he has to be. So a will lead to b. So, basically, causal connections are subtle.

It’s not just a to b. So, if b then b. That it doesn’t work like this. So what the point I’m making is here that if some people are behaving a particular way right now, that is that is it have an effect on their consciousness. But it may not necessarily have an immediate effect.

Because, say, as you’re writing, said that if somebody has been living in maybe in the past, we will. Or maybe this life, we’re living life in, but that particular activity is very much in. So there are certain behaviors which affect us, but how much what will affect will depend on the overall way a person’s think. So we, so we don’t minimize or deny the consequences of certain wrong actions. But, essentially, the point is that there’s a Brahmin with the crowd of this dramatical prowess.

And then he some bird angers him and just goes he just to learn the bird, the bird dies. And then he try and, he goes to a house for backgrounds and the, lady doesn’t give arms in to and she says, you know, I’m not a good girl. He says, oh, why? But we have used philosophy as a tool for understanding reality. And reality is complex, philosophy is also complex.

And how all the 2 work together? It is it is not easy to understand that. And that is actually I would say that’s a, in English, there is a word ideological hobby horse. That means give some oversimplified explanation for some action. But reality is complex.

And that doesn’t mean philosophy can’t explain our our philosophy can’t explain particular reality, but So he had human so basically, I said, we have become a natural skill that that orientation towards spirituality will not be lost. So there are both laws that apply. So sometimes multiple factors may be working and we cannot, we cannot reduce reality to a over simplified model where based on one parameter we judge everything. So they will continue. That means it’s manifest.

So if that is happening, we have to keep a distance from them. So sometimes the devotees, they But that evil that evil is not yet complete because that’s a very important thing. But and now there’s no exceptional piece. Where if some devotees start thinking that what they are looking is right, it is not that the argument stops. Rather, discussion stops, bloodshed happens.

So if if there there will be differences, like I said, there will be differences.

The post Mandodari s lament after Ravana s death 1 – Are some people incorrigible? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Hanuman s journey through the cave – Persevering through life s obstacles – Hindi
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. Today, I will discuss, based on the Ramayana, how adversities in our lives can actually present opportunities. How to see adversities positively. The challenges we face in life always have a purpose. Whenever we encounter a situation, at some point in everyone’s life, problems arise. And in reality, we don’t hate problems as much as we hate meaningless problems.

For example, imagine you are walking on a path, and a thorn pricks your foot. You feel angry, questioning why the thorn was there or why you didn’t pay attention. On the other hand, consider going to a hospital where a doctor gives you an injection. Here, too, you feel pain, but the context is different. When a thorn pricks us, it seems meaningless, but when the injection hurts, we know it has a purpose. That’s why not only do we accept the injection, but we even pay the doctor who gives it to us.

Nobody likes pain, but if the pain has a meaning or purpose, we are willing to accept it. Similarly, the problems in our lives are easier to face when we understand their purpose.

In the Ramayana, when Lord Ram sent the Vanar (monkey) messengers on a mission to find Sita, they encountered numerous challenges. In life, many of our problems are beyond our control. For example, while driving here this morning, there was a lot of traffic, which caused delays. But what can we do about traffic? It’s beyond our control. Similarly, some challenges in life are beyond our influence.

The Ramayana teaches us that even in such situations, if we see a higher purpose or learn something from the challenges, we can handle them better.

Now, as mentioned in the Ramayana, the term “Vanar Doot Prashak Ram” refers to the messengers of Lord Ram. “Prashak” means “to send.” So, when I recite this name, please repeat it after me:

Vanar Doot Prashak Ram, Doot Prashak Ram.

Thus, when Lord Ram sent the Vanar messengers, they faced difficulties on their journey, much like the challenges we face in our lives.

But imagine there are two paths, and we choose one thinking it will have less traffic. If that very path ends up being more congested, what happens then? In such a case, we hold ourselves responsible for the problem, and this leads to even more frustration.

So, there are two types of problems: some are beyond our control, and others arise due to our own wrong decisions. When faced with problems, what do we do?

Now, as we were coming through traffic, the Vanaras (monkey warriors) were walking through vast areas, traveling in all directions from Kishkindha to search for Sita. It was known that Ravana had taken Sita to the south, so the main search party headed in that direction.

The group going south was led by Angad, and it included Hanuman and Jambavan as the key members. Although Jambavan was much older and Hanuman was highly experienced, Angad, being a young prince and the son of Bali, was made the leader.

As they traveled south, they kept searching for a long time but found no clue of Sita. They wandered into dense forests and barren regions where there was neither food nor water. Exhausted and struggling, they reached a point where they saw a mountain in the distance. They debated whether to continue beyond the mountain or to stop there.

Sugriva had given them a strict instruction: return within a month, whether they succeeded or not. Searching for Sita could take a lifetime, but they had been given a time limit. They were determined to give their best efforts, but as the end of the month approached, they were faced with hunger and thirst.

At this critical moment, they noticed birds flying out of a cave on the mountain, and the feathers of these birds were wet. This led them to believe there might be water inside the cave. They decided to investigate.

The cave was pitch dark, and nothing was visible. They discussed how to proceed safely. Finally, they came up with a plan: each Vanara would hold onto the next one, forming a chain, and they would all enter the cave together. Leading the group was Hanuman, who took the first step into the darkness.

As they continued to move forward through the cave, they ventured deeper and deeper, surrounded only by darkness. Often, when we embark on a path or make a decision, we set out with conviction, but when the desired outcome doesn’t materialize, doubts creep in. We begin questioning ourselves: “Should I continue? Should I have chosen differently?”

Our mind keeps second-guessing us. Thoughts arise like, “Maybe I shouldn’t have done this.” Some people are so confused that they joke, “I was confused earlier, but now I’m not sure if I’m still confused or not.”

This reflects how, even in our confusion, we can become confused. The mind can be likened to a dark cave. For instance, some people resolve, “I will not get angry anymore.” But when anger arises, they respond defensively: “I’m not angry!” Then they get angry about the fact that they’re angry.

Similarly, some resolve, “I won’t worry anymore. I will trust in God and let go of anxiety.” Yet, when worry returns, they begin to worry about their worrying: “Why am I anxious? Does this mean I don’t have faith in God?”

Our mind is like this—a maze or even a black hole, as modern science might describe it. It traps us in cycles of thoughts, making it hard to discern what is inside, what is outside, or even where we stand.

As the Vanaras debated whether to go deeper into the cave, Hanuman kept moving forward. He had unwavering determination. They hadn’t eaten or drunk anything for a long time, and fatigue weighed heavily on them. Despite this, they resolved to keep going.

Hanuman, leading the group, silently prayed to Lord Ram and sought guidance, saying, “Lord, we are here in Your service. Please guide us. Show us the right path.”

In the Ramayana, it is said that progress is often accompanied by obstacles, but these obstacles are destroyed through devotion and faith in Lord Ram. It is through His grace that even the greatest challenges can be overcome.

This is beautifully encapsulated in the chant:
“Tadanshak Rama, Nadwansak Rama.”
This means: the one who destroys obstacles is Lord Ram. Their journey, guided by this faith, continued despite all challenges.

As they kept moving forward, there was only darkness, endless darkness. Sometimes in life, we also face moments like this, where it feels like there is no light, no hope, no way out. It seems as though the situation is so overwhelming that nothing can be done. Some of you might have experienced such moments in your lives—times when you felt utterly helpless, as though everything was unbearable, and you could do nothing to change it.

Has anyone here ever felt this way? Perhaps not everyone, but for those who haven’t raised their hands, such moments may come someday. I don’t wish it upon anyone, but this is the nature of material life. We all face challenges, and while some problems seem manageable, there are times when we feel utterly powerless. During such times, hopelessness takes over, and we lose the will to act.

I have a friend in America who works as a mental health counselor, particularly focusing on suicide prevention. He told me about a young girl who came to him and said, “Last night, I was about to end my life.” She was deeply troubled, and her situation was so dire that she saw no other option.

When someone is in such a state, it’s important to tread very carefully. Even in spiritual practices, mental struggles persist. For instance, when devotees meet each other, they humbly offer greetings like, “Please accept my humble obeisances.” But sometimes, when someone is deeply depressed, their despair can even come through in their words. My friend shared an incident where a devotee once wrote to another, saying, “Please accept my final obeisances.”

This shows how deeply sadness can impact someone. It’s essential to handle such situations with utmost care and compassion.

When my friend spoke to the young girl, he gently asked her, “You were about to end your life last night. What stopped you?”

Her answer was profound, and it’s something that teaches us all a lesson.

Because even in the darkest times, there might still be a reason to live, a spark of hope. If that reason can be nurtured and encouraged, it can bring light back into someone’s life. My friend told me that the girl responded, “I was too depressed to commit suicide.” She was so drained and overwhelmed that she didn’t even have the energy or will to go through with it.

This illustrates how the mind works—it can entangle us so deeply that we feel completely trapped. In such moments, when it feels like we can do absolutely nothing, we need to challenge our own minds. How do we challenge it? By asking ourselves, “Is everything in my life truly so bad that I can do nothing? If I can’t make the situation better, can I make it worse?”

This question shifts our perspective. Of course, the answer is, “Yes, I can make things worse.” Even in the worst situations, we still have the power to make poor choices and worsen our condition. For example, imagine someone has a fractured leg. They might feel helpless because they had many plans, but now the doctor has ordered them to stay in bed for six weeks. Yet, while lying in bed, they could still make the situation worse—they could pick up a hammer and fracture their other leg!

This thought experiment has a purpose: it shows us that if we have the ability to worsen a bad situation, we also have the ability to make it better. We are not as powerless as we think. And if we take shelter in God, even if we cannot immediately change our circumstances, we can still endure them with strength and hope.

So what should we do when facing such challenging situations? Don’t think too far ahead. For instance, if a family member is diagnosed with a serious illness, or you lose your job, or a close relationship is falling apart, it’s easy to worry about what life will look like five or ten years from now. But that’s not the time to think so far ahead. There are too many uncertainties and variables in the future.

Instead, focus on the present moment. Take one step at a time. Narrow your focus to what you can control right now. It’s like being handed a large coconut or a watermelon and being told to eat it whole. You can’t! What do you do instead? You break it into smaller pieces.

In the same way, when life hands you overwhelming challenges, break them down into smaller, manageable steps. Take one small action at a time, and gradually, you’ll find the strength to move forward.

So, when we face difficult situations, what should we do? The question to ask ourselves is: “Can I perform at my best for just one day?” And if even one day feels overwhelming, break it down further: “Can I perform at my best for the next one hour?”

If we hold this thought, we can say, “I can do it for one hour.” Even if I am feeling angry, frustrated, depressed, or anxious, I can still try to focus and work well for just one hour. Whether it’s interacting with someone or completing a task, I can give my best for one hour.

What happens then? By performing well for that one hour, we’ve faced the situation for that duration. Afterward, we can express gratitude to God, saying, “Thank You, I managed to live through this one hour without worsening anything.” This gives us encouragement to keep going: “I did it for one hour, now I can do it for another hour.”

This is what happens in life too. For example, when the Vanaras (monkeys) were walking through darkness, they didn’t think about how vast the darkness was or how long it would take to reach the end. They simply took one step at a time, then another, and another.

The darkness in our lives is like a tunnel. It is not like a dark prison where we are permanently trapped. No bad time lasts forever. If we keep moving one step at a time, eventually, we’ll come out of that tunnel. It takes time, but during difficult circumstances, it’s important not to think too far ahead.

Just take one step forward, and then another. As the Bhagavad Gita teaches, when situations become overwhelming, we must endure them with patience. And how do we endure? Through a step-by-step approach. For one hour, for one day, ask yourself: “Can I endure this situation? Can I work well for this time?”

If we follow this approach, what happens? Just like the Vanaras kept moving forward, step by step, eventually, they began to see light. The dark times in our life are not a destination, they are a tunnel. It’s not a dark prison; it’s a passage through which we can move forward.

At times, some of the Vanaras said, “No, we can’t go any further. We’ve had enough; let’s go back.” But Hanuman Ji encouraged them, saying, “No, we’ve come this far. Keep going, step by step.”

And eventually, they saw light and realized it was coming from a beautiful palace inside the cave. There were gardens, flowers, fruits, and a grand palace awaiting them.

As for the Vanaras, well, they are Vanaras after all! The word Vanara has several meanings. One meaning is Van-Nara—humans who live in the forest. Another interpretation is Vaa-Nara, meaning “Are they humans?” because they look somewhat like humans but aren’t fully human. So, they’re not exactly monkeys.

This is a different species that combines certain human traits, some qualities of monkeys, and some qualities of apes. People who see these beings often wonder, “Are they really monkeys or humans?” That is why they are called Vanara. These Vanaras displayed behaviors similar to those of monkeys. For example, upon seeing fruits, they immediately exclaimed, “Let’s grab them and eat right away!” Their instinct was to consume without hesitation.

This behavior mirrors our own inclination to indulge immediately whenever pleasure is presented before us. We want it now. Once, two years ago, I was in the UK giving a lecture on Science and Spirituality at Cambridge University. While there, I visited the very tree under which Sir Isaac Newton famously sat, and legend has it that an apple fell—some say it hit him on the head. The tree is still preserved to this day and is considered a shrine by scientists who come there for inspiration.

Many people had seen apples fall before Newton, but he thought differently. Instead of simply eating the fruit or ignoring it, he asked, “Why did this apple fall?” From that simple observation, he developed the laws of gravity. Now, if a monkey had been in Newton’s place, it would have eaten the fruit, and the story would have ended there. But humans have a unique ability to delay immediate gratification for the sake of future progress.

This ability to trade the present for the future is one of the most remarkable traits of humanity. For instance, when students choose to focus on their studies instead of indulging in pleasures during their youth, they are sacrificing the present to secure a brighter future. Animals cannot make such sacrifices. Imagine a cat seeing a mouse on a day of fasting—will it think, “Oh, it’s a fasting day, I should not eat”? No, it won’t.

This capacity for self-restraint and planning is essential not only for material success but also for spiritual growth. We often have the opportunity to indulge in immediate pleasures, but when we choose to restrain ourselves, we pave the way for higher progress.

Returning to the story, when the Vanaras saw the abundance of fruits in the cave, they were ready to pounce and eat them. However, Hanuman Ji intervened, saying, “Stop! We must first find out whose place this is. We cannot simply eat without understanding where we are.” As they explored, they noticed a radiant figure and approached respectfully. It was a yogini named Swayamprabha.

Hanuman Ji, with great humility, asked her who she was, what she was doing in the cave, and how this magnificent palace came to be. Swayamprabha explained that the palace had been built by Mayasura, a brilliant architect of the asuras. Indra, the king of gods, had destroyed the palace in a battle, but Swayamprabha remained as its caretaker and devoted herself to penance.

The Vanaras were skeptical at first, wondering how one woman could protect such a grand palace. But Hanuman Ji realized that her spiritual powers were immense. He respectfully explained their mission to find Sita Mata and asked for food and water. Pleased by their humility, Swayamprabha granted them permission to eat and drink.

The Vanaras, tired and hungry, became jubilant and satisfied after their meal. Their physical strength was restored, and with it, their mental clarity. This is a reminder of the close connection between the body and mind—when physical needs are met, mental tranquility often follows.

Once refreshed, Hanuman Ji asked Swayamprabha how they could exit the cave, as it was designed in such a way that no one could leave once inside. Swayamprabha revealed that Indra had created this system to prevent anyone from misusing the palace’s resources. However, she assured them that she could guide them out using her divine powers, but only if they trusted her and kept their eyes closed. The Vanaras complied, and within moments, Swayamprabha used her powers to lead them out of the cave to the open skies, where they could hear the ocean waves.

This part of the Ramayana is not just historical but symbolic. The dark cave represents the material world, filled with illusions and attachments. The Upanishads describe two types of darkness: the first is where we are aware of our ignorance, and the second is where we are deluded into believing illusions as reality.

This story teaches us to rely on wisdom, humility, and self-restraint when navigating through the “darkness” of life, so we can move toward the “light” of higher truths. Just as Swayamprabha guided the Vanaras out of the cave, spiritual wisdom can guide us out of the illusions of the material world toward liberation.

When the light next to you goes off and another light turns on, where does it go? As you move forward, you see that all the lights around you are off, and the light in front is shining ahead. This means your attention is directed towards it. People go to the theater to watch movies because they want to enjoy the illusion without any distraction.

To experience this illusion of attachment, no person is needed; there should be no distractions. If only one light goes off and everything is dark, people would start wondering, “What’s happening? I need to go somewhere; where is the light, where can I go?” But when one light goes off and another light turns on, they sit for three hours in one place, wondering what happened.

In that situation, we may feel like we are in darkness, but it doesn’t feel like true darkness because we see something, and what we see is not the truth; it’s just an illusion. And if someone doesn’t understand the technique or technology behind it, they may perceive that illusion as truth.

In India, around 1950, the first movie based on the Ramayana was made. When the audience saw Lord Ram on the screen for the first time, they all got up from their seats and bowed to him. The culture at that time was such that people believed it was real, and they paid their respects to Ram. This wasn’t just in 1950, but even in the 1980s, when the Ramayana series was shown on television, people would often keep plates with them for performing the Aarti as soon as Lord Ram appeared.

So, what is happening here? The emotion of seeing Ram’s image and bowing to him reflects that people felt it was real, but if someone doesn’t know the technology behind it, they may mistake that illusion for reality. In the same way, in this material world, attachment can often make us believe in illusions as truth.

We are in darkness, we don’t know who we are, where we are going, or what the purpose of our life is. But we remain in darkness, and what we have is an artificial light, a material light.

We live in this material darkness, believing that we need to do this or that, go here or there. However, sometimes in our lives, real darkness strikes, and we no longer know what to do. This is similar to what happens in a movie like “Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham.” When there’s sorrow, it feels like true darkness, and then we must move forward. Eventually, happiness comes, and we continue moving forward.

Just like the monkeys in the Ramayana, when good things come, they pass away, and we think that a big problem has arrived. However, we realize that the problem is temporary, and we have to keep moving forward one step at a time. Eventually, the darkness will end. But sometimes when we go through a drought in life, that too can be a problem.

How can this be a problem? In two ways: One is when something is dried up in front of us, and we see something that could bring pleasure, we get so tempted that we forget right and wrong and chase after it. For example, when the monkeys saw the fruit, they immediately wanted to jump and eat it, but Hanuman Ji told them, “No, we must seek permission before eating it.”

In the material world, when we desire pleasure or happiness, we must acquire it according to dharma (righteousness). If we forget dharma and focus only on growth for the sake of growth, it becomes harmful, like cancer. Cancer, too, is growth but it is excessive and uncontrollable, and it destroys everything around it. Similarly, our desire for happiness, wealth, and position in society is not wrong, but if we forget dharma in this pursuit, it becomes destructive.

Lord Krishna says that desires are not bad in themselves, but they should be pursued in accordance with dharma. Hanuman Ji followed dharma by seeking permission before eating the fruit, and in the same way, we must follow dharma in everything we do.

When the monkeys were told they could not go outside, some might have thought, “Why go outside? There’s everything here, we can enjoy it here.” Sometimes in life, we feel content with what we have, but we must remember that the happiness of this material world is temporary. Just like being in an ocean, the calmness of the sea doesn’t last forever, waves and storms will come. So, while peace is important, we shouldn’t settle in it and forget that we need to move beyond this material world.

So, when the monkeys were told they could not go outside, they didn’t think to go outside because they were content with what was here. This is how we sometimes get lost in the pleasures of this world, forgetting the ultimate purpose of our life.

What is happening in today’s society? People are being tempted in many different ways. Nowadays, there is TV. There can be hundreds of channels on TV, but even with hundreds of channels, no one channel will give you lasting happiness.

You may get some entertainment, but after some time, you will get bored. We all want happiness, but as we mentioned at the beginning, we want meaningful happiness, not meaningless suffering, and we do not want meaningless happiness either. What does it mean to not want meaningless happiness? For example, if someone tells you that from tomorrow, you will have no financial responsibilities, no family obligations, and from morning to night, you can just sit and watch comedy on TV all day long, will we be happy?

Fine, one or two hours, okay, one day, fine. But will you feel that you’re achieving anything in life? Do we need to do something in life?

We want happiness, but what we need is meaningful happiness. Imagine watching comedy – is that real happiness? There are small children who sometimes come to a relative’s house, and to entertain them, we might tickle them. When we tickle them, they start laughing.

But is laughing from being tickled real happiness?

It’s a kind of happiness, but if that were the ultimate happiness, scientists could invent a machine that tickles us forever, and then we would be happy. Would anyone want that? No, that’s meaningless happiness.

So, we need meaningful happiness. What was the purpose of the monkeys in the Ramayana? Their purpose was to serve Lord Ram, and that’s why they didn’t get trapped in worldly pleasures. In the material world, even happiness can become a problem, because happiness can make us forget our values or even our spiritual lessons.

If we find happiness in life, we should acknowledge it as a blessing from God and continue progressing toward God. Just like Hanuman moved forward from the dark cave and the palace, and always served Lord Ram, we too should move forward in our lives, regardless of whether the circumstances are good or bad, and keep progressing toward God.

The ultimate purpose of life, the supreme goal, is that we are eternal souls, and God is the eternal supreme soul. When there is love, affection, and devotion between the two, that relationship is eternal, and in that relationship, eternal bliss exists. Through that connection, we can attain the eternal world, just as Hanuman ji, in his service, progressed.

Similarly, we also have the strength to sacrifice the present for the future, and with this strength, we can make our future bright. This sacrifice becomes even more meaningful when we do it in the spirit of spiritual progress, and then after enjoying the worldly pleasures, we can move toward the divine.

The monkeys did not indulge in pleasures when they saw fruits in the cave; instead, they asked for permission to take them. This is how we should approach the material world—enjoy it according to dharma, not merely for selfish reasons.

In life, when we face challenges, we need to keep moving forward one step at a time. Life may seem like a dark cave at times, but even when we encounter difficulties, we should keep progressing. The darkness is temporary, and we can reach the light if we keep moving forward, just like Hanuman reached the light after crossing the dark cave.

In life, when we face challenges, it’s essential to keep moving forward, step by step. If we remain focused on our values and our purpose, we will overcome difficulties. Like Hanuman did, we should keep our devotion to God at the forefront and face challenges with faith that God will guide us through.

Thank you. Hare Krishna.

“I like to see beautiful views. So, in devotion, seeing the beautiful form of God is also part of it. We can see that the things we like and the things in devotion have some coordination, they are related. So, doing those things will be comparatively easier for us. By doing those things, we can push our minds towards God more easily and bring about the changes needed in the mind.

For example, after wearing a Tulsi mala, we might feel we shouldn’t speak lies or say anything bad about others, but we may fear that we will fail and might feel like we shouldn’t wear the Tulsi mala at all. But fear is not a bad thing. If something harmful might happen, and we fear it, that is healthy fear. Fear of something bad happening is a good kind of fear. But if that fear stops us from doing something necessary, it is not a good thing.

What can we do in this case? We need to understand the purpose of the rules and standards given in the scriptures. Their purpose is to inspire us to rise and not discourage us. God resides in everyone’s heart, and God sees our intentions. If we have a pure intention but sometimes due to circumstances or past tendencies, we make mistakes, God doesn’t punish us for them. God sees our intentions, just like Sugriva didn’t intend to not follow Lord Ram’s instructions. But after living in the palace for a long time, he got distracted by luxury, and after a while, he forgot. Lord Ram didn’t punish him right away. He reminded him and gave him a chance to correct himself.

Sometimes, due to circumstances or the state of mind, we might get distracted from doing the right thing. In such situations, we need to stay in good company. Sugriva was reminded by Tara and Hanuman to stay focused. If we keep good association, even if we go off track, we will be reminded of the right path and come back to it.

We should not focus too much on what we should avoid but on what we should do. If we focus on doing the right thing, the negative things will naturally fade away. We need to focus on what is good and positive. Just like a ship’s anchor keeps it in place even when waves try to push it, our connection with God, through prayer and good deeds, will keep us safe from distractions and guide us in the right direction.

When we take shelter in God, He helps us in our progress. Just as a mother runs to catch her child when they are about to fall while learning to walk, God doesn’t enjoy punishing us when we make mistakes. His purpose is to lift us up when we fall and help us get back on the right path.

So, if we engage in positive activities with the right mindset, over time, the wrong habits will fade away. The key is to stay focused on God and keep progressing positively in our spiritual journey.

In modern life, many people confuse real life with the life shown in movies or entertainment. People sometimes expect real life to be the same as what they see in films. This creates unrealistic expectations, especially in relationships. We may expect things from our relationships that are impossible to fulfill. I have a friend who is a marriage counselor in America. He was telling me that there are two types of couples he has seen.”

This is the continuation of the story or text, and it appears to focus on understanding spiritual life, relationships, and how we should engage in positive, purposeful actions aligned with God’s will.

What happens is that when two people are living together, disagreements are inevitable. But in today’s life, due to imagination, expectations can rise. And when expectations are not met, we begin to question: “What’s the point of this relationship? Why should we continue? What should I do about this?”

However, it’s not like that. All of us have shortcomings in our lives. We are all moving forward with our imperfections. So, having expectations is not wrong, but being attached to them is. What’s the difference? In any relationship, if I do something for you, it’s natural to expect something in return.

For example, if parents are giving good education and facilities to their children, they naturally expect that the children will study well and lead a good career. But sometimes, there may be other reasons why a child doesn’t do as expected. Parents’ expectations are natural, but they shouldn’t be attached to the fulfillment of those expectations.

What if the other person is not meeting our expectations? Then, we might ask, “What’s the point of this relationship?” If we are not holding on to expectations, what happens? We shouldn’t depend on the fulfillment of our expectations to validate a relationship. If the expectations are not met, we can still maintain a good relationship at a distance.

For example, when people talk in different parts of the world, they might have different personal space norms. In some cultures, people stand further apart when talking, while in others, they stand closer. This difference in proximity is not wrong; it’s based on different cultural norms.

Similarly, if we are feeling disappointed because our expectations in a relationship aren’t being met, we need to understand that the relationship might not be as close as we expect. That doesn’t mean we should end it, but rather we can accept the relationship as it is, and our needs might be fulfilled elsewhere.

Sometimes, relationships are horizontal (in this world), and others are vertical (with God). God is our ultimate parent and protector. If our needs aren’t met in relationships here, we should recognize that those needs may be fulfilled through God. The love we receive from others is actually God’s love working through them.

So, if we don’t get love from someone, we should not feel disappointed. We should understand that God is the source of all love, and whatever love we receive, it’s God who provides it through others.

When we face dissatisfaction or frustration in relationships, we should reduce our expectations and focus more on our relationship with God. This can bring us peace and satisfaction, and help us move forward in life. In turn, we’ll know how to handle these relationships better.

Expectation itself isn’t bad, but being attached to those expectations can lead to suffering. So, by reducing our attachment to expectations, we can make progress in our spiritual journey. And God can fulfill the deeper needs in our hearts, either by sending us peace, sending someone into our lives to help us, or transforming someone in our lives.

In this Kali Yuga, the knowledge and spiritual progress that was once common is now very rare. Only a few are pursuing the ultimate spiritual goals. But the grace of God is still available through the devotees who embody it, like Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, whose mercy can help us transcend the effects of Kali Yuga.

Thank you very much.

The post Hanuman s journey through the cave – Persevering through life s obstacles – Hindi appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Jagadisa Pandita Appearance
→ Ramai Swami

In Vraja there was a dancer named Candrahasa who was very expert in the tasting of rasa. In Chaitanya-lila, he became Jagadisa Pandit who also took great pleasure in dancing for the Lord. (Gaura-ganoddesha-dipika 143)

Jagadisa Pandit is considered to be simultaneously both Nityananda-shakha and Chaitanya-shakha, a branch both of Chaitanya as well as Nityananda in the desire tree of devotion. He was born in the town of Gauhati (Pragjyotishpur) in modern Assam. 

His father’s name was Kamalaksha Bhatta. Both of his parents were devotees of Vishnu. When they died, he came with his wife Duhkhini and his brother Hiranya to Mayapur on the shores of the Ganga where they built a home near that of Jagannath Mishra. Jagadisa Pandit became Jagannath Mishra’s very close friend.

Jagadisa and his wife Duhkhini had the same kind of parental affection for the little Nimai as Jagannath and Sachi themselves. Duhkhini was like a mother to Nimai and even sometimes acted as his wet-nurse. Nimai, the son of Sachi, is none other than the son of Yashoda, the supreme Lord Krishna incarnate. It is not possible for anyone but an eternal associate of the Lord to have the good fortune to treat him like a son in this way.

Just as Mahaprabhu was conquered by the devotion of Jagadisa Pandit, so too was his dearest companion Nityananda Prabhu who considered him to be one of his own intimate associates. Nityananda Prabhu was Jagadisa’s life and soul. Jagadisa was present in Panihati for the Chira-dadhi Mahotsava.

How strengths become weaknesses and weaknesses become strengths Learning from Ravana and Vibhishan
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So thank you very much for coming today in the evening, and today I’ll speak on this topic of how our strengths can be our weaknesses and how our weaknesses can be our strengths. All of us when we go in our life journey, we all have to struggle. We may have to struggle against our situations, we have to struggle against our own limitations and while we are struggling in this way we all look for something that will give us an advantage. So something which will help us become may be stronger than others or at least stronger than our situations by which we can function. So that in many ways our journey in life is a journey of self discovery we are trying to understand ourselves so that we can we can use whatever we have to the best capacity.

Say for example, if you go to new city and there you rent a car, and you had asked for a particular model of the car but then that model is not available. You got some other car. Then when you start driving that car, first you feel it out. How does the gear work? How does the engine work?

How does the overall car function, then are the brakes very fast, is the steering very fast, and then as you get a sense of that, then you can operate that car to the optimal capacity. So similarly for all of us when we come in the world, we are given certain resources. So we have certain strengths and we have certain weaknesses and the essential challenge in life is how do we how do we leverage, utilize our strengths and how do we manage our weaknesses for achieving that which is worthwhile in our lives. So I will talk of the contrast between 2 characters in the Ramayana to illustrate this principle. So I will take this discussion in 3 parts.

1st, I will talk about how strengths can become weaknesses, then I will talk about how weaknesses can become strengths, and lastly, I will talk about how strengths and weaknesses can both help us move forward toward life’s ultimate purpose. Once a group of people, once a marriage counselor was doing some counseling to some couples, so he said all the husbands who are controlled by their wives come on this side left side, and all the husbands who control their wives come on the right side. So everybody lined up on the left side only 1 person lined on the right side. So when everyone this one person lined up so do you really do you really control your wife actually my wife told me to stand here. So often relationships are also it is subtle or a gross way we are trying to gain control we are trying to gain power.

And amid such situations now we all try to get some advantage by which we can control whoever is there around us. The control itself does not necessarily have to be something negative now it is for what purpose we are trying to control that is also important. So when we get some strengths say, if somebody has strength in terms of their financial power, somebody has strength in terms of looks, somebody has strength in terms of contacts, somebody has strength in terms of intelligence. So these are all strengths by which we can get a certain amount of control over others, and with these strengths we all can function effectively. So in the Ramayana we will discuss the contrast between Ravan and Vibhishan Now interestingly Ravan and Vibhishan both were what was their relationship brothers who was older among them Ravan yes they are brothers but what was the difference between them thank you, what was the difference between them, one was the enemy of Ram and one was friend of Ram, one was the enemy of Ram another friend of Ram that happened as the story evolved but in terms of their personal attributes yeah, so both were born from the same parents but Rawan tended towards wise and Vibhishan tended towards virtue.

So now Ravan was extremely powerful and not only was he very powerful, he also gained a lot of he did a lot of tapasya, lot of he did a lot of austerities by which he gained further power and because of this whenever he would fight with anyone, he would make he would just crush opponents There’s practically no one who could match him. Now, because on one side he had power, other side he had wise, he had lust, he had greed, he had anger. So the power, he started abusing it, and as he kept abusing the power more and more, he started committing atrocities. He started committing vicious hurtful activities towards others. Now, through this all we be many many traditional societies are hierarchical very hierarchical means say if somebody is the older brother the younger brother only does not speak against the older brother.

And more so in terms of age Ravan was older, in terms of power Ravan was much more powerful, in terms of the royal hierarchy also Ravan was the king. So Vibhishan stood by him. Vibhishan stayed by his side, but what Vibhishan did was whenever Ravan would do anything excessively wrong, Vibhishan would try to give gentle advice. And slowly by that advice, he would make sure that Ravan would not do terribly wrong things, but even he didn’t have much control. Now because Rauan had so much power there is confidence what is the opposite of confidence?

Good, good it is true value what is saying is valid. It is actually we can say if confidence is here when we say opposite we can say confidence is like a healthy or a steady state, and you could go to a 2 extremes which are unhealthy as contrasted to confidence. So one unhealthy state will be what you said that is what overconfidence, and the other will be underconfidence or diffidence. So now everybody needs certain level of confidence, whatever we are doing in our lives we need confidence to be able to face what life is sending our way. But when there is overconfidence what happens is that we overestimate our abilities or we underestimate the challenges.

So when there is overconfidence the difference key difference between confidence and overconfidence is vigilance. Vigilance means somebody is alert. Somebody who is overconfident they think there is no problem at all. Any problem I will just smash it. Say now the Cricket World Cup is going on, now somebody might be a very good batsman, and if the opposite team player more bowling, then the batsman has to have confidence about how I either I can I can face these bowlers?

But if the batsman is not alert or what kind of ball the baller is bowling, and the batsman thinks it is a straight ball but it turns out to be a boogal, and because of overconfidence when there is overconfidence then there is no vigilance, one is not observant, one is not alert. So then when there is no vigilance that overconfidence leads to self destruction. So somebody might be a very expert talented gifted batsman, So their batting ability is their strength. But even if somebody has strength, that does not mean that they are omnipotent. Just because somebody can do one thing expertly does not mean that they can do everything or does it does not does not mean that they can do that same thing in all situations.

So they also have to be alert, but Rawa because he had so much strength, so because he had so much power and nobody could challenge him, he became overconfident. He became arrogant. Now sometimes if there is a if somebody has a particular opinion and then we try to tell them this is you know maybe your understanding is not the complete understanding or we try to tell them that their understanding is not correct then some people are so over confident they say I can agree with you but then both of us will be wrong. What does it mean? They are so completely confident that I am right that they are just not ready to entertain any other opinion of anyone else.

So Ravan had that overconfidence. And, of so when he abducted Sita, now at one level, he also had that awareness that I I am not protected from he had a boon by which he was protected from many kinds of beings. But there was one kind of being that he was not protected from which was that Anushya human beings. Now he thought actually human beings are insignificant. He is suppose, you know, if somebody is in the jungle, and in the jungle, there might be tiger, there might be lion, there might be elephants, somebody may say that okay.

I want to be protected from tigers, lions, and elephants. Somebody says, you don’t so if somebody asked him, I want to be protected from ants. What? Ants ants are insignificant so he thought humans were powerless like that he said why do I need the protection from humans I can deal with them myself so when he cast an evil eye on Sita, at that time, he started he because he knew at one level that he did not have protection from humans and he sensed that Ram is quite powerful. So, he decided not to confront Ram directly and he used a roundabout conspiratorial way by which he abducted Sita.

And then after that he abducted Sita and he brought her to his kingdom which was his kingdom? Lanka, now in Lanka he thought that this is surrounded by the ocean and nobody can come ill over here. He knew at one level that he was playing with fire then he angered Ram but what happens is demons have their own expectation of how things will work. So what happens is he thought now it could be he could have thought in the way that if I abduct Sita that will anger Ram and then Ram will come and attack me, I am actually co quoting danger by that but he thought that if I abduct Sita, Ram will never be able to reach me and because he will not reach me and because he is so attached to Sita. Now what was his evidence that he was so attached to Sita?

He said that otherwise he is living in a forest why would he bring his wife with him when unless he is attached to her? He did not have that conception also that Sita might be so committed to him that Sita wanted to come with him to the forest. So that’s why his plan was that if I just abduct Sita and get Sita with me and then I show her my magnificent palace, my huge wealth and that will tempt her and then she will come over to my side and she will surrender to me and because Ram is so attached when Ram is separated from Sita, Ram will just sink into agony and die because of that. So many times when demoniac people make plans they they have, you could say, one track imagination that this is how things are. So he had no idea of the strength of commitment of Sita to Ram or the strength of commitment of Ram to Sita.

And although he tried to tempt Sita, Sita was not in the least interest rate. In fact, what to speak of becoming his queen, Sita refused to even enter into his palace or stay in his palace. He said that because ram was sentenced to exile so just as ram as long as ram is living in exile in the forest I will also live in the forest and that is why he had to keep her in the ashokwathika in his favorite gardens. So anyway, the point that happened was that because he was so overconfident, he did not think his plan through and eventually, Ram came and Ram first sent Hanuman as a messenger. Lanka and stunned all his soldiers and he went back.

And Ravar was shocked when this happened and then he started thinking, he called a assembly of war, he said, the the Lanka which we had considered impregnable, it has been penetrated now. Oh, generals, please tell me what we should do now? So he said that actually a wise king always takes advice from his ministers and then he acts. A foolish king acts without consulting others, so please give me your advice. Now his mood was such that he wanted advice, but some people say you are free you are fully free to express your mind as long as you agree with me.

So he was like that all his generals were yes men around him. Yeah, so it is what happened, he said actually you know this Hanuman is a insignificant monkey. The only reason he was able to warn Lanka was because he caught us by surprise. Next time when he comes, he will be in for a surprise. Some other generals said actually why wait for them, we will send our army there and we will break vengeance on them right now.

And 1 by 1 by 1 they just spoke to him what he wanted to hear. Now this is in today’s language it is called as living in an echo chamber. So what happens is echo chamber means we hear if we are in echo chamber we just hear what otherwise being echoed. So similarly what happens in many cases is that nowadays say in social media if you are in Facebook and we get our news from Facebook then we get it along with people who are like minded. So what happens is we hear only those people who share our opinions, and anybody who does not share our opinion, we demonize them we reject them.

So Rawa lived in this kind of echo chamber And although he is very strong, his strength led to overconfidence. And that’s why, eventually, when Ram came, he was just overpowered. He fought he fought his full army, but he was overpowered. Powered. So, strength is strength is a strength, definitely, but strength can become a weakness if it leads to overconfidence.

One of my main services is writing. I have written about 20, 25 books. So it is quite sobering to know that in the last century, among the top 10 authors who are considered to be the best authors of the last century and if there are Nobel laureates or books are considered to be classics out of these 10, 8 of them committed suicide and the remaining 2, they just went into like manic depressive condition and this is not just among authors almost all artists it tends to happen like that. Now why does it happen? They are phenomenally talented people.

Now, of course, again, this each individual case might has some many specific things, but broadly speaking, what happens is that in any creative endeavor that we try to do, there are sometimes when we just work brilliantly. We just work with extraordinary brilliance, but then there are some other times when nothing seems to be working. Some days you start writing and then you dig gold you dig in gold wherever you dig, gold comes out. Some days you just keep digging digging and nothing except dirt is found. So what happens is now sometimes if somebody is a very, very talented person, then we say, you are a genius.

Now, if you look at the word genius is an English word, and it comes from the Greco Roman tradition. So, if we look at, say, before the scientific revolution, that is around 15th, 16th centuries, when anybody at that time also they were brilliant artists, they were brilliant writers. So at that time, what the usage was, not that you, if somebody do anything brilliantly, not that you are a genius, but you have a genius. Now, what do you mean by you have a genius? Their understanding was that whenever anybody does anything brilliant, there is some higher being that communes through you and that you have a genius means that some higher being that is acting through you and because of that higher being acting through you, you are able to perform superlatingly.

Now, of course, because the being is acting through you, so you deserve respect, but it is not just you alone. Now to take sole credit for our talents is to put too much burden on ourselves. To take sole credit for our talents is to put too much burden on ourselves. Why? Because even the most talented person, sometimes, they just can’t perform.

Now say again if you take example of cricket, there are some bats when the best batsman might someday just be out of form. Now nobody wants to be out of form they try to bat to the best of their ability but they discard bat. One day they might be in superlative form and any stroke that they hit, it just goes to a boundary, but the next day the most straightforward ball they are not able to hit. So now, of course, these players are dedicated the the players who perform, they are dedicated, their commitment is important, but there is something beyond us that acts through us and that is when we are able to do something wonderful. So, in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says, that I am ability in human beings.

It is God who acts through us whenever we are able to do anything extraordinary. So sometimes the children, they might be extremely talented, and some children are prodigies. There are YouTube videos of children who are in diapers, and they are playing harmonium. How do you do that? How do they learn it?

This is superb. So, when such kids are extraordinarily good, there is definitely something special about them. But if we start saying that you are a genius, the problem with that is that tomorrow something might happen they might not be able to perform at the same caliber and even the best of us sometimes have off days so many of these top writers what would happen is they were able to write superlative literature and they became famous and then after that they started measuring themselves by the standard of their superlative literature and anything that they would write not good enough not good enough See, our mind can make us unhappy in the happiest of situations by just speaking these three words, not good enough. Your house is not good enough. Your car is not good enough.

The food is not good enough. You know? My children are not good enough. My partner is not good enough. No.

This is not good enough. That is not good enough. And now, of course, we all want to improve but when when when something divine would act through them and they would be able to do something phenomenal and the next year they are not able to do that next time when they are writing so they become when we take sole credit for our talents, then we have to take the sole blame for the absence of the talents. And thus, they would go into enormous depression. Why?

What happened? Why can’t I write like this? I wrote so well. Why is nothing coming out over here? And, you know, anger is expressed in different ways.

Anger expressed outward leads to aggression. Anger expressed in our anger directed outward leads to aggression. Anger directed inward leads to depression. When we become angry with ourselves, why are you not good enough? Why can’t you do this?

Then we start sinking into depression. So it’s important that we don’t we recognize that our strengths are their gifts. We’ve been given them, and we are grateful that we have them. To have abilities is a gift to know that we have abilities is a greater gift. Some people say that I have many hidden talents but the problem is they are hidden even from me.

So to to have talents is a gift to know that we have to know that we have talents is a greater gift but to know that our talents are a gift is the greatest gift to know that our talents are a gift is the greatest gift. So because Ravan was demoniac, he never thought of any power higher than us. He just thought my power is my power and I will use this power for whatever I want. However, it is for me to abuse, it is for me to commit atrocities, I I don’t care for anything else. So when our strengths lead to overconfidence, then they become weakness.

With our children also the when they do something good when they say come come first in our class they come they top in a competition naturally as parents we will be very proud of them we will be very happy about them and then we celebrate and that is good that’s natural but if we want to foster intrinsic self esteem there is intrinsic self esteem and there is extrinsic self esteem extrinsic self esteem is when I achieve something, then I am considered someone worthwhile. Intrinsic self esteem is whatever I achieve externally, I have innate self worth. So when we appreciate others, when we for example, parents appreciate the children when they achieve something wonderful, that is good at least at that time you should appreciate, no doubt, but if if we appreciate only when they achieve something, that leads to extrinsic self worth. The children start thinking that only when I achieve something, then my parents will appreciate me, then my parents will love me. If tomorrow I am not able to appreciate if I am not able to achieve this, then will my parents still love me?

Will my parents still have the same regard for me? And that can lead to a lot of insecurity. The other hand, instead of of course, we can and should appreciate achievement, but ultimately what is in our hands is commitment. Now so if we learn to appreciate our children for their commitment, say if they study regularly sometimes they may get great marks, sometimes they may not get such great marks they are studying regularly, and then we appreciate them for that commitment. Then that appreciating for commitment leads to intrinsic self worth because commitment is what is in their hands achievement is not in their hands and if we have also sometimes we ourselves might have self esteem issues that might also be because our self esteem is extrinsically centered Maybe we are just trying to win the approval of someone.

Sometimes that almost in everybody’s life there are some people whose approval we desperately crave for and those people they are super stingy about giving approval they might approve others for some small things and we do a big thing and they don’t approve they would appreciate they would approve. And everybody has 1 or 2 people like that in their lives. So often our own insecurities come because we are basing our self worth on external things. Of course, external things are important, but they are not all important. So, again, what is this is the flip side?

When we think of our strengths as our strengths, then when we are not able to act accordingly, then what something is wrong with me? Yes, something can be wrong with us, but it sometimes is nothing wrong with us. We tried our best, but things didn’t work out. So, our strengths become weaknesses when they lead to overconfidence among us. That was the first point I was going to make.

Any questions or comments till now? So now I will go to second point. Does anyone remember what the second point I was going to speak? How are weaknesses become strengths? So normally, now, nobody wants to be weak that is perfectly understandable, but there is a difference between having weaknesses and being a weakling.

A weakling is a person who is defined by their weaknesses, who self identifies with their weaknesses and thinks that, okay, my defining characteristic is this weakness. It like everybody goes through painful situations in their life. Sooner or later life victimizes everyone. So we may be victimized, but we do not have to be victims. So life victimizes everyone.

In the Mahabharata, there is the example of Karana. He was victimized. Although he was born in royalty, he was never given the credit of being born in royalty. He identified himself as a victim. But if you look at it, it was not Karana alone who was victimized.

Even the Pandavas were victimized. Although the Pandavas were born in royalty, they became orphans at a very small age. And then when they came back to their own home, what happened? Those who were supposed to protect them, they were a part of the conspiracy to kill them. Their uncle was supposed to be like their surrogate father and their uncle was a part of the conspiracy.

Who was their uncle? Dhritarashtra. Dhritarashtra, he was blind and he remained blind to his son Durodana’s plans to kill. So the Pandavas, they were royalty, but when they were just small children, just small teenagers, they had to their attempts were made to burn them alive, attempts were made to poison them, and they had to flee and live in the forest. So, they could also have complained, hey, you know, why is life so unfair?

The fact is that life is unfair to everyone sooner or later and of course, if we look at it from the other side just like say sometimes if you again going back to the example of cricket sometimes the batsman may be not out and the umpire use out. So, basically that is unfair and yes it is unfair but if a say batsman plays for 10 years 15 years there are sometimes in the batsman in not out and the batsman is given out and many times the opposite also happens is not it what is the opposite yeah the batsman is out but is not out so like that we can see that sometimes we have made no mistakes and still we get the blame I feel life is so unfair, but then we can also think of situation in our life when we made big mistakes, but we escaped the blame somehow nothing happened because of that. So in the overall analysis, we can say life evens out. But the point I am making over here is that we all can have weaknesses, but we do not have to identify as weak links. Yes, if we start letting that weakness define us.

So what do we mean by weaknesses? Sometimes we might be physically weak. Sometimes if we want to speak, but we might stutter, and we are not able to speak so well. Sometimes, we may feel that our looks are efficient. Sometimes our memory might be some people have outstanding memory and some people have outstandingly poor memory.

Just cannot remember. So, we all have weaknesses. In fact, not just weaknesses, all of us have painful inadequacies. Everyone is limited by some some inadequacy or the other. So now our weaknesses if we obsess over them that can lead to resentment that can lead to anger that can lead to self victimization, self pity.

So sometimes what happens? 2 people who have self pity what happens they come together and then they have a pity party. So instead, how can so how can our weaknesses become strengths? Our weaknesses can become strengths if our we if our weaknesses can foster some humility within us If our weaknesses make us recognize the need to seek the help of others, to seek the help of someone stronger than us. And ultimately, our weaknesses can inspire us, can impel us to take shelter of God and that is what happened to Vibhishan.

Now, Vibhishan was very virtuous, but in terms of physical power or political power, he was no match at that time to Rawan and he was giving advice repeatedly to Ravana and he begged Ravana and he says, if you hold on to Sita, you will be destroyed just return Sita but not only did Ravana reject his advice started accusing him. He says, you you know, I have treated you so well, but still you are viciously motivated against me. That’s why you are opposed to my happiness and my well-being. So, Bhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebhebheb don’t reject my advice. If you reject my advice, it will cause the destruction of the whole dynasty of Rakshasas.

But, Ravana was so arrogant, he just kicked the Vibhishan’s crown away. Now, at that time, Vibhishan left a court and he had three options. He thought that if I’m here right now, I can just I can say that this I tried my best but nothing worked, So, I can just take sannyas. I can just go to the Himalayas and renounce everything and let whatever is going to happen, happen. He says, but that will be abdication of my responsibility.

I am a member of the royal family and I have a duty toward the citizens. So, I cannot just renounce like that. Then he thought, maybe, I can organize a rebellion against Ravana among the rakshasas because not all rakshasas were vicious. I can organize them, overthrow them, overthrow our and then hand Sita to Ram so that this Ram’s attack on the rakshasas can be avoided and the destruction of Lanka can be avoided. He said, but no.

Because Ravana was so powerful, even those who opposed him, they would be called down in fear. They would not join the rebellion against him and because Ravana also had become very he had got a lot of prosperity. So, he had given a lot of prosperity to others also. So, people would not be impelled to rebel against him. So, just then he said the only option for me now is let me go to Ram and tell Ram that not all rakshasas are against you.

Your enmity is not against rakshasas. Your enmity is only against Ravana and those demons were assisting Ravana and that way I will ensure that the entire Raksha dynasty will not be destroyed. Now, when he came across, it was a great risk because if Ravan came to know that Bhuvishan has become a traitor, Ravan would not only kill him, but kill him in horrible ways. Those people are demonic there is tragedy and there is evil. See, tragedy is, say, if a storm occurs and a house collapses and somebody dies because of that that’s a tragedy.

So if, say, road accident occurs and a car’s brakes fail and the car goes over somebody and that they kill that person gets killed that’s a tragedy. So evil so tragedy causes pain but circumstantially it happens. Evil is where somebody intentionally desires to cause maximum pain maximum pain to someone. So somebody wants to kill someone and say they just don’t drive a car over their head. They drive over a car first over their feet and then the rest of their body again and again and again.

You know, those who are demoniac, they can be horrible. When Hitler was tyrannizing the whole of Europe and soon it became clear even to Germans that we can’t win this war. So, then they wanted to stop Hitler. So, 2, 3 of Hitler’s assistants, they, they conspired, they made a plan against him, and they tried to assassinate him, but somehow that plan failed. And when Hitler came to know about it, Hitler was so brutal that all those who had turned against him normally, say, at that time somebody is to be executed, you might hang them.

So normally when you hang, you hang by a rope and then the person’s neck gets choked. So he hung them by you could say plastic bands And what happened by that? Like it took 11 days for the neck to get cut. So 11 days they were in horrible pain. So this is this is not just tragedy, this is evil.

Evil is where somebody consciously causes enormous pain to someone else knowingly. So, this is a horrible topic we are going to discuss, but the point I am talking about here is that, Ravan was that kind of person and if Ravan came to know that Vibishan has turned against me, and if Ravan was somehow able to catch Vibishan, then he would have done that he would have caused untold pain to Vibishan. So not only was he risking the anger of Raul, but he was also he did not know whether Ram would accept him or not because after all, he was a rakshasa, but he took that risk. And he took that risk. Ram just observed him, and Ram could see his heart, and Ram accepted him.

And Ram told some of the Vanaras said, no, we don’t know. He’s a demon. He might not he might have some ulterior motives. So, at that time, Ram spoke of famous words. He says, Vratam mama, this is my wow.

What is it? That even if once somebody surrenders to me saying, oh lord, I am yours. Says I will grant them fearlessness forever. And that time, Ram says that even if Raval comes and surrenders, I will grant shelter even to Ravana and then not only does he accept Vibhishad, but immediately he asked the Vanaras to get some water from the ocean and with the water sanctified through mantras, he coronates Vibhishan as the king of Lanka. Now when Ravan hears this Ravan is outraged he is shocked sometimes what happens we are surprised about something unexpected happening sometimes we are so surprised that we just become completely thoughtless what to do so this is that kind of shock he says I am the king and somebody is already enfranchised as the king Let us say if there is a political elections and even before the election has started somebody says I am the prime minister what?

So Rajas, Ravan, this actually indicated Ram’s confidence, but it is also a way of sending a message to Rahuand. Rahuand just tried to minimize and dismiss. He says what is the use of this coronation? He says one beggar has enthroned another beggar as a king it’s useless so he didn’t he didn’t take it very seriously but then after that one of the wanderers he said that you know you said that if Ravana comes and surrenders then you said that you will forgive Ravana, but he says, now you have promised Vibhishan that you will give Lanka to him. If Ravana comes now, what will you do?

If Ravana surrenders now, now, what does he say? Ram says, I will give Ayodhya to him. So the point over here is that Vibhishan recognized his weakness, but rather than wallowing in his weakness, feeling sorry for himself, what did he do? He connected with a supremely strong being and that alliance with Ram became his greatest strength. Many times, it is our weakness, it is in the weakest moments that we turn towards God.

It is at that time when we feel the need of someone bigger than ours to have an active role in our lives. So, if our weaknesses can bring humility within us, if our weaknesses can help us to connect with others to seek others’ help and ultimately seek Krishna’s seek the Lord’s help, then those weaknesses can become our strengths. Now, generally, in our life, when we want to form a relationship with someone, if somebody is a very impressive person, we are attracted by that no doubt but generally, when do we become close to someone is when they when they admit their vulnerabilities. Generally, when we are interacting with people, we all have our shields above because we don’t want to be hurt. So we we conceal our weaknesses.

We put on a facade. And to some extent, for functional purposes in the world, it’s required. But if you want to come close to someone, if somebody shares the painful experiences from their life, if somebody shares their weaknesses, their shortcomings, their difficulties, then what happens is they are lowering their guard and that is when we feel, we see not just their greatness, but we also see their humanness and that is what brings us closer to each other. So, what happens, sometimes if we just keep our guards, then the relationships can never go very close to each other. So our weaknesses, if we do not try to conceal them, but we try to be in the right forum with the right people, we we we admit our weaknesses, our vulnerabilities.

Not that we hold on to them, but then we seek help to deal with them. Then our weaknesses admitting our weaknesses can actually make us stronger because it can connect us better with others. When this whole series of superheroes started there is Spiderman, there is Superman, there is Batman, all these, of course, not just man, there is wonder woman and so many others. So, when all these started, initially what happened was that this this sort of movie started and then they started making superman more and more and more powerful. So, initially superman could fly in the sky, but then afterwards superman had enough power that even if a even if a meteorite came to hit earth, just catch it and throw it away and once Superman became like God then Superman’s popularity started going down Why?

Because if there is no weakness, if you can do anything and everything, then there is no adventure left in it. Isn’t it? The adventure is there when we have some characters may have some extraordinary strengths, but they also have limitations and within those limitations, they tap some strengths and do something special. So what happens is that its weaknesses not not that if somebody is a weakling, they are not very not at all attractive to anyone, but somebody who admits their weaknesses and deals with those weaknesses or finds a way to move forward in spite of those weaknesses. That is what is very endearing.

Now, there are some people who are impressive and there are some people who are inspiring. Impressive is wow, you are so great. Inspiring is oh, you are so great, I can also become great like that. So those who are impressive simply cause us admiration, but those who are inspiring, they cause us to transform ourselves, to improve ourselves. So, our weaknesses don’t have to make us a weakling.

Vibhishan was weaker than Ravana, but he was no weakling because he connected with Ram. He became stronger than Raman also. So for all of us, we can we all have weaknesses and sometimes we may, we may feel those weaknesses in very painful way because others might be better than us and others might get better things than us because of our weaknesses but if rather than obsessing over those weaknesses, we use those weaknesses as impetuses to connect, connect with others and connect ultimately with Krishna. Then those weaknesses can be the channels by which those connections become stronger. Ultimately, our devotion can become stronger.

So, our weaknesses can become strengths if they increase our humility. They lead to the admission of our humanity and they help us connect with others and with the lord. And the last point, this is the second point was that we talk our weaknesses can become strengths. And last point is, well, summary of what I spoke that weaknesses and strengths, how can we take all of, how can we take both of them together? It requires courage to accept our weaknesses, and it also requires courage to accept ourselves with our weaknesses.

Courage to accept our weaknesses is, you know, okay, I can’t do this I can’t do this that requires courage, but if I can’t do this, if I can take that forward and say, I’m useless. Then it requires courage to accept ourselves with our weaknesses. Yes, I have these weaknesses, but still I am a part of God. There is a spark of divinity within me, and therefore, I have intrinsic self worth. So, what the Bhagavad Gita tells us and what the Bhakti Liktivipa Charyan Jaindl tells us that each one of us is an inalienable part of God.

Each one of us is precious in the eyes of God and God cares for us not because of what we do for him. He cares for us or not it is not that he stops caring for us if we do something wrong. He cares for us simply because of who he is and who we are at our core. So, if we can raise our vision above this world towards God, then that can give us a sublime sense of inner security because that is one anchor in our life which will never shake. No storm in the world has the power to shake the anchor of God.

He is the unchanging North Pole in our life. He can always show us direction and the stronger we connect with Him, there is a storm and we are being battered by the storm. It is the anchor that is not shaking. But what we need to do is we need to hold on to that anchor. And bhakti yoga is a time honored process of tightening our hold on the anchor of God.

Bhakti yoga is not just about doing some religious rituals, maybe go to a temple, go to some go to do some rituals, do some pooja all these are okay, but all these are meant for a purpose. The purpose is to strengthen our inner connection with God, to strengthen our hold on the one unshakable anchor in our life. So if we understand that our strengths are gifts from God, then even while using our strengths, we can be conscious and grateful to God. As by God’s grace, I have been given some strengths. So, let me use those strengths in a mood of service, in a mood of contribution.

Then those strengths will not lead to arrogance it will not lead to overconfidence because we understand that these strengths which I have are gifts. And sometimes when those strengths do not manifest through us, we have talents, but say, we are out of form At that time, we still continue doing our best in a mood of devotion that when that magical thing manifests to me, I will do something I may do something extraordinary. When it does not, I still do something ordinary, but that does not make me insignificant because we do not let ourselves be defined by the because we do not let ourselves be defined by the results that we get in the world. We define ourselves by our connection with God. If we define ourselves by the results, when the results do not come, we will be devastated, But if we define ourselves by our connection with God and by the contribution that we can make in connection with him, then our strengths, whether they manifest through us or they don’t manifest through us, we will be able to move forward in our life.

So some days, we will be able to do wonderful things by the higher strengths manifesting through us. Some days, we will not be able to do wonderful things, but still by our commitment, we will be able to do something worthwhile. And as far as our weaknesses, we can see our weaknesses also as opportunities to that make us turn towards God. How? Because our weaknesses remind us that we are finite beings, we are limited beings.

Our weaknesses remind us that we are not God, that we are not supreme. And in that way, if our weaknesses remind us of the need of connecting with someone higher, then those weaknesses can also become our strengths. And over a period of time, we will each one of us learn how best to manage our weaknesses. Some weaknesses by our persistent practice, we will be able to overcome them and we will become strong in them. Some weaknesses, we will learn to live with them.

This is how it is, but I can still move on in my life. And either way, whether we are able to overcome the weaknesses or we have to live with the weaknesses, if we let ourselves be defined by our connection with God, that we understand I am a part of God, then those weaknesses may, may limit us from doing specific things, but the weaknesses won’t limit us in our onward flow in life. We will, if say, I conclude with this metaphor let us say, if we consider our consciousness and our life to be like a river which is flowing towards the ocean and that ocean is god, Then there are different channels by which water can flow. So, we all have different roles in our life. We may have a role I am a parent I am a spouse I am a son or daughter of someone I am a professional I am this and that.

We all have different roles. We have different responsibilities. We have different talents for doing those roles. I’m a artist. I’m a speaker.

I’m a cook, whatever. Now, all these are like channels through which the water of our consciousness is meant to flow towards God. And if we define ourselves by one thing, if my defining identity is that, say, I define myself solely as a parent and if my child starts going along some wrong track, then I’ll start thinking my life itself is useless. Now, it’s not like that. Our children are also growing, we are also growing, everybody matures.

There’s an American author who said that when I was 15, my father was a fool. Now I am 25, and I am amazed how much the old guy has learned in the last 10 years. So it just happen that as people grow they also that is not that the father learned in 10 years, father may also learn, but rather the child who is a 15 or 25 their perspective also changes. So, sometimes we overreact and we take others’ actions too personally we take life’s failures too personally. But if you understand this is one channel and presently this channel is blocked if it is blocked, still let the water of my consciousness flow to other channels.

And if we keep our consciousness flowing in this way, then even if we may have to live with some pain in our life because in each block channel, it will cause us some pain. Any weakness, it will cause us some pain. We may have to live with pain, but we don’t have to live in pain. That pain will be a part of our life, but pain won’t consume our life. We have other channels through which we keep moving forward, and gradually, we will find that not only will that pain end, but that pain will stimulate our growth.

Pain will help us to understand ourselves better and to grow better, grow more in our lives. And ultimately, if we stay connected with God, we will discover that life can hurt us in many ways, but greater than life’s power to hurt is God’s power to heal. Greater than life’s power to hurt is God’s power to heal. If we stay connected with God, then we let God give us that experience, give us that conviction and that conviction will be our greatest asset in this life and beyond this life. So, I will summarize.

I spoke today on this topic of confidence over confidence and diffidence when strengths become weaknesses and when weaknesses become strengths. So I started by talking about life is like a struggle in which we are all trying to get some power. So we want to discover our strengths, and even in relationship, we want some strength so that we can move forward in this. But if those strengths lead us to overconfidence or arrogance, then the strength can become weakness because we are good at doing one thing. If we think I can always do it or I can do everything, then we stop exercising vigilance and when our confidence is without vigilance, it leads to our confidence.

So I talked about Rauhar. He was so powerful and he got further power by his boons that he started becoming dismissive of the power of everyone else and thus he quoted danger and eventually disaster. Although others warned him, he neglected Vibishan’s warning. Although Hanuman demonstrated to him the power of one servant of Ram in devastating his entire defenses, but he just dismissed it. They caught he caught us by surprise.

And he lived in his own echo chamber and does he his strength became the cause of his downfall his strength became his weakness then I talk about how weaknesses can become our so there also I talk about how many creative people, authors and others, they become suicidal or they become manically depressed. That is because today’s idea is that if somebody is very talented, we say, you are a genius. The more appropriate way, you have a genius. That means, some higher talent or higher source of the talent is manifesting through you. We are grateful that it manifests to the extent we take sole credit for our successes to that extent, we will have to take the sole blame for our failures and when we want to guide our children, if we appreciate them only for the achievements, that leads to extrinsic self esteem, but when we appreciate them for their commitment, that leads to intrinsic self esteem.

And then they talked about how our weaknesses can become our strengths. Everybody is victimized in life, sometime or other. But if we let the victimization define us, we become victims. In the Mahabharata, Karuna, let that victimization define him. The Pandas are also victimized, but they never let themselves be identified as victims.

So we have weaknesses. We all have weaknesses, but we don’t have to be weaklings. And our weaknesses can become strengths if they foster humility within us, if they remind us of our humanity and help and make us seek connections with others. Even with other people, we might impress others by showing how strong we are, are. It is only when we admit our vulnerabilities then people see our humanity and then become closer to each other and it is admitting our weaknesses our vulnerability that is what actually ultimately inspires us to take shelter of God.

So, I talked about that Vibhishan was weaker than Ravan, but that his very weakness inspired him to take shelter of Ram and by that connection with Ram, he was able to overcome not only Rawat, but he was able to do his royal duty of protecting all the citizens of Lanka who were not actively abetting Rawat in his evil designs. I talked about the difference between evil and tragedy evil is mallebulently intentionally causing an extra pain to people. And then I talked about our strengths if we are conscious that they are gifts To have talents is fortunate, to know that we have talents is more fortunate to know that our talents are gifts is most fortunate. So if we can if our strengths, when we use exercising our strengths, we remember that these are gifts from God, then our strengths can also take us towards God, And if our weaknesses, they inspire us to call out to God, then our weaknesses can also be agents that help us to compel us to connect with him. And in that way, if we consider a consciousness like a channel or like a water flowing toward the ocean of toward the ocean of God, then our strengths are like those channels which are widely open, and our weaknesses are like the channels which are very closed, which are very narrow or almost closed.

So even if something is blocked, we don’t obsess over it. That blockage will cause pain. You may have to live with pain, but you don’t have to live in pain. And through leveraging our strengths, if we keep our consciousness flowing toward God, then even if life hurts us, if we stay connected with God, he is like the unshakable anchor by connecting with him through the practice of bhakti, we can get strength even amidst life’s greatest storms and then by holding on to God, we will discover that greater than life’s power to hurt is god’s power to heal. So any questions or comments?

Yes. You mentioned that Ravan is so demoniac. In one of the preaching programs, I was asked a question. Who is more demoniac? I didn’t know what to answer.

Okay. Who is more demoniac? Here in Nakashipu or Rawan? Well, there is, no demoniacness measuring meter for comparing who is more demoniac in general what we see is that our goodness or our badness is seen through our actions but it is also seen through the actions that we do in particular situations. Say, if somebody asks us, please give me a glass of water.

Say, go and take it yourself. Imagine that’s that’s rudeness, and it’s bad. But if somebody is in a hospital bed and they cannot move and they say, ‘Please give me a glass of water’ and we say, ‘Get it yourself.’ That is not just rudeness that is cruelness that is much, much worse. So, that means how bad an action is determined not just by the content of the action but also by the context of the action. So, if we consider that way, Hiranyakashipu, he consciously, knowingly turned against his own son and he tried to kill his own son which was very brutal.

Now, Rawat, as far as we know, if he had got an opportunity, he would have killed Bhebishan also, but he did not do that directly. Of course, it is said that Shurpanakha had Shurpanakha was married her husband was Dushta Buddhi. This is his husband was started becoming very powerful. So then Ravana sent him with a army to fight against some dheutas, and then he told the whole army secretly to withdraw. So that Dushtubbhudya left to fight alone, and Dushtubbhudya was killed.

So when Shurpanakha came to know about it, she went mad after that. Initially, she was mad because she had become a widow. But afterward, when she came to know her own brother had killed that caused the death of her husband, she just went so crazy that she decides somehow or the other I have to get back at Ravana, and that’s why she tried to she seductively describes Sita’s beauty so that Ravana would try to abduct Sita, and then Ram would come and destroy her. So you could say that, Ravana also killed a family member. But still, that is, you know, killing your brother-in-law or causing the death of brother-in-law is quite different from directly trying to kill one’s own son.

So in that context you could say that Hiranyakashippu is more demoniac than Ravana. Now another way of looking at it could be that Hiranyakashipu never tried to abduct the the goddess of fortune. Ravana tried to do that. It was only because of a curse that Ravana was stopped. Ravana could not physically violate Sita, but he was demonic.

So I would say if we use different parameters, we could say that, we could say that, say, in this in the context of trying to assassinate his own son, Hiranyakashi was more demoniac. But in terms of trying to directly abduct the lord’s consort, we can say Rama is more demoniac. Okay? Thank you. Yes, Ravan.

When you talk about the, you got a weakness, and you need to show your humility and have connection with the god. Other people tend to take advantage of that weakness. Okay. Yeah. I think that is true.

So if we show our weakness then won’t other people take advantage of it. Yes, of course, that is why I said carefully in the right with the with the right person with the right person. See, we all have different kinds of relationship with different people. I was talking only in the context that if you want to develop a close relationship with someone and while trying to develop a close relationship, if we just keep a facade, then, you know, I am so good, I am invulnerable, I am this. Yes, it is true, but then if you want to develop close relationship, there are times when we need to admit our weaknesses also, we need to admit our wounds.

If a warrior and that warrior is fighting, even if the warrior is wounded, the warrior will conceal the wounds, so that they can keep fighting, because if the opponent understand that you are wounded, the opponent will attack with greater vigor. So on the war field, the warrior needs to as much as possible conceal the wound, so that they can fight wholeheartedly, and they can keep the enemy from not getting a extra advantage or extra fillip. But when they come back, you know, they they have to admit their wounds. If somebody is nursing them, somebody is going to heal them, they have to admit their wounds over there. So even if they are very powerful, they have to admit their weakness at that time.

So similarly, if if we are in a confrontational role with someone, at that time, it is not appropriate to admit our weaknesses. At that time, we we have to put a best best foot forward. So humility does not mean admitting our weaknesses alone is not humility. Humility essentially means that we don’t let our ego come in the way of our purpose. And if this is important for me I will do it even if I am criticized for this even if the world disapproves but still I will do that so that is that is humility we do not let our ego come in the way of our purpose but practically it is not that anywhere and everywhere we should admit our weaknesses.

If we have to do a particular job, then we have to tell at that time what are the credentials for that job. Now we might have some disqualifications which may also need to be told at the appropriate time if it is required. Say if you are applying for a job and you fill your CV and the CV you tell all the thing that you do not know. I do not know French. I do not know German.

I do not know echo. I do not know economics. I do not know this. I do not know say get lost, isn’t it? You have to tell what you know, but along with that if you have to do a specific thing which you are not able to do then at appropriate time we need to admit a weakness, does that answer your question.

So thank you very much.

The post How strengths become weaknesses and weaknesses become strengths Learning from Ravana and Vibhishan appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

How to live wisely at the junction of order and chaos Learning from Dasharatha’s destiny
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. Hare Krishna. Thank you very much for coming today evening. And today I’ll discuss on the topic of, what is destined in our life and what is free for us to choose. So I’ll talk in terms of a story from the Ramayana, where a curse is involved, and that curse unfolds in a particular way.

So what is, broadly speaking, the role of our free will, and how much of our life is controlled? If we look at this in a broad way, we can see that in our life, certain things are already fixed. Say, for example, which family we are born in. Many Indians, when they come abroad to a western country, whether it’s New Zealand or New Zealand or Australia or America or Canada UK then they come with some culture from the past from their homes. But when the children are born in these countries, you know, children grow up.

Then these children, they often want to mix with the mainstream culture. But, they just can’t. Because they have a particular skin colour, their identity is a particular way. In America, this phenomena is called as ABCD. ABCD is American born confused Deshis.

So maybe you could have your n b n n n b c d. New Zealand born confused Deshis. So basically even if somebody wants to gel mix in the crown you can’t the brown color is there so one of my friends in America was telling me that you know Indian kids who are kids who are born to Indians see they are like coconuts the coconut is brown from outside but white from inside so basically the brown skin is there, but internally, culturally, because they’re blue, they’re they’re grown there. So they become like that, in terms of thinking. But still, even if no matter how much they want to, they can’t become a brown skin.

So certain things in our life are fixed. Right from our birth itself, they’re fixed. So it’s not just our skin color, it’s also the family in which we are born. In many ways, we could say, our how good our memory is, we can always improve it, but certainly, certain level of intellectual ability is fixed at the level of, at the time of birth itself. So certain things are fixed at the time of birth.

And we can’t change that. So now we could say that life is a constant tension between order and chaos. Order is the things which we have control over. Things which we try to maintain in a particular structure. And chaos is things which are out of our control.

Now, as we grow up, we try to increase how much control we have. So in a small child, the child is helpless. Just an infant newborn and just doesn’t know what is happening. And the infant cries because it’s so much fear, distress, uncertainty. But then, as the child starts growing, the child discovers that crying is my power.

Vow. By crying, I can move the world around me. If I cry, then my mother will come running, father will come running. And. Sometimes the children cry because they’re in distress.

Sometimes they cry just because they want attention. Isn’t it? So basically, that child, initially, everything is chaos. Oh, where am I? Who am I?

What is going on? Nothing it knows. But slowly, it creates some order in its life. That is, whenever I’m in trouble, cry. That is the one one strand of order in the child’s life.

As we grow up further, we try to create further order in our lives. For example, education is something, at one level, it creates some order. Okay. You go to school at this time, you attend these these classes, you come back. And this is not just creating a schedule and a routine.

A schedule and a routine itself is an order in our life. But along with that, what it also creates is, we create further power to create order in our future lives. That through these studies, I will earn more money. I will get a good job. And then, with that financial stability, there’ll be greater order in my life.

All of us okay. I think it was okay earlier. It was okay. Yeah, I think. Yeah.

Was anyone not able to hear? No. It’s a bit of a hissing song. His okay. Is it better now?

Just take it off and take it back. Okay. Can I have a little tissue paper? Okay? Thank you.

So, all of you are sitting and trying to hear this class. And there is some order. Now, all of you are reasonably confident that the person next to you is not going to suddenly turn at you and slap you in the face. Now, now, conceivably, that anything can happen. But probably, that will not happen.

And the probability is very high. And it is this order, this absence of chaos that enables us to focus. So all of us need some structure for our lives. And it is the structure that enables us to both live peacefully and work purposefully. As I am, I can be peaceful, and what I need to do, I can do it purposefully.

If say, right now, I’m going to speak to class, and at any moment, the power supply will go away. Or if assume, at any moment, if I am worried, everyone will walk up and walk and go away. Then I cannot speak purposefully. Like, every moment I am worried. Is the audience going to be there or not?

So basically, we all need a certain amount of order in our lives. But at the same time, the world often brings chaos. So, or chaos means, say, we might decide I’m going to go to this program, and I’m going to reach at this time, and you estimate it takes 30 minutes to go there. But then suddenly there’s a traffic. Suddenly there is maybe a car crash or something, and then half hour becomes 1 hour.

And that causes annoyance. That causes irritation. And annoyance and irritation are probably the small consequences of disorder. If suppose you go to your office, the job, and one of my friends in America, he told me he had come to India for about 15 days, and he because he was in India, he didn’t attend to he was on a break on holidays, so he didn’t attend to any of his mails. And many mails had come and gone, and he thought, okay, after I come back to office, I will go, and look at all those mails.

Now, he went to he went back to America, he went to his office, and he saw his office only was not there. In those 15 minutes, the company itself had closed down. So losing your job is one level of chaos, but the company itself disappearing. That’s an even bigger thing. So chaos can come upon us from any way.

Generally speaking, if we consider, what are the 3 kleshas? Adi daidik, Adi bhautik? Adi. Adi athnik. Yes.

Tomorrow, I’m going to talk about in the seminar on how to deal with discouraging situations. So I’ll talk about how discouragement can come from all these three ways. Sometimes we might fall sick. That’s adi apnek. Sometimes people around us can annoy us.

People around us can disappoint us. They can betray us. So that’s adhibhautik. And sometimes the weather can become too cold. The weather can become too hot.

So, actually, I was in I’m a I was in I think it was Melbourne, and from there, I flew to Chicago. So it was such that, Melbourne on that day was something like 47 degrees, and Chicago was minus 47 degrees. It was probably the coldest day. I think there was some some storm or something had come. It was the coldest day in the recorded history of the planet.

So it was quite a drastic shift. So now, the weather can change drastically. So, basically, from all these three sources, chaos can come upon us. And we try to create structure, but in our lives also, we don’t want simply structure. We don’t want we want order, but we also want some adventure.

We also want to do something new. We also want some exploration, some experience. So we want structure. We want order, but we don’t want only that. We want to experience something new.

So we, you can say we live if we all wanted order. No. We could just live, say for example, one of the safest places in the world is a jail. If there are no gang wars and if there are nothing in the no such problems, you can be completely safe in a jail. Isn’t it?

But who wants to live in a jail? Isn’t it? He wants freedom to do things. So if he wanted to be completely safe, he could say, I’ll just stay in my home all the time. But we’ll get bored.

All of us, we we are most of our thoughts are about ourselves, naturally. But at the same time, we will get bored only with ourselves. Imagine if somebody told us that, okay. Today, whole day, you do whatever you want, and somebody will record every single one of your actions. And the next day, you sit and watch everything that you do the previous day.

Hey. See, you know, boring soon. What what is there to watch in this? Maybe some special moments in our day we will watch. But if somebody says, just watch the whole day what you did.

So everyday, one day you act, one day you watch. One day you act, one day you watch. You get bored with life. What do I watch so much, isn’t it? So basically, all this analysis I’m giving to illustrate this point that we don’t want only order.

So if whole day I’m going to sit and watch what I did yesterday, whole day becomes completely predictable and then then nothing new, nothing special, nothing exciting. So that’s why, although we want order, but we live at the border of order and disorder. Order and chaos. So that’s why there’s a constant we live at the tension. And the chaos we need to manage, the order we need to sustain.

And how do we go about doing this? When we study scripture, it is not just stories which were told long ago and people heard it. In general, if we consider nature, nature is quite efficient. Anything that is not useful gets eliminated. That’s what, the theory of evolution is.

Now, whether the theory the the it talks about survival of the fittest and to that extent, it’s fine. But from survival of the fittest to arrival of the fittest, it’s a big leap. Mhmm. How things originated? So Darwin got many things right.

And one thing is that only things that are efficient survive. Like something simple. Only things which are useful which are effect effective, they survive. Say, if you are going on a long mountain trek, and if you have a backpack which contains a lot of luggage, lot of things, then we may before starting, we’ll say, hey. You know, I don’t wanna carry so much burden.

I’ll put some stuff away. I’ll put that away. I’ll put that away. So, similarly, if we as human beings, if we consider the past centuries, people lived through a lot of tough times. Many of the comforts that we take for granted today, say, heat, artificial heating, air conditioning, mobile.

All these were unimaginable even for royalty a few 100 years ago. So people had no time to load themselves with unneccities. Because life was tough. Life is tough even now. But without all the comforts and conveniences, it was tougher.

At least, sir. If you go back to recent history, a few 100 years ago, a few 1000 years ago. So the point I’m making is, if some stories, like the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, have survived for centuries, then those stories must have served some purpose. In the past, writing books and printing books was not easy. People had to do it early, so they couldn’t just replicate the books by giving one print command.

So if somebody was going to go through all that labor, they must have felt that this is worthwhile. There’s something worth learning from this. So many atheists are very dismissive about the past and they say oh people in the past were superstitious, foolish, unscientific, but those people survive through tougher times. And and if we look at history across the world, religion, faith in some higher being, and some stories about how human beings interacted with higher reality. These are universal, whether it is a biblical story in the Western world, the Vedic stories in India, they’re always like that.

So these stories have some great value within them. And what is one value? We can talk of many values, but one value we can talk about is how to live at the tension of order and chaos. So Ram is living a peaceful life, and just a big joyful event is to happen. He’s going to be coronated as the cake, and then suddenly what happens in one night everything changes and he has to go to the forest what In America now, currently, the government is becoming a little, more than a little hostile to immigration.

Many Indians, they’re not getting their visa extended and they have come back to India. So, you know, Ram suddenly being exiled. It’s like exile is just one level below execution. Execution means you lose your life itself. Exile means you lose everything except your life.

And, to consider how serious that is, probably the nearest we can get is that we are living in a country and our visa is denied. Oh, suddenly you have to leave that country. You know, your social life is here, your career is here, your friends are here, suddenly you have to leave. But still, you can go back to our home country, we have a life over there, we have a social circle. We made to revive it but we have it.

For Ram, it is nothing. Everything was lost. So, it’s chaos. So suddenly, from order, from a wonderful, joyous order to horrifying chaos. It’s how do you navigate such a transition?

How does one deal with it? And not only was it was the trauma there for Ram, but the trauma was there also for Dashrath. Because Dashrath, as the father, no matter how old a child grows, for the parents, still they are children and they had that mood that, you know, I should take care of them. I should provide for them. I should protect them from trouble.

So somehow for Dashrath to become the cause of that It was because of his word that he had to send his son that his son has to go to the forest. Now Dashrath was so heartbroken that he could never speak those words also. So that night when Kaikeyi made the demand in Dashrut, was shattered. He begged Kaikeyi. No, no, no.

But Kaikeyi didn’t listen. At that time, finally, Kaikeyi only summoned Ram. And when Ram came there, sometimes if you enter into a room itself, you can get a sense of the vibrations in the room. Isn’t it? Sometimes 2 people, they if they have a tension between them.

As soon as you enter, you also feel the tension over there. Isn’t it? You feel as if you are walking into a minefield. Isn’t it? So Ram immediately could feel immediately felt that there’s some tension between Dashrath and Keke.

And he could see Dasharat was disheveled, distressed, and Kaike was looking cold and feeling. And Dasharat couldn’t even speak the words. It is Kaikeyi who spoke. You know, based on the promise a father has given, he has told that Bharat will become the king, and he will go to the forest for 14 years. And Dasharat just wailed in sorrow.

We just couldn’t do anything to stop it. So it was not just for Ram, but it was for everyone. Suddenly, chaos had come. From order, sudden chaos came about. Now how do we navigate it?

How do we deal with life when life suddenly throws a horrible change in our lives. Everything that we have held dear, it’s just been ripped away from us. So Dashrath protests, but somehow, Rama says, I’ll honor your word. I’ll go. And when Ram departs, Dasharaj just doesn’t know, what can I do?

What did I do wrong? It was in good faith that he had and Kaikeyi had helped him long ago in a war. At that time, he had given a boon that I will fulfill 2 of your desires. She said, I don’t want anything now. I don’t want anything.

He says, in future, if you want something, you can ask. Now he had never thought you would ask something like this. So he was bound by the word of honor. So what did he do wrong? What could he have done?

He was searching for explanations. How did your thing happen? How did Kaikeyi become like this? How did Ram have to go like that? He was constantly lamenting, berating himself.

And slowly, his spirit started sinking. At that time, Kausheen Lai was initially very upset, very hurt, but then Ram consoled her and consoled her and said that the king is not behind this the king is obliged, king is not desiring this Kaushalaya had said that I will come with you how can I live in a kingdom which has exiled you? If Kaikeyi has done this, now Kaikeyi will further do so many things. If she can go to this extreme, what will she do in your absence? Please take me with you all through the forest.

So Ram says no. At this point, the king has been terribly betrayed by his youngest wife. This is the time when he needs you the most. If you also abandon him, he will not be able to survive. Through thick and thin, we’re meant to be together.

So basically, Ram helped her see that Dashrath was not the victimizer but Dashrath was the victim. There’s one thing we see in the Ramayana that people are committed to their relationships. See, relationships are tough work. In movies, people say one person sees another and they fall in love. Now, they say love at first sight.

Well, okay. Love at first sight can happen, but the test of love is what happens after many sides. So any kind of relationship requires it’s hard work, it requires commitment. And if people are fickle, there is anytime a problem comes up, I’m out of here. Then, you just every relationship, it is meant to give us some structure, some stability.

But anytime some disruption, disorder comes up, and you say, I’m out of here. Then, the very thing that is meant to create structure in our lives, we live in constant fear, this will create chaos. Then, we just can’t have any stability. So Ram reminds Kaushalya, and Kaushalya is constantly with Dashrath thereafter. And then Dashrath says, he’s just trying to make sense of what happened.

And then he says, I remember a curse. Long ago, I was cursed. And then he says that when I had gone hunting, at that time, I was practicing hunting simply by sound. Sometimes enemies might attack, from behind or from in some some invisible place. So just hearing the sound and fighting, that’s also an important skill.

So he was practicing that and he was waiting in behind some bushes near a pond, and he heard someone, someone lapping water, and he shot an arrow. An arrow went and thudded into someone, and he just felt happy. I hit the target. But then his happiness changed into horror because he heard a human scream in pain. He ran there, and he saw a Brahmin boy over there.

Who was that? Saram. Saramana. Saramana. So and Saramana is he said, what what wrong did I do to you?

How can you can apologize for small things when you’re killing someone? How can you apologize? What is the meaning of an apology also at that time? So he said, my parents are blind. No.

They have no one except me. They asked me to get some water. So what I saw here, come out here, at least please go and give them water. Now when you went there, you gave them water, but people who are, say, not having one sense, they become sharper in other senses. So just by his footsteps, they could make out this was not Chirawan.

So he says, sir, who are you? And the heavy heart darshan told the whole story. And the jusr said, it was it was completely a mistake. And they said that you have killed our son because he was our everything. And because you made us die in separation from your son, We curse you that you will die in separation from your son.

Now here, they were not being vindictive. They didn’t say that your son will die. They just said you will be separated from your son. So they said that you have done some bad karma and you have to get some consequence for that. If there had been vindictiveness, your son will die and that’s how you will be separated.

But what happened? Has Dasharat remembered the story? He, oh, that curse is coming true. And he told Kaushalya that now I think my time of my death has come. He says, no, no, you’re healthy.

But the hand of destiny was moving. But this understanding, Oh, that curse was there. That’s why this happened. That helped Dasharath to gain some kind of tolerance, some kind of acceptance, some kind of closure. When something bad has happened, as long as we are resenting it, it just why did this happen?

Why did this happen? Why did this happen? That just dissipates our energy, and we hurt ourselves, and we can’t move forward. So remembering that curse enabled him to be in acceptance. And then that night when he went to sleep, the next morning, when the bards came to sing to wake him up, he didn’t wake up.

He had still gone to sleep forever. In his sleep, he departed. So now here, Dashira now this raises 2, 3 questions. So if somebody is cursed, does that mean that they’ll that everything is pre ordered? That this is how things are going to happen?

And, oh, now, how does all this apply in our lives? So there are 2 things. There is intolerance. Not intolerance, but within tolerance, there are 2 things which need to be carefully understood the difference. See, tolerance is accepting reality.

It is not resigning ourselves to reality. Acceptance and resignation are 2 different things. When we equate or conflate the 2, then we feel how can I accept if we think that acceptance is resignation, then we refuse to accept? And then we hurt ourselves. Or if we equate acceptance with resignation and we do nothing.

That is also not desirable. So that will be the theme of subsequent discussion. Any questions till now? Yes, ma’am. The destiny is the situation we face in our life.

And with our limited life, liberty and, the free will, how we face the situation? To accept the situation as it is or how we have overcome the situation Yes. Destiny. Okay. That’s what I’m going to discuss in the subsequent talk.

Okay. So I’ll con I’ll come up to that. So now let’s look at a point that Dashrath, he experienced chaos. When he experienced that chaos, that his son went away and his wife turned against him. Now to go through chaos, to live through chaos, we need some some strand of order at least.

And this is remembering this curse helped him make some sense of things and that’s how he accepted. So now could we say that does that this means everything was destined? That Kaikeyi’s curse was all Kaikeyi’s change of heart was also destined, At rams going to the forest was also destined. Dashrath’s dying was also destined. What about this?

No. The curse the curse was basically Dashrath would be separated from rams, and he would die. Now how that separation would come about, that can happen in many different ways. It this doesn’t justify what Kalki did. You know?

A you say, a comes and suddenly gives a slap to b. Says, why did you slap me? I just gave you your karma. What? First of all, how do you know my karma?

I said, and who gave you the right to give you my karma? Give me my karma even if it is. It’s if a goes and slaps b now it could be that b deserved to be slapped for something. But if a takes the law in one’s own hand and does that, it’s a who gets implicated. It is sometimes the law of karma I can keep it below.

Law of karma, if it is not understood carefully, then very peculiar understandings can come up. So I was in, where was I? I was in a class in Stanford, and before that, somebody had spoken in karma. So after my class, one person asked the question. He said that you Indians, you love cows so much, and you say that if somebody slaughters a cow, then what will happen?

It’s Oh, yeah. They will what will happen? They will be born as a Yeah. They will be born as Yes, sir. As a cow and they will be slaughtered.

They will be born as cows, and they will be slaughtered. Since that means all cows now were cow slaughterers in the previous life. So what’s wrong with killing them? It that’s a distorted understanding. See, this is in logic, it’s called the error of the antecedent.

Error of the antecedent means a leads to b. If a, then b. But that does not mean if b, then a. That means, let’s say, if you say, if it rains, the pavement will be wet. So if a, then b.

So today, tomorrow morning, I go out and I see the pavement is wet. Now does that mean it has rain yesterday? No. Not necessarily. Maybe there’s a leakage and water has come out, or maybe somebody was watering the grass and some water spilled over.

Or maybe somebody who’s carrying some buckets and water spilled. So many other causes could be there. Unless we can say that b cannot happen ever, any reason except a, then we could say if b, then a. So if a then b does not mean if b then a. Similarly, if somebody slaughters cows, then they will be slaughtered, they will become cows.

And that means the point here is if a then b. But that does not mean if b then a. That does not mean all cows were cow’s slaughtered. See, the point also is of karma is that the point here is that we get the consequences for our actions. And even if we assume for argument’s sake that a cow was a cow slaughter in the past actually, cows are so gentle.

It’s if you’re able to imagine them as being cow slaughterrs in the past. But even if we assume for argument’s sake, is the cow slaughterer now given the authority by karma to slaughter the cow? No. Who gave them the who gave them the right to take the law in their own hands? This is called vigilante justice.

Sometimes, some people take the law in their own hands, and they decide, this person is a criminal. I’m gonna shoot. Now sometimes, movies of vigilante justice may become popular. But in real life, if people become vigilantes, law and order would collapse. So so the point here is that we have to understand karma carefully.

So yes, because of that mistake that happened from Dasharat, he was supposed to be in die in separation from Ram. But that doesn’t mean that what Kaikeyi did was right. What Kaikeyi did was still wrong. But destiny’s plan is so expert that destiny can use even people’s misdeeds to further its own plan. But when they do a misdeed, it is it is destinies acting through them.

Prabhupad would sometimes talk about how in the in the communist countries, there is a sustained campaign against atheism. In fact, we all hear about the 1st World War, 2nd World War. But in the communist countries, more than a 100,000,000 people were killed. The government itself killed its own citizens. So more than any religious violence and terrorism, now more than World War 1 and World War 2, communism was official atheism.

So people say religion causes violence, but the history shows that atheism has caused far greater violence. Of course, we can say that it’s neither religion nor atheism that causes violence. It’s people who cause violence. But people can use religion to justify violence. People can use atheism to justify violence.

But the historical record says that when there is atheism, people can cause people can and have caused far greater death and destruction. So, what this communist would do is that they would they would they would take all the bread, all the food to themselves. Government would snatch all the produce. So even if you have your own field and you have grains over there, you cannot eat those grains. The government will come and take all the grains, and the government will decide how many grains, how many grains your family needs, and the government will provide you that much.

So then what happened is that they will go to the church. There was some some some religion was there. They will go to, they said, where are you going to church? They’re going to pray to god. What are you going to pray?

Christians have the standard prayer. Oh, father, thou art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Give us our daily bread. Prabhupada said this prayer shows your love for bread, not your love for God. It’s okay.

At least you’re going having enough faith in God that you’re going to God for that. But, anyway, they would go there. Okay. Pray. And then they would come out, and they would say that, okay.

So did you get get your bread? He says, no. Okay. Now you pray to us. Please give us our bread.

And they would have truckloads of bread ready, and they would give it. See. So who fulfilled your need? God or me? Oh, you fulfilled.

Therefore, there’s no God followers. So Prabhupada said that and this was shortsightedness that actually if we consider as a point, the point I was making is destiny can act in various ways. So the same god whom they went into church and prayed to, that god fulfilled that prayer through the communists. So, sometimes, something that is meant to happen can happen through people who have no intention for doing something doing a part of something higher or being a part of something higher. So although Kaikeyi did this, Dashrath was still responsible.

Sorry. Kaikeyi was still responsible. Although Kaikeyi was giving Dashrath’s innocence karma to him. But she didn’t have to do that. It could have happened some other way.

Maybe Ram went to the forest for something, and that time Dashrath died. He would have died in separation. It could have happened in many different ways. So but Dashrath was able to accept. See, generally, if somebody has hurt us, then the resentment against them, the sense of betrayal, the sense of hurt, it can be a it can become a big burden on us.

So it was not that Dasharat completely forgave Kyi Kyi. She’s still wronged him, but he did not have that enormous negativity against her. So he was able to accept what happened, and he ended. And he was able to depart from the world gracefully. Generally, there are different ways to die.

But if somebody dies in their sleep, we can say, at least to our vision, the death is not very violent, not very painful. He’s departed. And because he was so closely related to Ram, devoted to Ram, obviously, he was elevated. So for all of us, sometimes when we get this chaos, Dashivat was able to make sense of the chaos, chaos by, he remembering the story. Now, what do we do?

I said, we’ll talk about the difference between accepting and resigning. So whenever things go out of control or whenever a lot goes out of control, we have 2 choices. 1 is keep fighting against the thing that has gone out of control, the thing that has changed terribly, and sometimes it’s just irrevocable. You can’t do anything about it. The other is we accept what has happened and then focus on what we can do.

So acceptance is acceptance and resignation. The main difference is in resignation, we think nothing is in my control and I give up. Acceptance is where we accept this can’t be changed. So then what can I do? What can I do?

So broadly speaking, if you consider Indian civilization or Eastern civilization versus Western civilization, Western civilization has always focused more on changing things. Something has gone wrong, change it. Fix it. Fix it. Fix it.

Fix it. In Eastern civilization, it has been more excellent. It’s happened. Accept it now. Now, both can be taken towards extreme.

We all need to change things. We live at the tension between chaos and order and chaos. So if we try to manage the chaos too much, control the chaos too much, how this this changes, changes, changes, changes, changes, then what happens? There is no stability, We keep trying to change. And then the structure gets lost by that because structure can be structure can be established only based on the things that are in our control.

Things that are out of our control, we can’t have order over there. So too much trying to change leads to instability. That’s why we see in the western culture, whenever people come to an uncomfortable situation, just change. So relationships have very less stability. In fact, nowadays, if you consider marriage, many people don’t even get married because they just don’t want any commitments.

So then the family is the most fundamental structure underlying society. But if we can’t accept, okay, sometimes people are not the way I want them to be. Not the way I expected them to be. But still, let’s move on with life. But when that when that inability to accept change is there, then just finish this off.

Give it up. Now, of course, you could go to the other extreme, and sometimes, if we just if we make acceptance into a fetish, then even if somebody is being abusive, even if somebody is being, excessive in their actions, they might just passively accept it. So in in a sense, one reason why invaders were able to conquer and rule India was because the Kshatriyas were quite in this mood of changing things. But the people in general is accepted. Whoever is the ruler, we will pay taxes to them.

That’s how a few 1,000 Britishers were able to rule millions of Indians because Indians did not have their mood of revolution. Now whether that is good or bad, we could say it’s some people say it’s bad. You know, Indians are always passive. But it’s not that Indians are passive. And the Indian culture is civilization is probably the only civilization from ancient time that has been surviving.

Because the Chinese is also surviving, but modern China is very, very different from ancient China. Modern India is also very different, but still there’s a lot of similarity. Otherwise, if you consider Mazapotiman civilization or Mayan civilization or so many other civili Aztec civilization, none of them are actually, there now. So there is a resilience that comes by the capacity for acceptance. So for Dashrath, he was able to accept by remembering that curse.

For all of us, how do we accept? We understand that we don’t know what destiny holds in future for us. We don’t know what the future holds, but we can know who holds the future. We can’t know what the future holds, but we can know who holds the future. Who holds the future?

Krishna. Krishna, the lord. So beyond this or beyond our order and the order that we’re trying to have and the chaos that is coming in our lives, Krishna exists beyond all this. Sad asad param yat, the Bhagavad Gita says that. There is cause and effect in this world.

Krishna ex exists beyond the cause and effect. So through the order that we maintain in our life, through the chaos that comes up in our life, through both, Krishna remains in control. And Krishna is expert enough to bring good even out of the bad. For Dashrath, the good that came was that he, although he died, he died completely absorbed in remembrance of Ram and that, although the situation was painful, the disposition was completely absorbed. And that’s why, in a sense, it was auspicious.

And because Ram went away, that’s how he was able to combat the demons, and he was able to rid the earth of the rakshasas. So although Kaikeyi’s actions were bad, but by the law, the arrangement could came out of it. So when we practice bhakti, it is not just about doing some ritual. Coming to some satsang or chanting some japa or doing some pooja, all these are, of course, important. But the purpose of all these is to help us connect with Krishna, to make our shelter in Krishna.

If our shelter is in the order that we have established in our life, if our shelter is in the job that we have, in the skills that we have, in the bank balance that we have, if these are our shelter, that order can go away at any time. That doesn’t mean this order is unimportant. Practically, it is extremely important, but we understand that we alone are not the sustainers of this order. It is Krishna who has given us some abilities, and with those abilities, we are able to sustain that order. And even if that order we can’t sustain, Krishna still remains in control.

So if we use whatever order we have to connect with Krishna, then whenever chaos comes in our life and the order that we have created is disrupted, we won’t become overwhelmed by that. Certainly, it’ll be a disturbance. But disturbance is one thing and devastation is another thing. We We won’t become so disheartened that we’ll become devastated. So sometimes, order can be a good foundation by which you can connect with Krishna.

That means, like, okay. When things are going on more or less well in our life, then we can go regular temple. We can do bhakti. But sometimes, order can become an enemy of bhakti. Because what happens when there’s order we think?

Things are fine. When I started practicing bhakti about 20, 25 years ago, I was talking with one of my uncles. I was talking about God. He said, I believe in God. He says, he’s happy there.

I’m happy here. So, okay. You’re happy here? But for how long? Isn’t it?

So if our order makes us complacent, then sometimes, this order will come up. Chaos will come up. Hey. I’m not happy here. What’s up, Dick?

So we try to maintain order, but we shouldn’t make our devotion dependent on the order. Devotion is what I want to practice. Whether there’s order, there’s no order. And sometimes the disruption of the order may intensify our devotion. The presence of order may make us complacent.

Things go wrong. Oh, Krishna. I need your help. Please help me. That’s why we pray to Krishna.

Krishna. Now, this doesn’t mean that disruption of order itself is desirable. Prabhupada asked that, in 19 seventies, at that time, it seemed that the world was on the brink of a 3rd world war. So Prabhupada asked, if the 3rd world war happens, will all that death and destruction make people more devoted? He said no.

Death and destruction are always there in the world. He said they may not be as sudden as if a war happens. See, Devotion grows when people consciously turn toward God. Now, destruction might cause devastation might temporarily impel them toward God. So sometimes, chaos can impel people towards God.

But if there’s constant chaos, then that also saps the spirit of people. See, say, for example, yesterday on Nirjali kadush, and those of us who fasted, probably we chanted much more intensely than usual. Now if somebody says that, hey. You know, you chanted so nicely on Nirjali kadush. Let’s do everyday Nirjali.

Then we’ll stop chatting only. So so too much disorder is also not desirable. So it’s neither order nor disorder. It’s neither order nor chaos that actually takes us toward Krishna. It is our intention, our decision, our choice that takes us toward Krishna.

And if we have that intention to connect with Krishna, then through order, we’ll connect with him and through chaos also, we’ll connect with him. And thus we’ll move steadily forward. So connecting with Krishna is not just about transcending the world. Connecting with Krishna also gives us calmness. It gives us clarity.

It gives us confidence and then what we can do, we will be able to do. So connecting with Krishna helps us to accept, not to resign because once we accept, okay, this I can’t change. But what can I do in this How can I serve Krishna in this situation? And then we start, okay, this I can do, this I can do, this I can do, and then we’ll be able to move forward. Krishna says, I will give you the intelligence by which you can come to me.

So by connecting with Krishna through order and through chaos, we will be able to move forward in our life. Because through with that that connection will be our supreme order. And that will help us. See, Dasharat found that strand of order by remembering that curse. Now we may or not may or may not find that kind of explanation when some chaos comes in our life.

But if we have that connection with Krishna, this is one anchor that doesn’t shake. This is a rock that is on which I can have my foundation. Then we can move forward, and we can grow through order, and we can grow through chaos, both. And ultimately, by doing like this, we become increasingly devoted to Krishna. We become absorbed in Krishna and ultimately, we attain Krishna’s abode, which is vaikuntha.

Vaikuntha. Kuntha means anxiety. The anxiety comes because the order may go away anytime. The chaos may come upon us anytime. But when we attain vaikuntha, then Krishna’s order is there and the order is there in our hearts, and we live joyfully there.

So I’ll summarize. I spoke today on the topic of managing order and chaos, and we look at Dasharat’s story. So first, I started by talking about how in our life we need structure, but we also need adventure. If it’s only structure, if somebody tells me just whole day watch what you did yesterday. Become boring, predictable and unbearable after some day.

So on the other hand, if everything is disorderly, then we won’t be able to function at all. So we need order. Order is the result of things that are in our control and chaos is order things that are not in our control, and we live at the junction between the 2. We live at the tension. So if our order is in our job, we might go to office and find the office itself is not there.

What do you do at that time? So how to, how to deal with life when chaos suddenly descends upon us? That was that is what the scriptures teach us through the narratives. I talked about people may say atheists may say everything, the religious stuff is old fashioned and useless. But nature is efficient.

It only lets those things which are useful survive. Other things get eliminated. So people in the past lived much tougher lives than us, so they still wrote and remembered and preserved these stories because they served some purpose, and the purpose that they served was these stories offer them guideline about how to live in the world. How to live in the world means how to manage or the how to live with the tension of order and chaos. And then I talked about Dasharat’s story, how suddenly things changed for him.

His wife, Kaikeya, just turned against him. And then, for Ram suddenly got into the got of the kingdom, it was like losing everything except his life. Bad for Dashwood, it was even more mortifying because he was seen as the cause of all this. So how could he accept it? He just couldn’t till he remembered that he had been cursed because of his accidentally killing Shravana, and that helped him to gain acceptance.

Now, was we discussed that although this curse was coming, that doesn’t mean that Kaikeyi was not responsible. Our karma may come upon us through anyone, but that doesn’t mean that person gets, is simply being a vaya medium for the karma. That person has their own desires, agendas, and they are responsible for those. We talk about how we should not twist the logic and those who slaughter cows will be slaughtered. That doesn’t mean the cows are cow slaughterers.

We talk about the error of the antecedent a. If a, then b doesn’t mean if b, then a. And so then he was able to accept this, and then he departed peacefully, remembering the lord and in separation from him. So then I in conclusion, I discussed about how for all of us, destiny means that the order that we have established, it might get disrupted anytime. So by destiny, for our birth, our birth, our color, our skin color, so many things are determined, which we can’t change.

But still, within this order, there is some opportunity for us to create something new, to to create a better life for ourselves. And if we do not accept that which is unchangeable, then we dissipate our energy into resent resentment. Accepting is not resigning. Resigning means nothing is in my hands. Accepting means, okay, this is not in my hands.

What is in my hand? Let me focus on that. And the way we can do that is by recognizing that beyond order and beyond, chaos, there is supreme Lord. And our shelter comes our shelter needs to come not from the order that we have established in our world but through our connection with Krishna. Bhakti is not just a is not meant to be a spiritualist state.

Bhakti is meant to make our consciousness spiritual, connect us with Krishna. And then when we have that connection, basic level of order can help us steadily connect with Krishna. But if the order makes us cons complacent, then disorder, chaos can help us intensify our connection with Krishna. But too much disorder, if it is there, then that can make us so insecure and life so unbearable that, again, we can’t connect with Krishna. So now sometimes the disorder will be more in our lives, sometimes the order will be more in our lives.

But we, in in Indian civilizations, in eastern civilizations, accept whatever disorder is there, just continue with your life. The western civilization, the idea is if there’s any disorder, change that. But then disorder keeps coming in many ways, and at Indian sense, there is that any passivity that might come to take into an extreme level and say in relationships, people might accept you and abuse. But they are going to other extreme. Anything doesn’t work, just change it.

That’ll lead to lack of stability, lack of commitment, and there’ll be no social foundation of a family left also. So we need a balance. And if we focus on connecting with Krishna, then we will get the intelligence from within of how to maintain the order and how to deal with the chaos. And through order and through chaos, both we will move toward Krishna and ultimately, we’ll attain his abode where we will be free forever from chaos in loving harmony with him forever. Thank you very much.

Hooray, Krishna. So any questions or comments? Yes, bro. Hey, Krishna, professor. Thank you very much for a nice, talk.

So you’re you’re saying that when something when somebody does something, he’s he’s just being an instrument of fate or instrument of instrument of, the destinies. So so you so you we can’t so but but you also said that he has some he may have some motive. Like, why can’t he have some motive? So so with with a motive, then how can they be a pure instrument? I said they’re not a pure instrument.

So when something happens to us, somebody does something to us, if they have their own intentions, then how are they, instruments of akarma? That’s why I said God can use things which in even people’s bad action, they can also use, like the communist side of the example. God used them to fulfill the need for bread of the peasants. So now if they are doing something wrong, then we have to decide using our intelligence how to respond. So when Ram was exiled to the forest, at that time, he accepted that as destiny.

But when Sita was abducted by Ravan, Ram did not accept that as destiny. Sameer, Ram fought a war to get Sita back. So the point is that in different situations, we may have to respond differently. And the basis for that response is, what is our purpose? Tomorrow, I’ll be talking elaborately about this, about how to respond differently in different situations, but I can mention this briefly that broadly speaking, whenever we face some unpleasant situation, difficult situation, we have 3 options.

I call it as tolerate, mitigate, or immigrate. Just accept the situation, tolerate it. Mitigate is work to change that situation. Immigrate is it’s true message. I’ll just leave it.

Now all 3 are valid approaches depending on what is our purpose. A purpose means we all have certain things important in our life. Say, a simple example could be if you are traveling in a local train. Say in India, we have these metro trains. In Mumbai, the capacity of the bogey might be 50 and there are 300 people over there.

So you’re squeezed. And some in every group of people, there are some people who are bullies. I suppose we are standing, and there’s a person next to us who starts pushing us. And supposedly, you think you’re so strong? I’ll show you how strong I am.

And we push them back. And they push us back. We get so caught in pushing each other that our station comes and goes. And we are still pushing. So there, you could say that, just a small thing, it’s a short journey, just tolerate it.

Just if you want to push, I’ll just move somewhere aside. Isn’t it? So there, the small thing is tolerated. But suppose that person starts pushing us out of the train itself, then you can’t tolerate it because what is happening is the small thing is where we stand in the train. The big thing is we get to the destination.

So if somebody starts interfering with the big thing that we are doing itself, then tolerance will not work. So what happens for most people, what is a small thing and what is a big thing, they’re not clear. And if we have nothing to fight, if we don’t have anything to fight for, it’s not that we will stop fighting. If we don’t have anything to fight for, we will fight for anything. So small things become big.

I was in Canada. I was staying at the house of a devotee who is, whose wife, Hare Krishna. Chaos. Hare Krishna. Hare Krishna.

Hare Krishna. Okay. Okay. So his wife is a family lawyer. Actually, this devotee, he has his own business, but he also does, he also does vivaha yagna.

He’s a priest. So he was telling that we are a complete package. You come to Vivo marriage, you go to my wife for divorce. So I was talking with that Vatajay, and she said that people come to people come to me for such trivial reasons. He said that, there’s this one lady who came to me, Canadian lady, and she said that, Canadian lady.

And she said that, you know, I want to separate. He says, why? He said, you know, I went into my restroom today, and I saw that my husband had used my toothpaste without my permission. I said, are you serious? He said, I said, are you serious?

He said, yes. He said, you know, I cannot take that case. You go to someone else. Now, the point is that if we don’t have anything big in, we don’t have a big thing, then the mind can make a small thing also very big. That’s why we all need to have something big, something important in our lives.

Then we can keep small things small. So, if that happens, then okay. If if the person is pushing it out of the trend itself, then we might have to mitigate. Now how do we mitigate? We might just call out to other people.

This person is troubling me. We might call the TC or someone, or we find that everybody around seems to be supporting that person. Maybe there’s a gang over there and persons. Then we might decide, you know, I just go to some other boogie, other coach and go. So immigrate.

So all 3 can be done with a negative attitude, you know, or all 3 can be done with a positive purpose. So if we have the purpose clear, then we will understand. Okay. What should I do? Small thing, keep it small.

It’s a big thing, I have to do something about it. Okay. Any other questions? Your question was answered, I think, isn’t it? Yes.

Thank you. Somewhat? Okay. Tomorrow, I will talk more about that. Yeah.

Deal with discouragements and delivery. Yeah. Yes, Rahul. You will be often find that, people are confused with the fact that what is destiny and what is free will, especially when it comes to the few certain challenging situations in life. And an example of that, sometimes we hear people say, so, they come to the temple or, you know, come to the programs.

Oh, my time hasn’t yet Okay. So what is destiny and what is free will if somebody says, we invite them to temple, and they say that it’s my destiny is not there to come to the temple. My time has not yet come. Well, see, destiny determines our situations. It doesn’t determine our actions.

In every situation, there’s always something in our control. So can we say that, I’m destined not to come to the temple right now? Well, not exactly. We always have free will, and by our free will, we can come to the temple anytime. More often than not, this is, this is just a excuse used to not come to a temple.

You can just turn it around. Say, okay. Okay. You invite them to a temple. Can you come tomorrow evening?

He says, no. Why? Okay. Where are you going? Oh, I’m going to maybe I’m going to this party.

Maybe it’s not your destiny to go to that party. You would think like that, isn’t it? If you want to go to the party, you won’t let the idea of destiny come in the way for that. So if there’s a now this cricket world cup is going on, and then there’s, you you there are people who go from all over the world to to now you to UK to watch cricket matches. So I was talking with a devotee in London.

He was telling me that his friend came from came from India, and I think yesterday, her sister was there’s a match which was washed away or something like that. So he said he had bought the ticket in black. And now the government the the if the match is washed off, then whoever has bought the ticket, the the credit card will refund them. But, you know, he had bought it. I was shocked.

Like, something like he bought the ticket for 50,000 rupees or 75,000 rupees, something like that. The ticket cost was more than the cost to come to America. Cost to come to UK? So it’s crazy. And he said, I probably got nothing back.

So, you know, there, sometimes it you might go there also. It might not be your destiny. So you go for the cricket match, but you can’t watch the match. But the point is that we don’t use the idea of destiny to not do the things which we want to do, isn’t it? So if somebody is saying, it’s not my destiny to go to the temple, let’s be honest.

You don’t want to come to the temple. That’s not that doesn’t make you necessarily a bad person, but don’t use, don’t use such rationalizations. You need to rationalize. You know? What is the spelling of rationalize?

You can have a different spelling. R a t I o n a l l I e s. Rational lies. So So when we rationalize, we give rational lies. So now having said that, it is also true that people may need to go to need to go through certain situations be before they realize that, okay, this is is coming to exploring life spiritual side is also important for me.

So if that is the case, then if somebody like that, they don’t want to come, then we can just maintain a cordial relationship with them. And sometimes when the life is like a school of hard knocks, and sometimes when they get get a some serious knock, at that time, they might come. So if somebody is not ready to come, we don’t have to condemn them. But the best not they don’t use the rationalization. Okay.

If you’re not interested, it’s okay. But if if they feel at the end of the interaction that they just met a nice person, they feel the devotees are nice people, Then later on, when they feel the need to explore something spiritual, then they will come to a devotee. They will come to Krishna. But sometimes what we do is just as people can abuse philosophy to not come to a temple, we can also abuse philosophy to condemn them. So we open the door for people to come to Krishna, and if they say they’re not going to come, we just bang the door in their face.

You are a envious person. You are a soul who’s gonna suffer in material existence. You are going to go to hell. Hopefully, we won’t say something like that. But we just open the door, and if they don’t come in, it’s fine.

Leave it open for them. Whenever they want, they can come. K? But destiny doesn’t determine our actions. It determines only the situations that we face.

Okay. Any other questions? So we have a choice to choose the situation, or we have a choice to face the situation? That’s what I said. Tolerate mitigate is what do you do with the situation?

Either you face the situation and live with it. You face the situation and change it. Our free will. That’s, of course, our free will. Charge or face and change the situation or walk away from the situation.

That’s the choice we have. That’s our free will. Yes. This question here, Samu? Yes.

Usually, in Krishna consciousness, Mhmm. So Yeah. Yeah. So usually in, in Krishna consciousness, we we keep talking about birth, death, and old age, and disease. So these are the 4 most, like, chaotic chaotic factor.

Correct. Yes. Birth, death, and old age, and disease. But, but sometimes when we put this forward, like, we people are people don’t accept this chaos. They’re saying, no.

Life is life is quite good. You people are negative. You still are quite negative. So can we be sometimes we’re talking too much about chaos, and so that’s why we we don’t, people are not attracted to Krishna consciousness because they feel that we’re talking too much about chaos? That’s possible.

That sometimes if we tell to people about old age, deceased, death, and they feel you’re always being too negative, and they don’t take up Krishna consciousness. So we have to find out that, say, if if a person is here and Krishna is here. Now 2 things we need to try to when talking with people, try to understand what will get them to come towards Krishna and what will keep them from coming to Krishna, and that will vary from person to person. So depending on whom we are interacting with, we need to customize the presentation. I find that talking about old ABC’s death, it just doesn’t make sense to most people, because at least the media creates the illusion that life is comfortable.

Most people feel that life is comfortable. Somehow, just my life is not comfortable. But I just adjust do that adjustment with my life will also become comfortable. So so the whole culture of comfort and enjoyment that is depicted through the media, it makes people disinclined for any radical change of lifestyle. They think, I just make some material improvement, then I’ll be happy.

So so what we can do is, as one thing which I find very universally applicable is to talk about mind and problems related with the mind. In fact, if you tell people you are not the body, people are just not not interested. One of my friends was a preacher in Russia. He told me he’ll give a class, which he told, you’re not your body. Then this is one person asked a question.

If I am not my body, then whose body am I? So I’m convinced I have the body. So then I match somebody else’s body. What is going on? So for people to they just can’t understand it because there’s so much in bodily conception, or they troubles everyone.

And so the standard example I give in my talks with new people, with companies or colleges or wherever is that, the metaphor of the computer. And the the car body metaphor also doesn’t seem so relevant to people now. The computer metaphor is that and the computer, there’s hardware, software, and user. So like that, there’s the body, there’s the mind, and there’s the soul. The mind is like the software, the body is like the hardware.

The soul is the user. And just as if the software gets corrupted, you can’t use the hardware. Similarly, if our mind becomes filled with negativity, with stress, with depression, with worry, then we can’t function properly. Everybody can feel their mind is often sometimes filled with negativities. So now what is happening over here, that people, if they if they understand and at least consider this model, I don’t even say this is what the reality is.

In corporate seminars, I say, the yoga texts offer us a model of the self, which can help us make sense of our own experience life, the way we experience life. So then, we present it that way. If people accept that they are not the mind, then they’ve already accepted they are not the body. So that has come automatically. So in fact, there was an article in New York Times about how in the churches in America have rebranded themselves.

That the whole idea was that God is a cosmic provider. It told that by the god, the god in heaven, give us our daily bread. Now in the western world, people are not worried about bread. If they’re worried, they’re worried about butter. So so depicting God as the cosmic provider, I don’t need anything.

I’ll pro I have my own ways to provide, or my government will provide me. Many come many of the western country, the welfare states. So then the churches have rebranded God not as the cosmic provider but as the cosmic therapist that when you have trouble with the mind, then you go to God and the wisdom from God, the devotion to God will help you to heal yourself internally, and many people are attracted by that. So the point I’m making is we need to if we appear too negative to people, then better change that approach. And so understand what will get them toward Krishna and what will keep them from Krishna, and then present the appropriate aspect of Krishna consciousness to them.

Okay? Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, please. In relation to Mahabharata and, Krishna’s going to the, Okay.

Could Duryodhana have surprised Krishna? Could he have accepted Krishna’s peace proposal and prevented the war? Yes. Definitely. He had that free will, and that’s why everybody gave that counsel to him.

It’s it’s this concept of destiny is also very interesting. Actually, this is I have a whole 3 part seminar on this, but it’s a good point you brought up. So before the Kurukshetra war begins, in fact, even before Krishna comes as a shanti root, at that time, Vyasdev has come to meet titharashtra. And Vyasdev is also trying to persuade him. Stop your son.

Otherwise, the whole Kuru dynasty will be destroyed. And at that time, Dhrtarastra says, if it’s destiny that our dynasty be destroyed, what can I do? So Vyasadev becomes very grim. And Vyasdev actually, he makes the same argument to Vyasdev as well as Vidura. So Vidura is more cutting.

So Vidura says, oh, king, destiny determines the consequences of our actions, not our actions themselves. It’s something if you want anybody asks you what is destiny and what is trivial? Yes. You can tell this. Destiny determines the consequences of our actions, not our actions themselves.

If a student studies for the exam and studies nicely and still somehow because the competition is too high over there and doesn’t get into a particular university, doesn’t get a very good rank, that is destiny. The student doesn’t study for the exam itself. That is not destiny. That is their responsibility. So So the point is that, now Vyazadev also says, he also, he asks, is this world destined?

And Vyazadev becomes very grave. And he says, the ways of destiny are very difficult to understand. Oh king, we can only do our duty. Ponder what is your duty in this situation and do that. After the Kurukshetra war, Dhrishtara is immensely distressed.

He is sinking a notion of lamentation and at that time, Vyasdev Agnya comes back and Vyasdev says at that time that, oh, king, do not lament. This war was destroyed. Now, what does it mean? Now, was the war destroyed, or was the war not destroyed? The point is that philosophy has to be understood in the light of the purpose of the philosophy.

The philosophy doesn’t just exist in the air in isolation. Philosophy has a purpose, and that purpose ultimately is to inspire us to practice dharma, inspire us to live virtuously. So, it’s like how philosophy can be distorted. Say, we could say that when we when we suffer, it’s because of our past life karma. Okay.

That’s okay. Say, if there’s a newborn baby and the baby is crying, and if the baby skin, the mother will immediately rush to pacify the baby. If somebody else the baby is crying because of past karma, let her go cry. That would be ridiculous, isn’t it? So when we can do something to avoid something painful, we should do it.

So the mother should be thinking at that time, what is my dharma? So my dharma is to take care of my baby. But sometimes, it may happen that despite the best efforts of the mother, of the parents, of the doctors, the baby might have some some painful disease. And the baby might be very kind because of that. Now even if they try, you can’t do anything to stop their crying at that.

So then when something is unacceptable, this is destiny. So before the Kurukshetra war, the Trastra was told like this that what is your duty? Contemplate that. And at that time, his duty he was the he was the acting king, so he should have put his foot down and stopped the Duryodhana. But unfortunately, he didn’t.

Now after the war is over, now there is no use beating oneself up. Why did this war happen? Why did I lose all my sons? Just accept it was just it was destiny. Now focus on my duty.

Now his duty that is okay, that chapter of his life is over where he was so attached, irrationality to his sons, especially Durudhan. Now close that chapter and move forward in your life. So destiny so philosophy has to be understood in light of the purpose of the philosophy. Philosophy. That’s why I said earlier also, when Ram was exiled to the forest, he accepted that as destiny.

But when Sita was abducted, he didn’t accept it as destiny because his focus was on his duty, on dharma. He says, I my my dharma in the first case was to obey my father. So it to obey my father, if he wants me, I will ascend the throne. But to obey my father, if he wants me to go to the forest, I’ll go to the forest. So his focus was not on destiny.

His focus was that in doing his duty, how destiny the thought knowledge of destiny can help him. So now, why should I go to the forest? Okay. It I mean, that’s destiny. But his focus was not because of destiny.

I’m accepting it. This is the duty that I should do. I could have done that duty, but why am I told to do this duty of going to the forest? That’s destiny. But when Sita was abducted, at that time, consider what is my duty?

She’s my wife. I have to protect her. So he focused on the duty at that time. So similarly, with respect to Duryodhana, certainly, he had the capacity to choose wisely, and he could have chosen. Now even if he’s destined to die, he might have died in some other way.

The horrifying war which killed so many people didn’t have happened. So he definitely had the free will. Okay? Thank you. So we’ll stop here.

Thank you very much.

The post How to live wisely at the junction of order and chaos Learning from Dasharatha’s destiny appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

The story of Vishvamitra – part 2 – Overcoming anger and arrogance
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna!

So, in America right now, there is a Sadhusanga festival happening. Every year, it takes place during the long weekend. Many devotees gather there and engage in hours and hours of Kirtan.
I was just talking to one devotee who had been inviting me to attend the Kirtan festival. I told him, “Right now, I’m in my own Kirtan festival.”
It’s wonderful to see all of your enthusiasm for Harinam and Harinam Sankirtan.

Now, I’ll quickly recap what I was talking about yesterday regarding the story of Vishwamitra. I’ll summarize the key points we covered, and then we’ll move forward.
We are exploring how we can learn from scriptures about the challenges we will face in life and how we can handle them. Some people ask, “Scriptures were written thousands of years ago—are they really relevant today?”
Yes, it’s true that our situations may differ greatly from those of the past, but more than the external problems we face, what truly defines our life are the internal challenges.

Today, we see people with phenomenal material comforts still experiencing alarming levels of unhappiness. If you were to describe modern society in two words, it would be “comfortably miserable.” We are far more comfortable than people were in the past, yet we are still miserable. So, if we focus only on improving the external aspects of our lives—whether in the world of today or the world described in scriptures—it may seem like there is a difference, and indeed, there is. But the internal world remains the same.
Just as it doesn’t matter whether we’re flying by plane or walking on foot, the sky is illuminated the same way, with the same sun and moon, whether we’re traveling in one way or another. Similarly, scriptures offer timeless truths. While there may be specific variations that don’t apply to us today, the core principles still hold.

We’re looking at Vishwamitra’s story through the lens of the timeless journey that each of us must go through.
Yesterday, I spoke about how Vishwamitra, when he was a powerful king, became increasingly power-hungry. The nature of power often leads people to crave more. He wanted to seize the source of Vasistha’s power, which was the Surabhi cow. When his efforts were thwarted twice—first by the cow, which produced an endless army of soldiers, and then by Vasistha, who used a mystical staff to counter his weapons—Vishwamitra was stunned.

There are multiple stages to this story. Initially, Vishwamitra tried to overpower Vasistha through Kshatriya means. Normally, if one Kshatriya warrior cannot defeat another, they might seek better weapons. So Vishwamitra performed austerities to please Shiva and gained a whole arsenal of celestial weapons. But when he used them against Vasistha, Vasistha countered them effortlessly with his staff. Vishwamitra was shocked. He realized that Kshatriya power could not match Brahminical power. So, he decided to perform even more austerities to gain Brahminical power, not just to gain more weapons, but to access spiritual power.

During his austerities, he was first tempted by desire. I spoke about Menaka’s arrival, and how even the most disciplined among us can be distracted by desire. Everyone has goals, and even material pursuits often require discipline. I talked about how impulses can distract us. When Vishwamitra resisted that temptation and transcended it, the next challenge that came to him was anger. Desire and anger are often connected. In the Dharmic tradition, it’s said that krodha (anger) is the younger brother of kama (desire). Anger outwardly manifests as aggression, and inwardly, it manifests as depression. When we’re depressed, we’re often just angry with ourselves—“Why am I not good enough?”

In today’s world, we see both of these forms of anger. Sometimes, they manifest as frustrated desires. Vishwamitra was not immune to this either. During his austerities, Indra, feeling insecure, sent another apsara—Rambha. Vishwamitra was now alert and determined not to fall for the same temptation. However, what often happens is that when we gain some level of self-control, we develop the subtle notion that we are the controllers.

When we succeed in controlling our senses, we may begin to think we are in control of everything. This is a dangerous trap. If we cannot control ourselves at all, we don’t have a strong sense of being the controller. But once we start gaining some self-control, the illusion that we are in charge can grow stronger. And when this sense of control is disturbed, it can lead to overreactions. Self-control is important, but when we become attached to the idea of being the controller, we can become intolerant of anything that disrupts our sense of control.

This is why sages who practice spirituality without connecting to the Supreme Lord can be vulnerable to anger. Of course, we should practice self-control, but the purpose of self-control is not to dominate the external world. The purpose is to serve Krishna better. The goal of self-control is to offer our will to the Supreme Controller.

When Rambha came before Vishwamitra, he did not succumb to desire. But when his sense of control was disrupted, his anger flared up. He was determined to succeed, and he couldn’t tolerate any temptation. His anger burst out, and he cursed Rambha. Sometimes, this happens to us too—when we are so controlled that we become hard-hearted. We dismiss all emotions as sentimentality, and this can lead to harshness. Vishwamitra’s curse transformed Rambha into a stone.

Of course, since she had come on Indra’s behalf, he eventually rescued her.

But at this point, what happened? Whenever anyone performs austerity, they gain certain powers from that. However, the nature of power is that, just like Lakshmi is fickle—wealth comes and goes—some people say money talks. If someone arrives in a fancy car or wearing expensive clothes, everyone takes notice. Money talks, indeed, but money talks and walks away while it’s talking. What this means is that the more we display our wealth, the more we spend to show it off.

It’s similar when we focus on showcasing our power. Eventually, if we don’t use it wisely, it will be lost. This is true for any form of power. When Vishwamitra used his mystic power to curse Rambha, what happened? He lost that power and fell back.

Now, what do we mean by “losing power”? Power here is not like a bank account where you can see a withdrawal. It’s not literal. But you can consider that consciousness is our most important resource. When we are distracted, we are disempowered. Whatever we want to do in life—whether it’s studying, speaking, or anything else—good memory, analytical skills, and articulation are helpful, but all these things are effective only if our consciousness is in control. If we are distracted, nothing works. So, consciousness is our most fundamental resource.

When we focus, our consciousness becomes concentrated and purposeful. But when we allow it to get misdirected, we lose that focus, that power. When Vishwamitra gave in to anger, he became frustrated again, losing his focus. He didn’t want to be distracted anymore.

Now, what should we do about anger? We all get angry sometimes. When we feel angry, sometimes our devotion might even justify it. We might say, “My anger is like Hanuman’s anger when he burned Lanka.” But even Hanuman regretted his anger after burning Lanka. He wondered if he had burned the Ashoka Vatika and whether Sita had been harmed. When he realized Sita was safe, a celestial voice reassured him.

The point is, Hanuman didn’t celebrate his anger, but he used it in the service of Lord Ram. Anger, in this sense, can go off course if not controlled. Managing anger is a big topic, but generally, we need to develop our “pause button.”

When we experience emotions like anger, we need to process them. The pause button works by two things: changing the situation or changing our perspective. If the situation is triggering us, we may need to move away from it. If we are in a provocative environment, staying in it may just fuel the fire. We’re all inflammable to varying degrees. Changing the situation can help avoid worsening things.

Alternatively, changing perspective means looking at things in a new light. This is where Krishna consciousness comes in. When anger arises, chant Hare Krishna. Chanting Hare Krishna isn’t just a ritual; it’s a mood where we surrender to Krishna, asking to serve Him.

We must find out which pause button works best for us. For some, chanting may work. For others, recalling verses from scripture or remembering how destructive anger can be might help. For some, just shifting our thoughts—by listening to soothing kirtan music or thinking of Krishna—can calm us. We need to discover our own pause button because, without it, we will be overwhelmed by our emotions.

As Vishwamitra progressed, he gained more and more power. However, as he grew powerful, more people started recognizing him as a great sage. This introduces a different aspect: competition. Competition can be constructive or destructive. Destructive competition is about pulling others down to elevate ourselves, which is unhealthy. Vishwamitra was driven by the desire to prove he was greater than Vashistha. This “other-centered” thinking never leads to peace or satisfaction.

Attachment is usually seen as undesirable because it distracts us from our true purpose. However, aversion can be just as distracting. When we’re averse to someone, we might spend the entire time looking around for that person, wondering if they’ve arrived, just as someone might constantly check for the person they’re attached to. So, aversion can be as distracting as attachment.

Vishwamitra, though, was still other-centered. He wanted to prove that he was greater than Vashistha. He wasn’t concerned with his own growth but with defeating someone else. This leads to unhealthy competition.

One such story involves King Trishanku. He desired to go to heaven while still in his body. Normally, people go to heaven after they leave their body, provided they have lived piously. But Trishanku didn’t want that. He wanted to ascend to heaven with his earthly body. This is where he differed from the norm, thinking that if his body went to heaven, he would achieve immortality.

He went to Vashistha, who told him it was impossible, and Trishanku, dissatisfied with the answer, sought out another solution. He went to Vishwamitra to fulfill his desire.

As soon as Vishwamitra heard that Trishanku wanted to go to heaven in his body, he was about to say no. But Trishanku explained that he had already asked Vashistha, who told him it was impossible, and now he wanted to know if it was possible for Vishwamitra.

As soon as Vishwamitra heard this, he felt an opportunity to prove his power. This is a good example of how questions can be framed to influence the response. For example, if a naïve car salesman simply asks, “Would you like to buy this car?” a more experienced salesman might ask, “Which car would you like, the red one, the green one, or the yellow one?” By phrasing the question this way, the buyer doesn’t even have the option to decline buying a car.

Similarly, Trishanku’s question was framed to manipulate Vishwamitra. “If Vashistha can’t do it, can you?” The question was designed to create a sense of competition and challenge. Trishanku knew that Vishwamitra’s ego might be triggered, and he was right. Vishwamitra, feeling challenged, agreed to take on the task.

Vishwamitra began performing a sacrificial ritual and used his mystic power to send Trishanku upwards. As Trishanku began rising, Vishwamitra noticed he was ascending, higher and higher, eventually reaching the heavens. But this ascent wasn’t simply geographical; it was karmic.

In the Vedic cosmology, “up” doesn’t just refer to physical direction. It refers to a state of spiritual or karmic elevation. Just as a data entry operator has limited access to a computer, a powerful person may have access to different levels of spiritual or karmic realms. Trishanku’s ascent was an elevation of his karmic position, not just a physical one.

As Trishanku rose, the alarms in Swarga (heaven) went off. Indra saw what was happening and used his celestial powers to bring Trishanku back down. Vishwamitra, undeterred, used his mystic powers to send Trishanku back up, but Indra intervened again, sending him back down. This back-and-forth went on for a while, with Trishanku becoming like a tennis ball bouncing between the two.

Frustrated, Trishanku asked Vishwamitra what was happening. Vishwamitra, feeling bound by his word to help, decided to create a new heaven for Trishanku. This heaven would be a temporary one, created using his mystic powers. However, this was not a perfect solution, as creating and sustaining such a place required an immense amount of energy and power.

It’s like someone buying a plane and flying it around, only to realize that the fuel is running out. Vishwamitra’s karmic power began to get exhausted as he sustained the new heaven for Trishanku. This is a reminder of how our ambitions can be driven by ego.

Sometimes, people pursue things just to demonstrate their greatness to the world. I once met someone on a train who had been growing his nails for seven years to set a Guinness World Record. After winning the award, he had to cut his nails, only to find that his hand had atrophied from lack of use. This is an extreme example of how pursuing something for the sake of ego can lead to unintended consequences.

Ambition is natural; we all want to grow in different areas of life. But the key is to grow in a balanced and healthy way. Just as cancer is uncontrolled growth in the body, excessive or misguided ambition can be harmful. Some people, for instance, become workaholics, sacrificing their health and relationships to work. Later, they spend all their wealth trying to regain their health. Similarly, unchecked ambition can lead to destruction.

Vishwamitra had immense power, but his journey was sidetracked by desire, anger, and arrogance. He wanted to prove how great he was to the world, which led him to create a heaven for Trishanku, but at a great cost. This is a lesson that we, too, must be mindful of in our spiritual journey—our purpose is not to demonstrate our greatness to the world, but to deepen our connection with Krishna. If we focus on our spiritual growth, that will be enough, and the rest will follow naturally.

We will be absorbed in Him and we will attain Him.
Finally, after all this happened, as the heavenly planet started crumbling down, Trishanku cried out, “Help, help! Whom should I pray to now?” He began fervently praying to Lord Vishnu, saying, “Oh Lord Vishnu, please help me, help me!”
He was a sage with scriptural knowledge and offered sincere prayers. Upon hearing his fervent prayers, Vishnu appeared before him.

Vishnu, seeing the situation, spoke to Trishanku: “Your desire is unhealthy. It is a disharmonious desire. By satisfying it, you have created disharmony in the universe. You may want to please or satisfy someone’s desires, but it is not just about fulfilling any desire of those we love. Sometimes, love also means saying no to someone.”

For example, if parents pander to every desire of their children, the children might ask for something harmful, like eating a hundred chocolates in one day. Parents, in an effort to satisfy their child’s desire, might inadvertently harm them. In the same way, Vishnu told Vishwamitra, “Don’t pander to these immature desires. Don’t lose your power like this.”

Vishnu also pointed out that even though Trishanku’s desire had been manipulated, the results had been disruptive. Finally, Vishnu declared that Trishanku would be suspended in between heaven and earth, neither here nor there. This state came to be known as the “Trishanku state”—a symbol of something suspended in between.

However, Trishanku’s contact with Vishnu purified Vishwamitra. He continued his austerities, and his power became so strong that fire emanated from his body. The gods looked at each other, worried that they might not be able to control him anymore.

When a problem becomes too big, it’s common to escalate it. A child might first go to an elder brother, then to the parents, or even the school principal. In this case, the gods, realizing they couldn’t control Vishwamitra, went to Brahma. Brahma appeared before Vishwamitra and said, “Your austerities and perseverance have earned you the merit to be a sage. You are now a Brahma Rishi.”

Vishwamitra heard this, but still, his heart wasn’t satisfied. He longed to hear this acknowledgment from Vashistha, his rival. So, Vashistha, a descendant of Brahma, came to Vishwamitra and declared, “You are a Brahma Rishi.” The moment these words were spoken, Vishwamitra felt a deep inner satisfaction, and all the anger, resentment, and competitive mentality within him disappeared.

This moment shows that we may begin our spiritual journey for any motive, but if we persist and connect with the Lord, that connection purifies us.

After attaining the Brahma Rishi status, Vishwamitra realized there was something more—devotion. He deeply longed for a connection with Vishnu. This desire, rooted in sincerity, led him to play a crucial role in the story of Lord Ram in the Ramayana.

The sage Shatananda, the priest of King Janak, narrated Vishwamitra’s story. Shatananda served the dynasty of King Janak, the father of Sita. Vishwamitra’s story exemplifies how a seeker, though reaching the status of Brahma Rishi, might seek something greater—devotion to the Lord.

When Lord Ram incarnated in this world, Vishwamitra was granted the opportunity to be his teacher. Though not a Diksha guru, Vishwamitra became Ram’s Shiksha guru, teaching him martial arts.

One day, Vishwamitra visited the palace of King Dashrath. Normally, kings would visit sages, but when a powerful sage like Vishwamitra arrived, it raised curiosity. Vishwamitra explained that demons were troubling the world and that he needed Ram, not Dashrath’s army, to deal with them. Dashrath was concerned because Ram was just a child, inexperienced in war.

Vishwamitra, however, was insistent. His anger flared up, and his eyes turned red. He said, “You promised to fulfill my wish. Will you dishonor your word?”

At this point, Vashistha intervened and reassured Dashrath that Vishwamitra could handle the demons himself but wanted Ram to fight alongside him. Vashistha explained that Ram was no ordinary child—he was the Supreme Lord Himself incarnate. For those close to the Lord, like Dashrath, the knowledge of his divinity was secondary to the love they felt.

Convinced by Vashistha’s words, Dashrath allowed Ram and his brother Lakshman to go with Vishwamitra. Vishwamitra taught Ram the Atibala and Atibala mantras, granting him supernatural strength. Though young, Ram defeated the demons Subahu and Tataka, and sent Maricha flying far away using the airways. Ram’s victory over these powerful demons was a spectacular display of divine strength.

There are different ways we can glorify someone. One way is to simply speak the glories of a person. Vishwamitra, being an elder sage and Ram being young, didn’t directly glorify Ram in that particular service. One way of glorifying someone is to praise them, but another way is to provide them with a platform where their glories can be manifested.

For example, the devotees would glorify Srila Prabhupada by speaking his praises and also by organizing big programs where Prabhupada would speak and attract people’s hearts. In the same way, Vishwamitra’s service to Ram was not merely to praise him, but to provide opportunities for Ram’s glories to be revealed.

The first way Vishwamitra glorified Ram was by guiding him to overpower great demons at a young age. But Vishwamitra also desired to reveal Ram’s glories to the entire world. To do so, he took Ram to the place where all the great kings had assembled: the Swayamvar of Sita in Janakpuri. There, they had a massive bow of Lord Shiva, which was so heavy that nobody could lift it.

Applause can be for appreciation, or it can be for the conclusion of an event. As the Swayamvar began, many great warriors had assembled, and the bow of Shiva, called the Trambak Bhanjaka, was displayed. It was so powerful that no one could even lift it. When Sita, as a young girl, approached it, she effortlessly lifted the bow to clean it, surprising everyone around her. The maids fainted, and when one ran to inform King Dashratha, he was astonished.

Dashratha, realizing Sita’s immense power, thought to himself, “If Sita has such power, her husband must be powerful enough to handle her strength.” Sita’s future husband had to be able to at least string the bow. This was because to string the bow, immense strength was required. It wasn’t just about lifting the bow; it had to be bent and strung with tremendous force.

When the kings gathered to try to string the bow, they all failed, even Ravana. Then, Ram came forward. He circled the bow, folded his hands in respect, and effortlessly picked it up. A hushed silence fell over the assembly as he took the string and pulled it with such force that a thunderous sound filled the air, causing everyone to faint. As they regained consciousness, they were stunned by what had just happened.

Vishwamitra stood proudly, watching his student Ram, knowing he wasn’t just a student—he was the Supreme Lord. When Sita approached and offered the garland to Ram, Vishwamitra was honored to be a part of this intimate service—uniting Sita with Ram, or Lakshmi with Narayan.

This, in essence, was the ultimate success of Vishwamitra’s spiritual journey. The purpose of bhakti is to unite the resources of this world (symbolized by Sita and Lakshmi) with their source, the Supreme Lord. Our success in devotion comes when we, like Vishwamitra, persevere on the spiritual path and ultimately serve the Lord.

Vishwamitra’s journey exemplifies how, despite starting with impure motives, one can eventually be purified through perseverance and devotion. His story shows that even if we come to the spiritual path with mixed desires, we can gradually purify our hearts and ultimately attain the highest perfection in our lives.

To summarize, I spoke about Vishwamitra’s journey today, highlighting how scriptures guide us with timeless truths. While external situations may change, our real challenges are internal, such as weaknesses and distractions. The scriptures help us overcome these and provide eternal wisdom.

Vishwamitra’s search for power and recognition led him to first seek Kshatriya weapons, then Brahminical powers, and eventually spiritual power. But initially, his desire for spiritual power was driven by material motives. Over time, however, he encountered distractions such as lust, anger, and arrogance. These obstacles were purifying for him as he overcame them through perseverance.

In the end, Vishwamitra realized that material achievement was insufficient. His contact with Vishnu purified him, and even after achieving the status of Brahma Rishi, he realized there was something more—he sought pure devotion (bhakti). His sincere desire led him to participate in the pastimes of Lord Ram, ultimately uniting Ram with Sita.

Vishwamitra’s story teaches us that, no matter what our initial motivations are, if we persevere on the path of devotion and purify our hearts, we can achieve the supreme perfection in life. Like Vishwamitra, we too can serve the Lord in whatever way we are capable, and in doing so, we achieve the ultimate success in our spiritual journey.

Similarly, the ultimate purpose of our spiritual journey is to unite all the resources we have with the source of everything. This is something we can all draw inspiration from in Vishwamitra’s journey. Whatever distractions come our way, we must stay alert to avoid being diverted. But even if we do get distracted, we must recover and resume our journey until we attain perfection.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Any questions or comments? Hare Krishna.

Question
So, thank you again for a fascinating class. Very inspiring. The question is a two-part question, if that’s okay.

Answer
Yes, please.

First Question
How do we understand the Trishanku pastime, where he tried to go with the same body to the heavenly kingdom, compared to the pastimes we read from the Srimad Bhagavatam, where kings like Muchukunda, Kathwanga, and even the grandson of Vishwamitra go and fight for the demigods in the heavenly planets? Do they get different bodies and then come back?

Answer
The whole point is that there is a cosmic hierarchy, and within that hierarchy, there are certain authorized ways for one person to go from one level to another. For example, if we think of levels of access in a computer system, one way for a data entry operator to get access to confidential files is by growing in position to become a manager. Another way is if the manager specifically allows that data operator to access the files, which is a special privilege.

Similarly, Arjuna could go to heaven, not only visiting but even sitting on Indra’s throne because Indra treated him like a son. Arjuna himself credited his access to heaven to Krishna’s grace, saying that without Krishna’s help, he wouldn’t have attained that position. So, the demigods can grant special permission for someone to go to heaven temporarily and even provide them with power. But it’s not by one’s own force that they can get there.

Second Question
Indra seems to make mistakes again and again. In various pastimes, such as the Govardhan Leela, he seems impulsive and childish. Why does this happen?

Answer
Indra is indeed a very respectable personality, especially in the Rig Veda and other Vedic literature, where he is considered the embodiment of success through the Karmakanda (ritualistic) path. He is a great position, but in the path of bhakti, the literature primarily emphasizes bhakti itself. To glorify bhakti, it often contrasts it with the successes of the path of karma, showing that even the greatest karma yogis, like Indra, can still make blunders.

Indra’s mistakes are not to diminish his greatness but to show that even the greatest karmis can falter in the presence of illusion. The Bhagavatam highlights bhakti as superior because it emphasizes humility, devotion, and surrender to Krishna. Indra’s blunders are meant to show that even the most powerful beings are subject to the influence of maya (illusion) and that bhakti, which is free from such pitfalls, is superior.

Additional Question
Sometimes, the big personalities like demigods are placed in certain situations by providence, which might seem unfavorable from a normal bhakti perspective, but the situation is created for a specific lesson. For example, in the Mohini Murti pastime, Lord Shiva was captivated by Mohini Murti, and from our point of view, that might seem like a fall. However, the purpose was to teach the sages a lesson. Could you elaborate?

Answer
Yes, that’s an excellent point. In the Mohini Murti pastime, when Lord Shiva chased after Mohini Murti, he passed through the hermitages of various sages. The sages observed this and were taught a lesson. While Lord Shiva is considered to be beyond illusion, he was temporarily captivated by Mohini Murti, which served as a lesson for the sages.

What is important to note is that despite this “fall,” Shiva’s consciousness remained focused on the Lord. After being momentarily captivated, he doesn’t feel humiliated or embarrassed; instead, he feels honored that only Vishnu could have captivated him in this way. Shiva’s focus immediately shifts to glorifying Vishnu, demonstrating his devotion and humility. This lesson shows that even if we fall temporarily, we should rise again with humility and gratitude, focusing on Krishna.

The key takeaway here is that Krishna consciousness includes both success and failure. If we fail, it should not make us lose hope or cause us to leave the path; rather, it should make us more humble and prayerful, calling out to Krishna even more. To fail in Krishna consciousness is okay as long as we don’t fail out of it. Failure should not deter us; it should only deepen our devotion.

Shiva’s fall illustrates how even the greatest beings can be subject to illusion, but their ability to recover and glorify the Lord afterward demonstrates the ultimate success in Krishna consciousness.

But Shiva is also so great that even after falling, he is not conscious of his own fall or humiliation. He is conscious of the glory of Vishnu, who made him fall. He falls in Krishna consciousness, not out of Krishna consciousness.

Thank you.

Yes, Paramahamsa.

So, regarding the pastime of Trishanku Swadhaka, how does it fit in the normal cosmic arrangement? It’s not like Vishnu sustains it forever. Does that mean it’s a part of our universe? After death, what is the desired realm where human beings go and what happens to their bodies?

Okay. Is Trishanku a particular level of existence that all souls or humans go through?

Not necessarily. Certain exceptional situations might be created for particular purposes, but that doesn’t mean it becomes a standard for everyone. The way to describe Trishanku’s state is not as a very comfortable one. He is in a state of suspended animation, and how long he remains there depends on his karma. Eventually, he will be elevated. It’s an emergency arrangement created because Vishwamitra prayed to Vishnu to sustain it for Trishanku, but it is not for everyone.

Thank you.

Another question?

Okay, any other questions or comments?

Yes, please.

Question:
My question is, are these understandings that you’re presenting here all substantiated by the commentaries of the acharyas, or are they modern-day understandings? For instance, I like the fact that you give practical examples, such as from cricket. But sometimes, other commentators tend to give more allegorical interpretations. This can sometimes diminish how the original teachings might be understood. So, I’m trying to understand this and playing the devil’s advocate a bit.

Answer:
There are quite a few questions there, but let me try to clarify.

Madhvacharya, in his Brahmasutra Bhashya, states that the Itihasas (like the Ramayana and Mahabharata) can be understood on three levels: literal, ethical, and metaphorical.

Literal means this is what actually happened. Just by hearing it and reciting it, one can purify themselves. For example, reciting the Ramayana is purifying, even if one just repeats the words without fully understanding them.

Now, the word “literal” might be equated with “historical” in modern terms. However, we should understand that the concept of history has evolved. In ancient times, history was not necessarily about precise recapitulation of events. Rather, it was more about imparting wisdom or moral lessons. In the past, whether it’s the Ramayana or even Homer’s Odyssey, the purpose of history was not merely to give a factual account but to teach something worthwhile, to inspire and to edify.

Take, for instance, a historian like Will Durant, who famously said that “what we learn from history is that we don’t learn from history.” The focus of history in modern times is on facts. But in ancient traditions, including Vedic literature, the focus was often on learning moral lessons, wisdom, and insights from the past.

So, are the scriptures historical? Yes, absolutely. But we must recognize that they are not history in the same sense that we understand it today. While modern history is focused on recapitulating facts, ancient history was about learning lessons. Even if the stories aren’t exact replicas of every event, their core teachings and spiritual truths are what matter most.

Regarding allegorical interpretations, yes, there is room for figurative speech in scriptures. For example, in the Bhagavad Gita (2.69), it states, “That which is night for all living beings is day for the self-realized, and that which is day for all living beings is night for the self-realized.” Now, if we take this literally, it would imply that self-realized people are only found in India and materialistic people in North America. Clearly, this is not meant literally. Day and night here are metaphors for knowledge and ignorance, or the areas in which a person is active.

So, while the scriptures are historical, they are also poetic. There is artistic license, and the intent is not always to provide a literal, factual account of events but to impart wisdom and spiritual teachings. As Chaitanya Mahaprabhu mentions in Chaitanya Charitamrita, the great poets glorify Krishna using figures of speech like hyperbole.

This doesn’t mean that everything in scripture is allegorical, but it does mean that scripture uses artistic methods to teach profound spiritual truths. The scriptures aren’t just about giving a dry historical account—they are intended to teach us deeper spiritual lessons.

So, in summary, while the scriptures are historical, they also contain metaphors, allegories, and artistic elements that help us understand spiritual concepts more deeply. This is the key difference between how history was understood in ancient times and how it is understood today.

And poetry includes hyperbole, but that is for a poetic purpose. So, that’s the first point. When we say that it’s historical, it’s not history in the modern sense. Getting caught up in pedantic debates—whether it’s like that or not—is not the focus.

In the first canto of the Shrimad Bhagavatam, it says that Krishna returned from Hastinapur to Dwarka. The Bhagavatam describes the path he took, passing through various kingdoms. Some historians might try to retrace the path of Krishna. However, the earth’s surface is constantly changing due to geology, so retracing the path can be quite a difficult task. As far as we are concerned, we are simply satisfied that Krishna reached Dwarka and is going to perform pastimes with the devotees there.

Prabhupada’s focus is not to deny the importance or validity of research into Krishna’s historicity, but to keep things in perspective. That research is secondary. The primary focus in studying the Ramayana and Mahabharata is to learn the devotional and ethical values that help us remember the Lord.

So, I am presenting it from a literal or historical perspective, if you want to use the term “historical,” but it is not historical in the modern sense. There are ethical lessons, and the primary purpose of history in the past was to teach us what to do and what not to do. And beyond that, because it is poetry, some metaphorical elements may also be present.

What is of concern, especially for Srila Prabhupada, is when the metaphorical is used not to supplement the historical but to supplant it—to replace it. For example, if someone says the Kurukshetra war never took place and that Kurukshetra only represents the body, that’s a problem. It’s fine to say Kurukshetra represents the body, and you can say the Kauravas represent our unholy desires and the Pandavas represent holy desires. But when someone uses that to claim that Kurukshetra is not historical at all, that was a serious concern for Prabhupada.

Prabhupada himself has used metaphorical explanations in his works. For instance, he has spoken of how Devaki’s womb represents our heart and how the first six children were killed, symbolizing the removal of six anarthas (undesirable qualities). Balram, as the Guru, comes in to cleanse the heart, and then Krishna appears. We shouldn’t be paranoid about metaphorical explanations, but we shouldn’t turn everything into metaphor either. Some parts of scripture are definitely metaphorical, but we must be careful not to metaphorize the entire text.

As for those who say that the scriptures are just poetic myths, we don’t need to immediately engage in confrontation with them. We understand where they are coming from. Second, while poetry can include exaggerations, not everything in scripture should be seen as exaggeration. Ultimately, our goal is to help them accept the wisdom in the scripture.

For instance, if someone says, “I can’t believe demons exist,” we don’t tell them that they have to accept the existence of demons before chanting Hare Krishna. Instead, we encourage them to chant, and through purification, they will gradually come to understand deeper truths.

Prabhupada once asked a devotee in Hawaii, who was concerned about how scholars laughed at the idea that King Ugrasena had thousands of bodyguards. They wondered, “Where did they all live? Where were their houses and toilets?” Prabhupada didn’t respond by saying Krishna can do anything. Instead, he asked, “Did you find only that verse to talk about with the scholars?”

Prabhupada’s approach was always to focus on what’s most important in our limited time with others. Our goal is to give them the most essential message, not to engage in endless debates about the historicity of every detail.

Even if someone isn’t ready to accept that everything in scripture is historical, we can help them appreciate the principles and teachings. As far as the explanations I gave, they depend on what we’re discussing. Generally, Prabhupada said that realization means presenting things in a way that is interesting and relevant to the audience. For example, the concept of a mainframe computer may not be in scripture, but using it as a metaphor can help make the teaching more accessible.

Scripture is not just about being correct, but also about getting the message across. If someone gives a perfect class in Sanskrit but no one understands it, they’ve achieved nothing in communicating the message. Prabhupada’s emphasis was always on communicating the essence of the teachings in a way that is understandable to the audience.

For example, in the Bhagavad Gita (15.6), the literal translation says that the spiritual world is not illuminated by the sun, moon, or fire. But Prabhupada adds “electricity” in his purport. A literalist might question where electricity fits into the spiritual world. But the point is to convey that the spiritual world is self-effulgent, not dependent on external sources of light, as is the case in the material world. Since most people today live in a world dependent on electricity for light, Prabhupada used “electricity” to make the point clearer to modern audiences.

The point is that it’s not just about getting everything right, but about getting the message across. Prabhupada emphasized that the purpose of presenting scripture is to increase people’s interest in Krishna Bhakti. As long as contemporary examples help people understand and practice Krishna Bhakti, they serve the purpose.

Thank you very much.

The post The story of Vishvamitra – part 2 – Overcoming anger and arrogance appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

The story of Vishvamitra – Obstacles on the spiritual path – Part 1
→ The Spiritual Scientist

A story from the Ramayana that reflects the challenges and the growth we experience on our spiritual journey is the story of the great sage Vishwamitra.

The Ramayana is primarily the journey of Lord Ram, but it also includes stories that describe how various characters in the Ramayana reached the positions they were in. I’ll divide this story into three parts. First, we’ll look at the obstacles we face on our spiritual path and how we can overcome them.

Vishwamitra was originally King Kaushika, the ruler of the Kusha kingdom. He was a Chandramamshi, belonging to the lunar dynasty, while Lord Ram was a Suryamamshi, belonging to the solar dynasty.

In any society, certain authorities are required, and in ancient India, within a dharmic society, there were two primary centers of power: the Kshatriyas and the Brahmanas. The Kshatriyas were the political leaders, and the Brahmanas held spiritual and intellectual authority. This setup mirrors today’s systems of government, where we have the separation of powers between the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary.

Just as these divisions ensure checks and balances, the separation between political and spiritual power was meant to prevent corruption. Power, as they say, corrupts, and absolute power can corrupt absolutely. While it’s easy to criticize politicians, it’s important to remember that most of us, if we were in positions of power, might be equally susceptible to abusing it.

Vishwamitra was a powerful king, but like anyone in a position of power, he began to feel insecure. He feared that someone might challenge his authority. One day, he was passing through a forest and came upon a hermitage where the great sage Vasishta resided. Vasishta was a very powerful sage, and he welcomed Vishwamitra warmly, offering him food and hospitality.

Vishwamitra, impressed by Vasishta’s hospitality, noticed that Vasishta’s hermitage was modest, yet he seemed to have everything he needed. Vasishta explained that he had a divine cow named Kamadhenu, a miraculous cow that could grant any wish. When Vishwamitra expressed his amazement, Vasishta explained that the cow could provide everything necessary for the sage’s rituals and sacrifices, including grains, ghee, and food.

Seeing the cow’s power, Vishwamitra, who had an entitlement mentality due to his royal status, became greedy. He demanded that Vasishta give him the cow. Vasishta refused, explaining that the cow was essential to his sacrifices. But Vishwamitra insisted, feeling entitled as a king. When Vasishta stood his ground, Vishwamitra grabbed the cow.

As soon as he did, the cow began to cry out in distress and, to Vishwamitra’s astonishment, started producing soldiers who battled and defeated Vishwamitra’s army. In the face of defeat, Vishwamitra had to flee in humiliation.

But instead of learning from the experience, Vishwamitra returned, more determined than ever. He came back with an even larger army, but this time, Vasishta, in his frustration, invoked a curse. Vishwamitra again suffered defeat and humiliation.

What is important to understand here is not the magical elements of the story, such as the cow granting wishes or the curse, but the deeper lesson. The focus of the scriptures is not always on proving the literal events; rather, they aim to inspire us to improve and grow spiritually. In today’s world, we might not believe in talking cows or curses, but we can appreciate the lessons they offer.

For example, in our modern context, we have technology that can seem almost magical. We might say, “Okay, Google, open the door,” and the door opens. Someone unfamiliar with technology might question how that happened. Similarly, in ancient times, events may have appeared magical, but the purpose of such stories is to convey spiritual truths, to guide us on our path, and help us understand the deeper meaning of life and our journey toward self-realization.

No, no, don’t send this message.

So, what happens in this case is what we can call a performative utterance. When we speak, if there is no technology or device around us, our words may not lead to any immediate action. However, in certain cases, the words we speak can have a direct impact. For example, if a judge sentences someone to ten years in prison, that utterance leads to action because the judge holds a position of authority and power.

The connection between the utterance and the action may not be immediately clear to us if we don’t understand how the judicial system or technology works, but the point is that an utterance can lead to a performance. When this happens, it’s called a performative utterance.

So, when something seems unbelievable, it simply means we don’t understand the mechanism behind how it happens. Sages, for example, could connect with higher powers in the universe. When they spoke or gave blessings or curses, their words would activate subtler energies in the universe, leading to actual events.

In this case, Vasishta twice overpowered King Kaushika (Vishwamitra). After this, Kaushika realized that the Brahmanas were much more powerful than the Kshatriyas. Vasishta was a Brahma Rishi, the highest among the sages, and Kaushika decided he wanted to become one too. He wanted to become great and powerful.

Ultimately, everything we do, if it is not spiritually oriented, is a search for power. Even for an infant, it’s a discovery to realize the power of crying. Initially, the infant cries due to discomfort, but over time, it learns that crying will bring the mother running. Eventually, the infant might cry just for attention, even when it’s not in distress. From infancy, we’re all driven by a desire for power.

Seeking power itself isn’t inherently bad; the important thing is the purpose for which we seek it. We all need some power in life. In Kaushika’s case, he sought power so he could become more powerful than others. He wondered, how did Vasishta become a Brahma Rishi? Vasishta had become a great sage, so Kaushika thought, “If I can become like him, I’ll have the power I desire.”

Kaushika realized that to become a Brahma Rishi, he had to perform austerities (Tapasya). Austerity is an interesting concept. All living beings are driven by their immediate needs. A cat, for instance, doesn’t think, “Today is Ekadashi, let me fast.” The cat is driven by its instincts, reacting to impulses. Similarly, we too have impulses, but as humans, we have the capacity to resist them.

For example, on Ekadashi, we may decide not to eat grains. If we see a plate of delicious food with grains, the impulse to eat might arise. However, we can resist that impulse. The ability to resist our impulses is what differentiates humans from animals. The question is, how well developed is our ability to resist, and for what purpose are we resisting?

If we resist impulses to grow spiritually, that’s beneficial. But if we do so simply to show others how self-controlled we are, it might not lead to spiritual growth. For instance, someone fasting on Ekadashi might criticize others who are eating, thinking they lack self-control. Though the person is fasting, their ego is feeding on the pride of their self-discipline. This is not helpful for spiritual growth.

Now, Kaushika’s reason for fasting and performing austerities was to become more powerful. His goal was to best Vasishta. Austerity, in general, is something that anyone striving to achieve something worthwhile must practice. Athletes, for example, perform their own form of austerity by working out. Austerity is about sacrificing immediate pleasure for future gain.

Humans have the ability to trade the pleasure of the present moment for something better in the future, something that animals cannot consciously do. While animals may instinctively prepare for the future (like burrowing to stay warm), humans can consciously plan and negotiate with reality. As students, for instance, we might sacrifice leisure to study and build a career.

I can enjoy, but I want to create a good life for myself in the future.
So, the capacity to sacrifice, to practice austerity, is what defines humanity. In fact, if you look at any person who inspires us in life, it is often their capacity for austerity and commitment that stands out. In any field, if you want to be successful, you must, to some extent, trade the present for the future.

We all desire pleasure in life, but pleasure comes in many forms. However, pleasure is often too shallow a purpose to sustain us through life. Most of us enjoy humor. Is there anyone who doesn’t like jokes or laughter? It’s rare to find someone who doesn’t. But consider this: if we had no financial obligations or responsibilities, and someone told us, “For the rest of your life, just watch comedies and laugh,” would you enjoy that?

Maybe for an hour or two, yes, but after that, you’d likely feel the need to do something more meaningful, right? So, while we all want pleasure, we don’t just want any pleasure; we want worthwhile, meaningful pleasure. Watching comedies and laughing is not a very meaningful pleasure in the grand scheme of life.

Sometimes, to experience meaningful pleasure, we might have to give up what gives us immediate pleasure. Pleasure, in this case, is too cheap a purpose to sustain us. We will eventually get frustrated with it. If we do something just for immediate pleasure, we often find ourselves in trouble, as with addiction. People who drink, smoke, or take drugs do so for short-term pleasure, but it leads them into problems.

Pleasure is too cheap a purpose. Vishwamitra realized that if he wanted to become a Brahmarishi, he needed to perform austerities. As a Kshatriya (a king), he already had determination. Some people claim they lack determination. Do you think it’s possible for someone to have zero determination?

No, it’s not. Why not? Even someone who is addicted to a substance demonstrates determination. They may lack the willpower to stop, but they have determination to keep indulging in their addiction. If someone fails to wake up early, they lack the determination to rise, but they have the determination to keep sleeping. People may mock them or criticize them, yet they continue. So, everyone has determination; it’s just often misdirected.

Determination means continuing to do something, even if it’s troublesome. The positive side of determination helps us persevere, while the negative side, like obstinacy or stubbornness, leads us to persist in harmful behaviors.

As a Kshatriya, Vishwamitra certainly had determination, and he began performing austerities. His austerity gained him immense power. This power made others, especially Indra, insecure. Indra, the king of the gods, was always fearful of someone usurping his position.

Austerity essentially means giving up immediate pleasures for a higher purpose. In any field, consistent, diligent practice leads to power. By doing something regularly and trying to improve, we gain expertise. With talent and practice, some individuals become extraordinarily powerful, like athletes or gymnasts who can perform feats most people couldn’t even imagine.

If we want to improve in any area, we need to commit ourselves to consistent practice and austerity. The more we commit, the better we become at it. But with power comes the potential for others to feel insecure and try to take it away.

When Indra saw Vishwamitra performing austerities, he sent Menaka, a celestial nymph, to distract him. Menaka was extraordinarily beautiful and used her powers to transform the place where Vishwamitra was meditating into a beautiful garden, complete with flowers, a lake, birds, and a soothing breeze. She began to dance and sing.

When Vishwamitra heard the sound of her ankle bells, he became distracted. For us, it might not be ankle bells that distract us, but rather our mobile phone notifications. A small beep is enough to disrupt our concentration. Imagine you are trying to focus on something important, whether it’s a lecture or meditation, and suddenly, you hear that beep.

Distraction, in any form, disempowers us. Our most fundamental power is our consciousness. If we remain focused on a task, we perform better. But if we are distracted, we lose our power. When we are focused, we can read a page in a few minutes and fully understand it. If we are distracted, it might take us an hour to understand the same page, and we might even find ourselves holding the book upside down.

To be distracted is to be disempowered. Our consciousness is our greatest strength, and it is essential to maintain focus. In today’s world, distractions come in many forms. Let me explain distraction using two metaphors.

The first metaphor is a road. Imagine we are on a road and come to an intersection. There are multiple options, multiple ways to go. We might pause to decide which way to take. Similarly, distractions are like multiple options that demand our attention. We must choose wisely.

The second metaphor is that of a river. When a river splits into different distributaries, the water flows toward the path that is easiest, like the downhill path. In the same way, distractions in life pull our attention toward the easiest, most tempting options, and it’s up to us to choose which path to take.

So, just like that, for all of us, our consciousness is like a river that is constantly flowing.
When we are attached to particular objects, that means those objects have a broad, downhill path, and our consciousness will naturally flow in that direction.

For example, let’s say someone is an alcoholic, and their home is here, their workplace is there, but there’s a bar in between.
Now, someone who has never drunk might not even notice the bar, but for someone who drinks regularly, passing by that bar triggers a desire.
They might think, “I have a lot of work to do,” but then the temptation comes, and they think, “What difference does one drink make?”
Even if they try to resist, their mind might argue: “No, last time you had one drink and it turned into more than you planned. Shouldn’t you stop now?”
But eventually, their consciousness has already moved toward that bar. Even if they don’t physically go in, the mental pull is strong.

To be distracted is to be disempowered. Some distractions are passive, just waiting outside for us to choose them, while others are more active, luring us in.
In this case, when Menaka came to Vishwamitra, she was an active distraction.
It’s important to note that this is not about a male being distracted by a female; both males and females experience distractions in various forms.

When Vishwamitra opened his eyes and saw Menaka, he had come to the forest to perform austerities, yet he was captivated by her beauty. He was so drawn to her that he lost his focus and forgot about his meditation.
This is the nature of temptation—it grips our consciousness and makes us forget everything else.

The Bhagavad Gita says we are meant to give up everything else and surrender to Krishna:
Sarva dharman parityajya mam ekam sharanam vraja
(“Abandon all varieties of dharma and surrender to me alone”).
But when temptation comes, we often forget everything else and are drawn into it. That is the nature of temptation.

Vishwamitra had left his royal pleasures for a higher purpose. However, when temptation came, he got so caught up in it that he forgot his original purpose.
This is something we all face. Initially, when we come to spirituality, we may not be truly interested in God or spiritual goals. Many come to spirituality seeking peace of mind, self-control, or personal growth. This is not bad—at least they are coming to spirituality for some purpose.

In our life journey, temptations arise constantly, and there is no guarantee that we will resist them at any given moment.
Everything comes down to choices and circumstances. While our choices are ultimately up to us, circumstances significantly influence our decisions.

When Vishwamitra got distracted, he completely forgot his austerities and purpose. This story is told in the Ramayana, but something more is shared in the Mahabharata.
Vishwamitra, known as Kaushika until then, became completely captivated by Menaka. He was so infatuated that he lost all focus.

This is how we also get captivated today. When we become infatuated with something, it completely pulls us in.
For example, at a very advanced American university, which specializes in AI, they’ve developed a sophisticated technology. Normally, if we’re watching a YouTube video, related video suggestions appear on the screen. We can choose to click on them.

However, this new technology tracks where your eyes are looking. If you glance at another video for even a few seconds, that video will automatically start playing.
The experiment revealed that people watching videos this way end up spending three, five, or even six hours in front of the screen. It is as if you are being pulled into the next distraction without even having to click anything.

In the same way, technology can provide many temptations, but our mind itself can present distractions as well.
As these distractions grow and grow, we can become completely overwhelmed.

Vishwamitra, after uniting with Menaka, had a daughter named Shakuntala, whose story is quite illustrious. She eventually became the mother of the Bharata dynasty.
But the main point here is that Vishwamitra got distracted. Once he realized this, he turned away from Menaka.

Most pleasures in life promise a lot, but in the end, they often lead to disappointment. They seem to offer endless fulfillment, but they fall short.
Vishwamitra realized this and, feeling regret, sent Menaka away. She, too, confessed to him that she had been sent by Indra to distract him. Vishwamitra felt upset by her actions and cursed her, saying, “You will never be with me again.”

Then, he returned to his austerities.
Now, in our spiritual journeys, we face similar obstacles. Our minds go through binary responses—desire and anger.
Desire arises when we want something, and anger follows when we don’t get what we want.

In Vishwamitra’s case, the first obstacle he faced was desire. Desire distracted him, and the same happens to us. We might say, “I want to study,” but then we find ourselves distracted by our phones or other things.

Then I get distracted, and then they get distracted.
Sometimes, especially in India, when the Cricket World Cup comes, passions run high. I remember in 2000, during a particular World Cup where India performed poorly, something remarkable happened. It was about 10–15 years ago, and a world record was set when around 5000 TV sets were smashed by angry people in just one hour.
People were so upset that India lost the match, they smashed their TV sets. It wasn’t just one or two TVs—it was widespread.

At that time, India was not as affluent as it is now. Due to liberalization and economic growth, some people in India are well-to-do, but back then, it was quite different.
However, the other side of desire is anger. We often get what we think we want, but it’s not truly fulfilling, and this leads to frustration.

Desire is one side of the coin, while anger is the other. So, how did Vishwamitra fall prey to anger? How did he succumb to it, and how did he eventually overcome it?
Then, there’s how he was tempted by pride and tried to disrupt the universal order because of his arrogance—and how he overcame that too. After all this, he attained spiritual perfection. I’ll discuss these topics in tomorrow’s class.

To summarize today’s lesson, I spoke about how to focus on our spiritual journey using the story of Vishwamitra.
In Vedic society, there is a balance of power between the Kshatriyas and the Brahmanas—martial and political power alongside spiritual and intellectual power.
Whenever we hold power, there is a tendency to seek more and more. Kaushika (Vishwamitra) was a powerful king, but he wanted the power that Vasishta had, symbolized by the Kamadhenu cow. His attempt to seize that power backfired, leading to defeat. After trying again and failing, he realized that his Kshatriya might alone couldn’t help him achieve his goal, so he decided to become a Brahmana.

I discussed the concept of Brahmanical curses and blessings—these are performative utterances. Just like a judge can pronounce a sentence, or technology can be activated by certain actions, these utterances lead to actions in subtle ways. Vishwamitra wanted the power that the Brahmanas had, so he began performing austerities.
Austerity means negotiating with reality, giving up present pleasures for something greater in the future. All living beings are driven by impulses, but humans have the unique ability to resist these impulses and aim for something higher. The extent to which we do this is what shapes our humanity.

However, resisting impulses is not the goal in itself. If we resist only to appear self-controlled, it’s counterproductive because we become proud. We must resist impulses to persevere in a higher purpose. Vishwamitra’s original motive was the desire for power.
Indra, feeling insecure about Vishwamitra’s growing strength, sent Menaka to distract him.

To be distracted is to be disempowered. We all desire various forms of power, but our most fundamental power is our consciousness. And in today’s world, our consciousness is pulled in a million different directions.
There are two kinds of distractions: passive distractions, like pathways at an intersection, and active distractions, which allure us.
If we repeatedly indulge in something and become attached to it, our consciousness will naturally flow in that direction, like a river following a broad, downhill path.

Thus, we need to stay focused and purposeful. Vishwamitra, too, got distracted and experienced pleasure, but that pleasure turned out to be an anticlimax.
This is what happens with most pleasures in life—they promise a lot but often deliver very little. We talked earlier about how we all seek pleasure, but what we truly want is meaningful pleasure. Pleasure alone is too trivial to give our lives true purpose.
Nobody would enjoy watching comedies forever. We need the kind of pleasure that comes from doing something meaningful in our lives.

On the spiritual path, desire is often the first distraction we encounter. If we overcome desire, anger often follows, and then pride. I’ll discuss anger and pride in tomorrow’s class.
Any questions or comments?

At what stage did Vishwamitra request King Dasharatha to send Rama?
That happened much later in his life, after he had become a great sage and a devotee. Vishwamitra was performing sacrifices and was inspired by the Lord to seek Rama’s help for an important task.

Thank you. Any other questions?

Regarding the question of whether anger and depression are twins—
They’re not exactly twins, but they are closely related. Depression can be seen as anger directed inward.
Anger directed toward others often leads to aggression, but when directed at oneself, it becomes depression.
Depression often stems from the belief that we are not good enough. We may be in a reasonably good situation, but the mind keeps repeating the thought, “I’m not good enough.”
This thought can apply to many aspects of our lives—relationships, health, appearance, income, and even our spiritual progress.
These thoughts make us feel inadequate, and that is a core cause of depression.

It takes courage to accept our weaknesses, but there is another kind of courage needed—to accept ourselves as we are, even with those weaknesses.
If we don’t accept ourselves, we lose our most fundamental resource: ourselves. Even when seeking shelter in God, it is ultimately we who must take refuge in Him.

Some people are so arrogant that they refuse to accept their weaknesses. I remember a person I counseled who had serious anger issues. When I spoke with them, they said, “I don’t need anger management. Other people just need to stop making me angry.”
This person was outsourcing responsibility for their anger. It’s important to recognize our weaknesses, acknowledge them, and have the courage to improve.
If we don’t accept our flaws, we cannot improve or grow. Depression, in that sense, is often the anger we feel directed toward ourselves.

Why am I like this? Why can’t I do this? Why can’t I do that? Why couldn’t I achieve it? Why did I make that mistake? Why? Why? Why?
The anger directed outward becomes depression when turned inward. Depression is a complex phenomenon, but in broad terms, we don’t see as many people in the past getting depressed as we do now. Why is this happening more today? There are many reasons, but one broad understanding is that we all have unrealistic expectations.
The world around us is structured in such a way that everyone is made to believe they can be controllers, achievers—they are meant to be. However, there are many things that are simply beyond our control.
Failure is something that can happen despite our best efforts. Only our endeavors are in our control, but the results are not. This is the essence of karma, where Krishna says, “Do your duty, but don’t be attached to the results.” What He means is that we don’t solely determine the results.
However, in today’s world, society has removed the understanding that there are higher forces influencing the results. I have an entire talk on the relationship between actions and results, which you could call the “4D formula”:
Duty + Destiny + Duration = Desired Result.
In Sanskrit, we can express this as karma, daiva, and kala leading to phala (result).
These three elements—duty, destiny, and duration—must come together for the desired result.
For example, when a couple gets married and hopes to have a child, their union alone is not enough. Conception must happen, and that’s not in their control—it’s destiny. Similarly, a farmer may plow the field and sow the seeds, but rain is necessary, and that’s also destiny. Even after rain comes, time must pass for the crop to grow—duration is also a key factor in bringing about the result.

What has happened in today’s world is that we often believe, if we do our part, the other factors don’t matter. If I’ve done my duty, I should get the result. When results don’t come, we start thinking something must be intrinsically wrong with us.
Yes, sometimes we go through a rough patch in life. Destiny can be unfavorable, and no matter how much we try, we don’t get the results we expect. We try one thing, and it doesn’t work. We try another, and that fails too. We might think, “My life is doomed.” But that’s not the case.
When we look back at the times we’ve been successful, we’ll realize that many things worked out beyond our own efforts. Of course, we worked hard and did our best, but other factors contributed too.
To the extent we claim credit for our success, we must also accept responsibility for our failures.
If we have a broader understanding of life—that results don’t solely depend on us—we can accept when bad things happen. We can understand that we’re going through a bad phase, and it will pass.
Failure is an event in life, but it doesn’t define who we are. People are not failures; they sometimes meet failure. When we take life’s events too personally, that’s when depression sets in.

Having a broader philosophical understanding can help. When you understand that you’re going through a dark phase, you realize it will pass. But when we’re depressed, we tend to take small events and attribute far too much meaning to them.
For instance, one of my friends is a suicide intervention counselor. He shared a story about a girl who tried to commit suicide after a phone call went unanswered. She called the boy, but he didn’t pick up.
Is not picking up a phone a reason to end your life? She didn’t see it that way. She thought, “He doesn’t care about me, maybe he’s with someone else. Maybe no one will love me. All my friends will have happy relationships, and I’ll be alone, pitied by everyone. Better to die than live such a pitiable life.” And she attempted suicide.
This illustrates what happens when we take one incident and extrapolate far too much from it. Depression grows when we ascribe overwhelming meaning to a small event.

When we keep perspective—recognizing that small things are just that—small things, we can avoid spiraling into depression. Yes, sometimes things go wrong because of factors beyond our control, but we need to understand how important or unimportant certain things really are.
When the mind is in control and intelligence is not, small things can blow up in our minds. One small failure leads to another, and before we know it, we think our whole life is a failure.
But life is not doomed. It’s not the life that’s the problem—it’s the perspective. Understanding the principles of karma and destiny helps us realize that we’re just passing through a phase. It’s a tunnel, not a dungeon. We must keep walking forward, and we will come into the light.

Thank you. Any other questions?

I hope this explanation didn’t add to anyone’s depression. 🙂
Do you have any other questions?

Okay. So, thank you very much.

The post The story of Vishvamitra – Obstacles on the spiritual path – Part 1 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Special Sunday Satsang Program by HG Chaitanya Charan Das
→ The Spiritual Scientist

After that question and answer session, followed by Aarti, Maha Aarti, Jyotindra and the temple hall. So, it is our request to all of you that after the class and question and answer session, please proceed to the temple hall. We will have a Aarti over there and after that we will go for the session.

So, let us welcome, again it is our fortune to welcome you to this K. C. Sivan temple. So, let us welcome you by loudly saying Hari Jyot. Hari Jyot! Hari Jyot! Hari Jyot! He has sent his wife.

No, the wife is not connected. I will assign my phone to her. Okay, thank you.

Hare Krishna! I am grateful to be here with all of you today. We will be discussing today on some life lessons, some wisdom from the Ramayana.

Broadly speaking, there are good people who do good things. And then there are bad people who do bad things. Now, this is broadly speaking the way the universe is also understood to be in the Vedic tradition.

There is Daiva, Asura, Airvachar. There are two kinds of people, the divine and the demoniac. So… I had a digital and a physical garland.

So now this is the general polarity that we expect. Yes, there are some good people who do good things. There are bad people who do bad things.

But then there are exceptions. There are exceptions where good people sometimes do bad things. And there are people who we think are bad, but they do good things.

So, most people in the real world, they don’t really fit into this neat polarity. Yes, there is good and there is bad. But most of us exist in the mix somewhere.

This is the muddled middle. We all have some good inside us, sometimes bad inside us. So, when some good people do bad things or especially when bad people do good things, if anybody does good, that’s nice, that’s surprising, that’s beneficial, that’s nice for us.

But especially when some good people do bad things, that can be very disturbing. Because when we are functioning in life, life is tough. There are many problems that we face, there are many difficult situations that we have to deal with.

And at such times, we need to know whom can we trust. And who can be our supporters, who understand us, who share our values. So, we want to know about good people.

But when good people do bad things, so what makes them do such things? And how do we deal with that? How do we make sense of that? So, broadly speaking, if we consider the Ramayana, can you give any example of good people doing bad things? Yes. One is Kaikeyi. So, Kaikeyi, she ended up having Ram Exile.

That is one thing. Anyone else? Vali. Yes, Vali is another example.

Sugreev, what did he do? Okay. Sugreev lost himself in sensual pleasures. He forgot himself.

So, we could say that if he wanted to put it on a spectrum. Any other characters? Vishwamitra. Vishwamitra, what did he do? Okay.

Vishwamitra, when he was basically, it was before he became Vishwamitra, when he was a king Kaushik and then he took away the cow and he tried to attack him. So, we see that there are good people also who do bad things. Now, broadly if you wanted to put in a spectrum, let’s see, if we consider, see these three are the most central characters.

Vishwamitra is also a character within the Maha Ramayana. Vishwamitra is also, he is a sage who is widespread. He is there elsewhere also.

Among these three characters, Sugreev, Vali and Kaikeyi, whose bad action was less, whose bad action was more? What do you think? Kaikeyi was more. Okay. Was that the most? Yes.

The worst was whose? Vali. Vali. Vali.

Okay. Then we have Sugreev. Now, we may decide, how do we decide how bad is somebody’s action? So, one thing is we could even look at it in terms of the effect.

Effect, how much did it result? So, basically, how bad, how much was the negative effect? And we can look at how long. How long did that particular effect last? So, from that perspective, Sugreev was for basically a few days. He had made a promise to Lord Ram that I will be there.

I will be there with my entire army to help you find Sita. After you help me to get back the kingdom. So, but there he completely lost himself in sensuality.

For a few days at the most, it might have been a few weeks. After the four months got over, Lord Ram was waiting eagerly, almost impatiently for him to do something and he was not doing anything. Now, Kaikeyi, her action had result for how long? 14 years.

And if you consider the Vali, how long was that? It was practically lifelong. The Mahabharata is not really specific how long Sugreev was being pursued. But it was, it went till his death basically.

Till his death. So, now none of these are villains, none of these are bad people. If you consider what impels anyone to act, so there are, when we act in particular ways, say right now you came for this program.

Some of you may be regularly coming for this program but today you didn’t come for this program. Some of you may be hearing online. So when we do our actions, there are many factors that shape our actions.

Those factors can be broadly categorized as external and internal. But quite often there are very few actions which come only from external sources and very few actions that come from only internal sources. They are generally a combination of both.

So, external we could simply put that as conditions. There are particular conditions when we become impelled to do certain things. And then there are internally, there are conditionings.

Conditionings which also can prompt us to do certain things. So, broadly speaking when we human beings act, we could put it that say if the conditions are positive, conditions are good and normally the word conditionings is used for something negative. But it doesn’t have to be negative.

If I use the word conditioning generically to refer to particular way we are habituated to behave. So, for example, if you are brought up in Indian culture, then if our foot touches somebody then immediately we touch our head. It’s a default way we are offering some respect.

So, that’s you can call it a condition. It’s a habit but it’s more of a default behavior. So, it’s something ingrained within us.

So, now if the conditions and conditionings, they can be in four combinations. The condition can be positive and the conditioning can be positive. That means that say somebody has a tendency to live an honest upright life and they are living in a society where also honesty, integrity, uprightness is appreciated.

So, if you go back to the Vedic context, somebody wants to do brahminical activities like doing yajnas and then there is a king who supports and sponsors and protects yajnas. Then the external condition and the internal conditioning. So, we could say this is the best situation to be in.

And the conditions are positive and the conditionings are also positive. Now conditions could be just the atmosphere of the place. There could be some particular people in that place.

It can mean many different things. But conditions and conditionings. Now conversely the worst situation is where the conditions are bad.

When you say the conditions are bad, that means it can be bad in various ways. Bad means say somebody is in a place in their life where internally they dislike someone. And then when they dislike someone, maybe that person has treated them a little badly, spoken something harshly to them and they are annoyed and they obviously also had a little negative conception about that person.

So, they have a negative opinion about that person. And that is the time say they come to know some nasty rumor about that person. Maybe it is true, maybe it is not true but they come to know about that.

Then what happens is internally there is a dislike and externally they have come to know something dislikable about them. So, this is for example when gossip happens. Now gossip for it to happen two conditions have to work together.

Now when we hear something we like about someone we don’t like. So, if we like that person then what will happen? Okay, maybe this is not true, maybe I don’t want to talk about this. Maybe I will find out from that person what actually happened.

But when internally there is dislike and externally we get some information. Hey, this person is like this. The two come together and it can be deadly.

So, ordinary people can start gossiping at that time. So, when conditions and conditionings both are problematic, both are negative then it works out badly. So, now we could look at the other two situations where the conditions are positive but the conditionings are negative.

Say for example, Prabhupada tells the story of a thief who went on a pilgrimage. And when he went on a pilgrimage he had this tendency to steal. Now there is a particular behavioral tendency called kleptomaniac.

Some people just like to steal. There was a British king, he was a king of Britain, he had this tendency to steal. Courtiers, people who would come to visit him, he would steal their shoes.

So, he doesn’t need them at all but that’s just the condition. So, he went to that holy place and he has had to steal something. So, what he did was, one part of him said I don’t want to steal, this is a holy place.

But other part he says I have to steal. So, what he did was, he took things from one person’s luggage, one bag and put it in some other bag. He took something from somebody else’s bag and put it in somebody else’s bag.

I have to do something. I don’t want to take it but I have to do this. So, sometimes what will happen is, somebody’s conditions may be positive but the conditionings may be negative.

Then what happens is, the behavior becomes out of place. Physically out of place. Like somebody is very habituated to say speaking swear words, speaking vulgar words or swear words and they come to a society which is very cultured.

And suddenly they speak some swear words, everybody falls high, what is happening over here. This is not the kind of language you speak over here. So, the conditions may be positive but the conditionings may be negative.

Now, sometimes it could be that the, what happens is, the conditionings are positive but the conditions are negative. That means that the person, say a child was brought up in a very good family, good environment. But then that child goes to maybe a hostel and in the hostel everybody is into say drinking or smoking or into drugs.

Now, at that time, then there is a inner war. Now, we could say to some extent there is inner war everywhere but the degree of the inner war can be more or less. So, when there is a mismatch between inner and outer things, the inner war is more.

Now, inner war when it is more, then it becomes like a, this is like a test for that person. That there is a test of temptation. You go into that situation, but what happens? So, for example, Hanuman, when he went to Lanka, he had to search for Sita.

And now Sita is a woman. Now, where is he going to search for a woman? In woman’s chambers. And he has come in here secretly, sneakily, so he can’t just go in the daytime.

So, he is going at night. At night he goes to the palaces of Ravana and looking through the windows, is Sita there over here? Now that, everybody broke into sights over there. But he was not disturbed.

So, sometimes the conditions can be negative, but the conditionings can be positive. So, I am using the word conditioning in a more neutral way over here. So, broadly speaking for us, when we are trying to function in life, so we need to, if now when somebody is a bad person, you see, bad person means that they intentionally like to do bad things and they even get joy in doing bad things.

That is the person who is, you can say evil. Broadly, you can say our conditionings, if I use the word conditionings as interchangeable to impressions. We all have some samskara, some impressions inside us.

We could put them in three broad categories. There is goodness and the opposite of goodness is wickedness. Goodness means that person has a very good nature.

So, they will do good things. So, when the conditioning is goodness, then it is they will do good even in bad conditions. That is somebody who is honest, even if they go into a disruptive dishonest place, they will not become dishonest.

Somebody who is very firm, I don’t want to drink alcohol. They may have to go to a bar, but they will not be tempted by it. So, goodness means it is they will be good even in bad conditions.

On the other hand, some people are wicked. Wicked means they are cool. They not only do bad things, they get joy in doing bad things.

Say, if we have rushed to meet someone and there is a lot of crowd over there, rushing through the crowd. While rushing through the crowd, our footsteps on somebody’s foot. If we notice that, as soon as we notice, oh, I am sorry, we will apologize.

But suppose somebody notices their footsteps, step on somebody’s foot and they look at that person and then they deliberately raise their foot and bang it on that person’s foot. And they get joy. What kind of person would do something like that? So, there are wicked people who will be bad even in good conditions.

Because they get joy in doing that. They get some perverse pleasure in doing that. So, Krishna talks about this as a demoniac nature.

Krishna says not only demonic people are demoniac, asau mayaha dhahishatru hanishe cha paranapi. I have killed this enemy, I will kill that enemy also. But not only that, they say, after that they celebrate that.

That they think, just see how clever I am. Adyo abhijanwanasmi konyasthi satrusho maya. Who is as clever as me, who is as smart as me.

I have fooled everyone else. I destroyed everyone else. So, everybody may have a desire for getting more and more money.

That’s just a part of normal human psychology. But very few of the people who desire money will actually want to kill to get money. And even if somebody kills, even I have friends in the military and they have to defend, they kill.

It’s like we are taking a human life. There is actually lot of remorse and pain and lot of agony a person goes through. So, if somebody delights in killing, that is demoniac.

So, there are people who will do bad even in good things, in good situations. So, Krishna describes this kind of mentality in the 16th chapter. So, everybody is greedy.

Greedy means not everybody but that greed for money is there widespread you can say. But what happens is, from that greed, we can use the word covetous. Somebody is coveting lot of things, coveting greedy.

But from that somebody just becomes murderous. That’s a huge, huge leap. And then not only murderous, that is sadistically murderous.

Sadistically means, sadism is where basically a person gets joy in causing pain to others. So, sadism is where the person has a perverse psychology. With seeing others suffer, the person gets joy.

So, who had a sadistic psychology in our tradition? Somebody associated with Ramayana only? Sorry? Ravana. Yeah, Ravana. But somebody who became good afterwards? Okay, Murugari was there, not associated with Ramayana.

But Murugari, he wanted to half kill people, half kill animals basically. So, sometimes people get joy in that. And Narada Mahatma told him don’t do this.

So, basically the point is that there can be a spectrum in this. You can kill but somebody gets joy in causing pain to others. Things like, oh I am so clever, I killed so many people.

That is very perverse. So, basically now in between these two, there is goodness, there is wickedness and then there is weakness. So, people who have weakness, what happens is, they will be good in good conditions and they may become bad in bad conditions.

So, when we have weakness, we all have certain weaknesses. Say, for example, somebody who has taken alcohol sometimes. And they say, no, I am not interested in taking alcohol, I am not going to drink anymore.

But suppose they go to a party, they go to corporate dinner as a part of the office obligation and there everybody is drinking. You can just take a drink. Now, they may start and they may keep drinking.

So, from weakness, somebody can go down to wickedness or somebody can go up to goodness. Somebody becomes sober, they say, I am never going to drink. And even if they go to a particular place, they don’t get tempted.

So, most of us, so when I talk about this black and white earlier, the good and bad, so the goodness is associated with good and bad is wickedness. So, most of us exist somewhere in between these that we may have the weakness of lust or anger or greed, whatever. And because of that if we are put in particular situations, the dark side within us may come out.

So, now if this happens, what can we do about it? How do we deal with it? So, we look at these three characters and we will see how they had some weakness because of which they did something bad. But then they recovered and it took different amounts of time for them to recover. So, how did that happen? So, broadly now even we talk about conditions.

Now conditions can be passive or they can be active. Passive and active, what do I mean? Passive means that they are more like things and active means there are people. Like somebody goes to a bar or somebody goes to a party where there are drinks available.

Okay, those drinks are there and somebody may see that and may get the desire to drink. But somebody goes to a party and there is somebody who is telling them, let’s take a little drink. Take a few drinks.

Somebody is pushing them again and again. Then what happens is the vulnerability becomes more. So, conditions can involve both these things.

Similarly, if we talk about conditionings, now we can say our conditionings are positive and negative, good and bad, but that we already talked about. But there could be conditionings which are weak and conditionings that are strong. So, when there is a weak conditioning, then if the temptation comes, then the desire that comes up is not very strong.

But the conditioning is very strong, then the temptation that comes also is very strong. There is weak conditioning and strong conditioning. So, we could say, with this broad understanding, now let’s look at the three characters.

So, for Sugreev, now if you consider Sugreev’s life, it was quite a turbulent life. He was born in royalty. He lived as a prince and although he was awarded to Wali, still he had royal luxury and prosperity to live in.

And then he became the king because he thought Wali had died. And then Wali came and attacked him.

He lost everything. In some ways, actually Sugriva’s predicament was worse than Ram’s predicament also. Mainly we can say Sugriva’s predicament was worse than Ram because of three main reasons.

One was there was no proper party, no proper separation. Like Ram, he could talk with everyone. He had to go to the forest, he could talk with his mother, he could talk with even his father, he talked with the citizens.

But it is that Sugriva was one day the king and the next day he had to leave from there. He had to rush away from there. In Bangladesh, the Prime Minister was there one day and she had to leave immediately.

She said, I want to give one last speech. He said, nothing, you have to leave immediately. So, there is no problem.

And that somebody has been in an influential position. Somebody is a leading devotee in a community and just one day they disappear. That causes pain.

So, there was no proper separation. Then there was also, there was no family for him. He had friends, Hanuman and Jabal were there.

But Ram had Sita with him. Ram had Lakshman with him. And there was also no safety for him.

Now we could say that being in a forest itself is dangerous. But Ram was not being actively persecuted by someone. He was targeted.

Bharat was not sending anyone to assassinate Ram. Bharat actually wanted Ram to come back. He was eagerly waiting for Ram to come back.

So, there was no safety for him. He was constantly being targeted. And on top of that there was no duration, no clarity about duration.

That how long would be in a forest? Ram, maybe after 14 years he will come back. Somebody is put in the jail and they don’t even know how long they are going to be in the jail. That’s far more painful than knowing at least this is the way.

So, in many ways his situation was very painful, very difficult. And then after that when he suddenly came back, he became the king and then the rainy season started. So, he had to live in complete austerity, complete deprivation.

And suddenly he got all the royal luxury back. And not only he got all the royal luxury back, but that royal luxury and there was no responsibility that he could discharge. So, for material perspective Vali was a good king.

Kishkind was a prosperous king. So, they were well stocked for the rainy season. They didn’t have to worry about supplies.

So, he had like, what happened for him? Suddenly his situation changed and he came back to the kingdom. There was no responsibility in the sense of no immediate responsibility. And there was huge luxury, especially luxury after he had nothing for a long time.

So, let’s say somebody has lived in some forest area where they have gone for some work or assignment. There is no internet, there is no movies, no kind of entertainment. And they suddenly come back home and they have all the entertainment and suddenly there is a lockdown.

So, you can’t go out and you have full net access. Or somebody might just go on a Netflix binge. Isn’t it? So, Sugreev went on a Netflix binge at that time.

He just forgot everything. He just got into enjoyment and he got into so much enjoyment that the four months passed. And he just didn’t remember.

Day after day passed after that. And initially Ram was agitated, Lakshman pacified him. When Lakshman went to the kingdom, then Lakshman heard sounds of dancing and singing and music.

He realized there were his… He was just enjoying and he became angry because of that. So, at that time, Lakshman strongly chastised Sugreev. However, to his credit, he completely changed thereafter.

So, for him, we could say that although he went on a bad track, Sugreev, we could say he was a king. So, if you consider his conditionings, on one side there was kings are habituated to luxury. But at the same time, kings are also trained to take up responsibility.

A king by the palace might be living in great luxury, but a king who goes on the war field, in those times the kings would be expected to lead from the front. And it is not that they would have a lot of luxury on the war field. They have to fight.

They have to risk their lives. So, today often the political leaders and the military leaders, they are completely different. This happened around the start of the 20th century.

Napoleon Bonaparte is considered the last… in the western world, India or something went on it, he is considered the last political leader who was also a military leader. You see, from the Second World War onward, First World War onward also, none of the heads of state actually were involved in fighting. So, because of that, people can, those who are the head of state, they can just sit comfortably in an air-conditioned room and they can send their armies to fight, to be slaughtered.

So, they are ready to take austerities also. But he had got sudden and great luxury. So, now if you could talk about the conditionings.

Now, if you talk about the conditions, you know, there were temptations, huge temptations that came to him. But then for him, he also had good association. So, good association was, for him, first Hanuman reminded him.

Then Tara reminded him and then Lakshman reminded him. And Lakshman’s reminder was much more than a reminder. So, Hanuman was very respectful and very gentle and polite.

Tara was more like a mother figure for him, the wife of his elder brother. She was a little more strong and Lakshman came and shook up everything. But to his credit, he changed completely.

He didn’t have any relapse after that. He didn’t give up responsibility for luxury. So, we can say, in this case, it was primarily due to conditions.

What he did was bad, but those conditions were exceptional. It was a unique, not exceptional, but very rare confluence of conditions that he had no external responsibility and he had huge luxury which he never had before, for a long long time. So, it is, you could say, this is largely excusable.

It is bad, but excusable. It was largely caused by the conditions. Now, which is the next character we are discussing, Kengai.

So, basically, you know, when, why are we discussing this? We are all dealing with each other. Sometimes we ourselves do something wrong. Sometimes people around us do something wrong.

So, we need to be able to understand. When somebody has done something wrong, how much should we just reject the person or condemn the person or how much should we excuse the person. So, by understanding the situation, understanding the person’s conditionings to whatever extent we can understand and understanding the person’s conditions as much as they can be understood, based on that we can decide.

Now, for someone whose conditionings are relatively stronger, we will come to that. We will look at these three cases and then we will finally come to some broad conclusions. Now, in Kengai’s case, what happened, if you consider, what were the condition, what were the conditions? Sorry? Conditions can be basically events, things that happen and it can be people.

So, the event was? Yes. So, it was the sudden succession plan. Everybody knew that yeah, Dashrath is getting on in the age and he will be hanging over the Kimidogi.

And Ram was widely known to be, he was the senior most, the eldest and he was also very worthy, very virtuous, very much loved. It was to be in one sense expected. But Dashrath decided to do it quickly.

Now, there are many reasons for that. One of the reasons is astrologically he felt that, he was told that after some time there will be a lot of inauspiciousness. So, better do the transfer as quickly as possible.

So, there was a sudden succession plan. So, that was a little unusual. But along with that there was Mantra.

Mantra’s manipulation. Mantra’s poisoning of her mind. And now in her case, we can say that the, now if you consider the conditionings, now what were the conditionings? There was a certain basic level of jealousy or rivalry among the co-wives.

That is natural. It was never to the level of hatred, never to the level of I want to destroy you. But it is just natural.

If two people are in a similar situation, you know, what is this person doing? What is this person doing? Now a days there may not be co-wives, if two brothers are living close by and their wives are there. And then when you say okay, you know, how big is your house? What are you doing? There is always a comparison will be there. So, natural jealousy and rivalry was there.

So, that conditioning was there. But at the same time, you know, there was also a dutifulness. Dutifulness means she was a mother.

She had a maternal sense of dutifulness. That she never hated Ram. She of course loved her own son, but even Ram also she loved.

So, even when she wanted to send Ram to exile, it was not out of hatred for Ram. It was more of her affection for her own son and she wanted Ram to get out of the way. So, now for her, if you see, there was a particular confluence.

Confluence means coming together. Like the Triveni, the Ganga, Yamuna, Saraswati, they all come together. So, sometimes conditions and conditionings, there can be a confluence, both come together.

And say, it can work positively. Sometimes we are going through something in our life because of which we are questioning, what is the meaning of life? What am I really meant to do? And say that is the time somebody gives us a Bhagavad Gita, somebody invites us for a Gita class. Then the conditions and conditionings, conditioning means we are thinking.

I am basically talking about conditioning generically. We are thinking about something spiritual. And somebody shows us the path of something spiritual and then we take it up.

So, both conditions and conditionings can come together. So, now in this particular situation, what happened? So, there was this insecurity or rivalry or jealousy or whatever word, but it was mild, it was not very strong. Her sense of maternal affection for her children, for Bharat primarily, but for all the children, it was quite strong.

But then at that particular time, when Mantra poisoned her mind, she just could not resist it. Mantra told such a story that she just completely bought into it. Now that itself is a completely, how Mantra was able to persuade and pervert Kaikeyi, that itself is a complex story and that could be a separate class.

But let’s focus here on, there was a negative influence from outside, from Mantra’s side. Now for her, if you see, she went on and she didn’t listen to anyone. See, normally what happens for us is, this is the soul, this is the mind.

And then, say here, there is some person. So, most people, we look at them through our mind. That means, say if somebody is very nice to me and immediately my mind will say, why this person is so nice? Do they want something from me? What do they want? So, if I have a suspicious mind, I will look at them through my mind.

So, for most people, we look at them through our mind. But there are a few people whom we trust. And then what happens is, they are so close to us that we look at our mind through them.

That means, say, if somebody has hurt me, and then, this person is so terrible, this person hates me, this person is my enemy, this person wants to destroy me. And that’s what, every action we will see from there, we will see from that perspective only. But if we have some close friend, if we have a spiritual guide, spiritual master or spiritual mentor or whatever, then we trust.

And then they tell us, actually, you know, you are being too suspicious, you are being too critical over here. No, yes, that person was going through that situation that time, that’s why they spoke like that, that’s why they did like that. But that person has also been kind in this way, this person helped that person over there.

That person has been, you had a nice relationship with that person in the past. So, we need someone we can look at, through whom we can look at our mind. Normally, we look at everyone through our mind.

But we need some people through whom we can look at our mind. So, this is a trusted friend. There are very few people who are that close to us.

Because whenever anybody has an opinion opposite to our opinion, immediately we become defensive or offensive. And the more closely cherished that opinion is, the more we become offensive or defensive. And if anybody challenges that, then we want to dismiss that person.

So, for Kaikeyi, for her, when Mantra poisoned her mind, then she was looking at everyone through that poisoned mind. And Dashrath begged her, okay, if you want Bharat to be the king, that’s fine, but please don’t send Ram away. Why? What has Ram ever done to you? Please don’t do that.

Vashishtha requested her, Sumantra requested her, but she was not ready to listen. But fortunately for her, there was one person whom she trusted enough that through him she could look at her mind. Who was that person? Bharat.

So, it was only when Bharat came back and he told in a very sober yet celebratory tone, you know, the king is dead and the kingdom awaits you now. Now, Bharat was shocked to know what had happened. Now, Bharat’s, you know, his shock was actually at four different levels.

First was at the event itself. What had happened? Oh, my father is dead and my brother has gone to the forest. That itself was, the event was shocking.

Then the cause was even more shocking. And my brother, my mother did this. You know, my father had died because of natural causes and maybe something had happened.

Maybe my brother did something because of which he decided I want to go to exile. The cause, how could she have done this? That made it even more shocking. Then not only that, the intent.

Kaikeyi told this whole thing as if I have done all this for you and you should be pleased with this. It’s like not only, what kind of person are you? Yesterday in the Artha Forum class I was giving the example that we want our children to do well in exams. Say, our child comes and says, I came first in my class.

Oh, wonderful! How did you do that? You know, you wanted me to come first in class. So, I learnt how to hack computers. I hacked my teacher’s computer and I got the full question paper first and I had all the answers.

That’s why I came first. And now, if a child says that, we will be shocked. Not only what kind of person are you? That’s a shock.

But what kind of person do you think I am? That I will be pleased by this. Isn’t it? So, for Bharat, it was a shock like that. Now how could you have done this? And how could you, in what universe could you even think that I would be pleased by this? And then, not only that, the fourth shock was perception.

That everybody was thinking that he was a part of this plot. And Bharat, he had no idea, he had no way supported it, he condemned it, he was being accused of doing it. Or at least an unspoken accusation was there.

So, it was like a huge series of shocks for him. He just totally condemned her at that time. He says, you cannot be my mother.

You must be the goddess of destruction, descended into our family to destroy our entire family. When Kalgai heard those words, she was just completely jolted out of her illusion. Shocked, what is this? Why is Bharat speaking like this? And then as the whole bubble of illusion that she had created around herself, it broke.

It just burst completely. And that was when she came back to her senses. And then she terribly repented, what have I done? And she even went all the way with Ram to, sorry, with Bharat to get Ram back.

So, of course, Lord Ram refused to come. But the point was, we can say here, the conditionings, were they there? They were there. But it was the conditions primarily.

Conditions, especially in terms of not just the situation, the event, but the person. And when a positive person came in her life, somebody who she could trust, that whole thing ended. So, you could say Kalgai’s actions were more severe than Sugriva’s actions.

Because the consequences were far greater. They were worse. Nobody died because of Sugriva’s actions.

Dashrath died because of heartbreak. And they were, they lasted longer. So, in that sense, those actions were worse.

But here also we will see that what happened essentially is that, okay, there is a bad situation. To be in a bad situation and to have a bad person at that particular time in our lives, that’s a difficult situation. That’s unfortunate.

It’s something which can make even good people fall. So, now, if we consider, the last is, who is the case we discussed? Wali. Wali, yes.

Now, in the case of Wali, we can look at, again, conditions and conditionings. Now, from the perspective of conditions, now, it was, basically, I won’t go into the whole story, but you know that they had got to, Wali and Sugriva were both pursuing a demon named Mayavi. And Mayavi went into a cave.

And it was a long series of caves. It was like a catacomb and underground. So, Wali said, I will go inside.

Sugriva told Sugriva to stand on the door. And Wali was gone for a long time and there was no sound from him. And Sugriva saw blood coming out and Sugriva heard the screaming of the demon.

But he didn’t hear any sound from Wali. And he concluded with a heavy heart that his brother had been killed. And he decided that, if that demon is powerful enough to kill my brother, then it will be very difficult for me to kill him.

And if he kills me, then he will go and destroy an entire kingdom. I have to stop that demon. Therefore, he blocked that cave’s entrance with a giant boulder.

And he came back and he reluctantly became a king. Accepted the kingship. Because Angad was too young at that time to become the king.

So then, now if you see from Sugriva’s perspective, it is a misunderstanding. But you can say it was an understandable misunderstanding. An understandable misunderstanding.

Anybody could have come to that conclusion. Similarly, when Wali came back, when Wali came near the cave entrance and he saw this huge boulder, he started suspecting. How could such a giant rock come and exactly cover this? This did happen by chance.

How did it happen? He called out to Sugriva. There is no Sugriva over there. After great, great effort, he finally pushed that boulder out, away and he came out.

And he looked and he saw there was no sign of any scuffle, any violence. So had Sugriva been killed and some demon had put it over there? Did Maya be an accomplice? It didn’t seem like that at all. And then he started thinking.

In royal families, when there is so much at stake, there could be trust but there is also suspicion. There can be betrayal. There can be brothers fighting against brothers.

And did Sugriva do this to me? And when he came back and he saw Sugriva on the throne, he just exploded. He started jumping on Sugriva and pounding him. Now you could say it was an understandable misunderstanding on Sugriva’s side and Wali’s side also.

So that is true. But where did he go wrong? Sugriva was trying to explain, explain to him but he was just not ready to hear. So Sugriva decided that the kind of mood my brother is in, if I stay here, he will beat me to death.

Better let me go away right now and I will live to tell my tale on another day. But unfortunately when Sugriva ran away, for Wali it confirmed his suspicion. If he was not guilty, why would he run away? And then after that what happened is, so it was an understandable misunderstanding, it was tragic.

But after that the conditioning that came into the picture over here was his arrogance. His first misunderstanding was perfectly okay. But then afterward the other citizens, the other courtiers, even his own wife Tara told him that Sugriva thought that he had died.

Now what happened was because of his arrogance, if somebody is a leader, somebody is a king, they have to have a certain level of confidence. Now if somebody is constantly second-guessing themselves, hey should I be doing this, should I not be doing that, if somebody is constantly second-guessing themselves, somebody has a lot of lack of confidence, they have diffidence, then they can’t even manage their own life. How can they manage anyone else’s life? So somebody who is a leader has to have a certain level of confidence.

But from confidence to go to overconfidence, that is very easy. So Gwali did have a certain level of pride. So what happened is because of that pride, he dismissed what explanation everybody was giving him.

He said he told you a story and you all believed the story. Now how will you actually know what was Sugriva’s thought? He said Sugriva made a whole plot and he came up with a story and you just believed the story. You thought I could be killed like this? So anyone who tried to support Sugriva, he just dismissed them.

So what happens is that arrogance can lead to overconfidence, it can lead to dismissiveness. Dismissiveness towards other’s opinions and not only other’s opinions, he could have at least given Sugriva a chance. Now what happened? You tell me in your words that Sugriva could have lied.

It’s possible of course. But generally if somebody is lying right in the face, unless they are very good liars, as a very bad people that means, but it’s very difficult to lie completely in the face of someone. And if you know someone very well, their lying can be detected.

Especially those who are supposed to administer justice. And they call it somebody in the police or somebody is an investigator, somebody is an attorney, lawyer. They are supposed to be good at what you call as deception detection.

If somebody is trying to deceive. So at least he could have given Sugriva a chance to tell his side of the story. But he did not do that.

So the conditions were bad. But what he did went far beyond the conditions. In the conditions he is attacking, Sugriva was understandable.

But he is never giving Sugriva a chance to tell his side of the story. That was unreasonable.

struggle between him and his brother. It is unfortunate. But the thing was it was his conditioning that were primarily responsible for his actions.

So what do we conclude by this? Two main points. For all of us there are actions are determined by our conditions and our conditionings. So as far as conditions are there we need to try to situate ourselves in positive conditions as much as possible and we all need to avoid or minimize, situate or maximize.

So the conditions that will inspire us to act virtuously, act devotional, we need to maximize those conditions. That’s why satsang is so important. Satsang is external, going to temple is external.

But in our social circle, this is one advantage of being outside India is that for many Indians, if they become devotees, their social circle becomes their spiritual circle. And then we become encouraged and facilitated in our bhakti by that. So we need to maximize the situations, maximize the positive situations.

And similarly, say it appears to basically to the things, the places and also the people. If there are people who we see, by observing sometimes when we spend some time with people, now after that our consciousness completely goes down. Now they gossip about this.

They may be devotees also. But sometimes devotees also are of different kinds. They just gossip about this, they blame about this person, they blame that person.

Now of course, it can happen that sometimes some devotees may have gone through some great difficult situations in their life and they are feeling hurt and they need to vent out. That’s once in a while is okay. But that’s how they are always complaining about this person and complaining about that person and blaming that person.

Then they may be devotees, but Chakravarthy says that we should keep a distance from such devotees. So there are people who bring out the worst within us, whether it is intentional or unintentional. And we have to be careful that for the things and the people, the conditions, we try to minimize them as much as possible.

And that is where this, see, how the conditioning surface in our life, that is not so much in our control. Now we can say what kind of conditions come in our life also is not in our control. Well, yes and no.

That there is a significant degree of control we have. We don’t have to necessarily go into places of temptations. In the early days, devotees would go everywhere and preach.

So they would go to, and one day devotees went to a bar and they started doing kirtan in the bar. And in the bars, they have generally some kind of singing happens. So devotees went and did kirtan over there.

And for us, kirtan is sacred. For them, it was just some music. Not for them, the people in the bar, I said.

And they came and told Prabhupada. Prabhupada said, we need to consider, are we likely to make devotees over here or are we likely to lose devotees over here? So even in the name of service, we have to be careful. We don’t have to put ourselves in tempting situations unnecessarily.

So in traditional cultures, there was generally, say, there was some level of gender segregation. That is, male-female distances are there. Now in contemporary cultures, that level of gender segregation is not there.

But a certain level of gender distance, gender separation, certain level of respectful distance is necessary. Now if we don’t have that, then now we may put ourselves in unnecessary tempting situations. So we need to be careful.

I was in America when I started doing Western outreach. So in the West, the gender differences are quite less. So I was in a college program in America, in Texas.

And then there was one American girl. She asked a question, why do religions fight among each other? So I gave an elaborate answer. And I could see she was quite relieved by that answer.

And then after that, at the class, I was talking with different people. And she came there. She said, I’m so grateful for this answer.

You know, I always had a spiritual urge for a long time. But this, seeing all the violence in the name of religion, that made me always hesitate in my spiritual search. You have removed a big burden from my heart.

I’m so grateful to you. Can I give you a hug? Now, in their culture, a hug is just an expression of affection. So now, I looked at the devotee who was a youth preacher over there.

I told him, please help me. I didn’t say that. I just indicated to him.

Now, he helped me, but in an entirely unexpected way. He said, he’s a monk. On his behalf, you can hug me.

His wife was next to him. And his wife said, I’m his wife. On his behalf, you can hug me.

And then they hugged each other. It’s protection through parampara. So, I talked about this incident with my spiritual master, Radhamanth Maharaj.

So, now, since I’ve been doing Western outreach, and Maharaj also is focusing on that, so, I talk about him and give a report of what I’m doing. So, Maharaj said that, when they are offering some appreciation or affection, if you just apply Indian standards, don’t you have any sense of decency? Don’t you have a sense of culture? If you reject that, if you condemn or reject that, you will be alienating them. That will be violence to their spiritual life.

But if you accept that, that will be violence to your spiritual life. So, we have to find a graceful way. We don’t want to be rude, but at the same time, we have to be careful.

So, the point is that, we may be in particular conditions where certain actions, we could justify them because of the situation. But we have to be careful. So, we don’t have to put ourselves in situations where our conditionings may get triggered.

So, for us, with respect to conditionings are there. Now, what happened to Wali was that, he didn’t accept anyone’s good advice. Because he was the king, he was the top person.

He had no authority above him. No one whose guidance he could turn towards or even their input he could take in. Kaikeyi took in the input of Bharat.

Not anyone else, but at least Bharat. But for Wali, there was no one, unfortunately. So, for us, our conditioning should never become such that, I don’t need advice from anyone else.

Everybody can have a certain level of pride. And we all have some pride. But the pride which says that, there’s nothing I can learn from anyone else.

That’s a terrible thing to be. So, if our conditionings are there, what we need to do is, the positive conditionings, we need to nurture them, we need to strengthen them. And the negative conditionings that are there, that we need to reduce them.

We need to ultimately renew them. So, how do we do this? So, basically, the conditions are changed broadly through the bhakti environment. The bhakti environment could be, in our home we have a temple.

We come to the satsangh. And the conditionings are changed by our bhakti practice. Through our personal practices.

And that’s why one of the key practices that is often neglected, we have our sadhana, we have our japa, we have satsangh, we have various things. But one of the things is, We need to have close friends with whom we can share our heart. They can share their heart and we can share their heart.

We can share our heart with them. So, even if we have one friend like that, then our mind’s conceptions, whatever they might be, they won’t rule us, they won’t dominate us, they won’t destroy us. So, cultivating that kind of friendship is important.

It is a limber bhakti. We may have general association, that is good. But we also need some like-minded association.

So, I’ll conclude with this point that, What is like-minded? Sajatiya Sangha. Like-minded association. It has broadly three features.

That, in that association, they… First of all, it is that we understand their mind. That means, when they speak, things click for us. Like, sometimes what happens? Sometimes we ask a question and we get an answer that only raises more questions in our head.

Sometimes we may not be able to make sense of something from scripture logically. And we ask a question and they explain a scriptural point with another scriptural quote. And that’s okay, but how do we make sense of it logically? So, when they speak, we understand their mind.

Then second is, they understand our mind. So, if we speak, they don’t necessarily mean, Hey, you know, you’re being too over analytical. You’re being sentimental.

You’re being sahajiyaic. You’re being mayavadi. And then they understand our mind.

They don’t just label and dismiss. And third is, that they help us understand our mind. Yeah, I know, I understand how you’re thinking.

And your thinking is right till here. But maybe here, your thinking might be going wrong. You need to evaluate that.

So, they help us understand our mind. So, if we have even one person like that, country had Bharat, Wali did not have anyone. So, having good association in general and having at least one close association that can save us from a lot of the problems that may come, either because of the conditions we are in or because of the conditionings we may have.

So, one person, what is this? What like-minded association, what happens by that is, we are able to look at our mind through them. For most people, what happens is, we look at them through our mind. So, if there’s even one person who can help us look at our mind through them, that is extremely powerful.

Many people nowadays have mental health problems and they go to therapists. One reason is, not that they are insane, not that they are mad or something like that, but just that they just need someone to clear their mind. Now, I am not recommending going to therapist, but I am talking about how people when they are lonely, mental health problems often increase when there is a lot of loneliness.

So, when they are lonely, the mind is speaking something and you just don’t have any alternative narrative to the mind’s narrative. So, we need that in devotee association. If we develop this close friendship, it may be in our particular community, it may be a different community, it may be a different place.

If you find that clicking happens within one person, invest time in that relationship so that we can be there for them and they will be there for us. So, I’ll summarize what we discussed today. Broadly, we discussed three points.

First was, we discussed about this paradox of good people doing bad things and how do we understand that. So, I discussed that our actions are determined by two factors, our conditions and our conditionings. So, what is inside us and what is outside us and we discussed this spectrum of positive and negative, sorry, positive and positive conditions and conditionings.

And I won’t go into the diagram fully, but the idea is that this is the best situation and this is the worst situation. So, as much as possible, we try to avoid the situation where we have conditionings also and the conditions are tempting for that. And we try to have the best situation as much as we can.

Then we discussed about the human nature. We could put it in terms of, there can be three broad kinds of people. Human nature can be goodness, that means, in all conditions, they will always act properly.

Wickedness means, in all conditions, in good conditions, they will act bad. When there is weakness, then it depends. So, as examples of weakness, we discussed the spectrum of three characters.

Who are the characters? Sugriv, Kaykay and Bali. Yes, excellent. And what we discussed was how, for Sugriv, it was largely, it was primarily the conditionings.

Was it? No, it was primarily the conditionings. As the conditions was much more, the conditioning, it never came back afterwards. It was just exceptional conditions in which he did something wrong.

But for him, in each situation, we will see that it was some individual, some person who rescued them from that situation. Now, for Kaykay, we could say, here it was the condition much, much more than conditionings. For her, the conditions were there.

But actually, you can say, there were definitely some conditionings also. There was jealousy. There was some level of rivalry, which led to some suspicion.

Now, even in Mantras, poisoned her mind. There has to be something inside her for her to get that much affected. Isn’t it? So, there were some conditionings definitely there.

But in this case, here it was mostly that the conditions were passive. That it was not that the court dancers were deliberately trying to provoke Sugriv. They were just doing their job.

But here, the Mantra was, there was active condition that was there. That was, actually someone was trying to instigate. There is Mantra over here.

Now, in the case of Bali, it was the conditions hardly played any role. Definitely, the initial was the conditions. It was understandable misunderstanding.

But in his case, let alone anybody instigating him, there were people who were actively, active deterrents were there. Deterrents means, there are people who are telling him, don’t do this. And yet, he did that.

The courtiers were there. The Tara was there. But he didn’t listen to anyone.

So, in his case, it was primarily his conditionings that led to the wrong action. And that’s why he needed that final shock treatment of Lord Ram’s arrow to be corrected. And then the last part to discuss was, so, how do we bring about protection for ourselves or for others in particular situation? So, basically, if we have to judge others or evaluate others, then we have to see what primarily caused it.

Was it the condition or the conditionings? So, generally, if it’s the conditions, then mostly it is guard against the conditions and forgive. Don’t hold it against them afterwards. And don’t get into those conditions again.

Be careful. But generally, if it’s conditionings, then some amount of disciplining or punishment is required. So, it depends on the corrective action that is required.

Overall, we talked about how the protection can come is, the spiritual environment can provide us positive conditions. So, whether it is our children, ourselves, we try to have as much of a spiritual environment as possible. And it is our, that environment may be good, but we need to have our personal spiritual practice by which we can have positive conditionings within us.

And in this way, we all can, from this position of weakness, move toward goodness, so that even in tempting situations, we won’t be pulled down. And we won’t go down ever toward wickedness. So, Vali actually went down toward wickedness for a particular phase of his life.

Sugriva never did that, nor did Kaikeyi do that. She was weakness. In weakness, she did something terrible.

But she came back to goodness soon. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Is there any quick question? Yes, ma’am. Right. This condition and conditioning are predestined or part of free will? Is this question predestined? Okay.

I think it is a complicated thing. Certainly, there is a role of destiny in it. The kind of conditionings we have, the kind of conditions we have, say, destiny plays a role.

If this considers the situation of Ajamil. Now, Ajamil, he didn’t plan to go into any tempting area. He just went out to get firewood for his father’s fire sacrifice.

And that’s what he’d been doing regularly. And that time, suddenly, he saw this sight. So we could say it was completely destiny for him.

So destiny can sometimes put us in provocative situations. So sometimes, the situation that we get in is completely due to destiny. But sometimes, we ourselves know that, you know, I am getting into a dangerous zone right now.

Say, we are working in our office and there is some person who, you know, who seems to be attracted towards us, who has some interest in us, improper, adharmic interest in us. And we notice that, but we don’t shut it down. The way that person coming in our life might be because of destiny.

But, you know, if we get some pleasure in that person’s attention and we enjoy that pleasure, we will not do anything wrong. But we just, we don’t discourage that. Then that is not due to destiny.

That is, our indulging in that, even to a small degree, that will be our own actions. Our own free will be misused. And then, after that is, we are going, that is, we move on for some time.

And then, after that, somehow, some situation comes up, you know, there is a late-night project and that person is there and we are there and everyone else goes. Now, we can say that situation may also have come out of destiny. But then, all that attachment or attraction or infatuation that we have fuelled in the intermediate, that may impel us to do something adharmic.

And so, we can say the conditions may come because of destiny. But we do make choices by which the effect of those conditions can become worse or lesser. Like, somebody is, say, alcoholic and they are trying to recover from alcoholism.

And they just get a job. They just don’t get a job anywhere. The only job they get is in a bar.

Now, somebody will say, I just die. I will not take a job in a bar. But, you know, that is the only job they get.

What can they do? Maybe that is their destiny. But, if they are there, now, maybe they have to create some systems. You know, maybe they have some, in Alcoholics Anonymous, they have the accountability partner.

You know, every few hours, you call your friend and you talk with them and inform them, keep yourself on track. But if they start neglecting that, you know, let me take one drink, what is the big deal? And one drink becomes two drinks and becomes three drinks and then it just becomes full roll of glass. So, conditions may come by past karma.

But it is we who fuel or weaken our position in those conditions by our present actions. Similarly, conditionings. Sometimes, you know, we may be practicing Bhakti and we may find that a particular desire has more or less gone away and suddenly that desire starts coming back.

And, you know, we have not done anything to indulge in that desire. We are not fantasized. But suddenly that craving starts coming up.

Like somebody may be living very, may practice Bhakti, they lose their desire, I want a big house and I want a lot of wealth. And suddenly one starts feeling a lot of discontentment. Oh, this person has such a big house, this person has a big car.

Start feeling agitated by that. So now, now that kind of conditioning suddenly rising up, that could happen because of past karma. But then, what do we do? So, the worst situation is by past karma, we are in, we are with strong conditioning and by past karma, we are in a tempting condition.

If that happens, that’s really a difficult situation to be in. But even then, how have we lived our life before that? If there are small temptations have been coming and we have been saying no to those temptations, then when that big temptation comes, we will be able to say no to it. But small temptations, we have been saying yes.

When a small temptation, you know, I say yes, what’s the big deal? It doesn’t make any difference. I have been thinking like that. But then those small temptations and the indulgence of those temptations will lead to a situation where by destiny we come, that confluence of strong conditionings and tempting conditions come up.

Then we may just fall and we may have a grievous fall at that time. So, our choices do matter. Both conditions and conditionings may come because of destiny, but our choices do matter in how we will deal with those conditions and conditionings.

Thank you. Good question. Important question.

Any other last question? Yes, ma’am. What about Mantra’s situation? She will be in the mode of weakness or wickedness and throughout her life, what was she? I actually don’t know. So, maybe little… Yeah, good question.

Again, interesting. See, Mantra is by no means like a central character. There is hardly any reference to her after that incident.

In the Ramayana, when Lord Ram comes back after the 14 years exile, so Kaikeyi is there to welcome. Now, Mantra is not a part of the family, but there is no mention of her. So, she doesn’t play any major role.

Now, what is described in the Ramayana is that there are two levels of understanding it. It was not wickedness so much. She had been a friend of… She was like a nurse of Kaikeyi since her childhood.

She had come from her mother’s place with her. So, they had a close relationship. She was generally known to be irritable.

But she was… She was irritable, but she was never evil. That’s why even Kaikeyi was caught off guard by what Mantra did. But Kaikeyi did not blame Mantra for it.

Kaikeyi… I believed her. So, she took responsibility for it, for what happened. But… So, we can look at it from a psychological perspective.

And we can look also from a philosophical perspective. So, from a philosophical or a devotional perspective, what we understand is, it was Mantra’s mind was influenced by the Devata so that Lord Ram would go to exile. And so, she became an instrument in that.

But it was not that just she wanted to be of service to Devatas. She had her agenda. What had happened was that she was a hunchback woman.

And because of that, she was often… Because of her hunchback, because of that being this figure, she was teased and mocked sometimes. Not very viciously, but just playfully. And… She had resented that.

But when Kaikeyi became the favorite queen of Asura, then she was the favorite maid of Kaikeyi. So, her position in the royal staff became elevated. So, in Kaikeyi’s father’s, Kaikeyi’s kingdom, she was often mocked.

But here, since the time she came, soon after that, she had got a privileged position. And when she heard that Ram will become the king, then what will happen is, that Ram’s mother will get the privileged position or Ram’s wife. But either way, Kaikeyi will not have that privileged position.

And if Kaikeyi doesn’t have the privileged position, then I won’t also have my privileged position. And she didn’t want to lose that. So, you could say it was a selfish agenda, definitely.

But was it evil? She had no agenda to destroy Ram. It was her own small concern because of which she ended up causing a large catastrophe. So, sometimes it has happened in Indian political history.

At least two, three times I know that there are two brothers but they had some rivalry. One was the king, the other was the minister. The king did not treat the brother properly.

Other brother felt mistreated. And then the brother allied with some invading Muslim army. And then what happened was, their invading Muslim army promised him that, we will make you the king.

And then after he helped his brother to be defeated and killed, then the Muslim invaders killed the brother also and they took over the kingdom. So, or even if they let him become the king, they kept him like a puppet. And then they spread Adharma all over the world.

So, now there is a small rivalry that could have been resolved. But from that rivalry there was conspiracy and from that conspiracy there was treachery and treachery led to complete depravity. Terrible things happened.

So, it was bad but probably she never expected that this would lead to Dashrath Maharaj dying. So, because Dashrath Maharaj died and his wife becomes a widow, then again she would not have much privilege position there. So, it sometimes… So, you can say she is not an evil character.

So, it is more on the weakness. But in that particular phase, what she did led to a chain of events which was terrible. So, thank you very much.

Shri Ramachandra Bhagwan ki Jai! Shri Lapa Prabhupada ki Jai! Gaur Bhakti Bindu ki Jai! Tai Gaur Premanand ki Jai! So, much of what I spoke today is similar to the contents of this small book, Living the Ramayan, Life Lessons from Ramayan. So, about eight, nine essays are there in this. And incidents such as what we described, narration of the incident along with some life lessons from there rather than this book.

If you would like to have it, I will be here for some time and I can sign the book also. And there is this calendar with 365 days.

The post Special Sunday Satsang Program by HG Chaitanya Charan Das appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Relationships flourish by sharing not by dominating – Rama Lakshmana interactions
→ The Spiritual Scientist

On the topic of relationships, there must be give and take, not just an imposition of authority and obedience. Let’s look at this dynamic through the lens of the Ramayana, focusing on the relationship between Ram and Lakshman.

In Ayodhya, King Dasrath had four sons. Does anyone know who they were?
Ram, Lakshman, Bharat, and Shatrughna.
Excellent, thank you. Among these, two pairs formed particularly close bonds. Can you guess which pairs?
Ram and Lakshman, and Bharat and Shatrughna.
Yes, thank you. Wonderful.

Now, Ram, being the oldest, naturally had a certain seniority, which earned him respect. However, even with that respect, Ram never demanded obedience.

In any relationship, there is usually a power dynamic. For example, one person might be more powerful than the other, which might give them the authority to impose laws or commands. But if a relationship is based solely on this—on the imposition of authority and the obedience of the other—it cannot be sustained in the long term. Sooner or later, such a relationship wears out.

This dynamic is observed even in the animal kingdom. Take, for example, how young animals interact. Ethology, which is the study of animal behavior in their natural habitats, shows that when two mice play together, one might be slightly bigger than the other. If they engage in rough play, the bigger mouse will naturally dominate. But if the bigger mouse keeps winning, the smaller one will eventually lose interest in the game.

Even among mice, the bigger one occasionally lets the smaller one win, because otherwise, the game would be no fun. If the bigger mouse only dominated all the time, the smaller one would not want to play anymore. The relationship would end.

So, even in the animal kingdom, might isn’t always right. If they only relied on power, the relationship would not last.

Similarly, in the relationship between Ram and Lakshman, although Ram was the older brother and had a certain position, he didn’t dominate Lakshman. There were times when Ram listened to Lakshman, and times when Lakshman gave advice to Ram. This was a dynamic of mutual respect.

Now, let’s look at a few instances from the Ramayana to illustrate this further. One such instance occurred when Ram, Lakshman, and Sita were living in the Dandaka forest. There, a golden deer appeared. Sita was enchanted by its beauty and wanted Ram to capture it for her as a gift. Lakshman, however, was suspicious. He noticed that the deer was behaving strangely, and he thought it might be a demon in disguise.

Despite Lakshman’s warnings, Sita insisted. She even asked Ram to go after the deer. Now, Ram, moved by Sita’s request, decided to go after the deer. He did not tell Lakshman to go; instead, he took it upon himself, as Sita had asked.

When Ram chased the deer, he realized that it was no ordinary creature, but a demon in disguise. Ram then shot the deer with his arrow, but the deer, as it was dying, called out for help in Ram’s voice, tricking Sita and Lakshman into believing that Ram was in danger.

At this point, Sita grew anxious and urged Lakshman to go after Ram. Lakshman, still suspicious, hesitated but eventually agreed to leave Sita alone and go after Ram. Meanwhile, Ram, realizing the trap, turned back, but by the time he reached the hermitage, Sita had already been abducted by Ravana.

At this moment, both Ram and Lakshman were devastated. It would have been easy for Lakshman to say, “I told you so,” but he didn’t. Instead, despite the tension, they did not blame each other. Ram did not scold Lakshman for leaving Sita alone or for not taking her words seriously. Similarly, Lakshman did not argue with Ram for going after the deer.

This situation exemplifies that in any relationship, there are moments when things go wrong. In such moments, we can choose to focus on who is right or wrong, or we can focus on what is right. This is the essence of relationships built on mutual respect and understanding, rather than simply on power and obedience.

So either I am right and I try to prove I am right, or you are right. Then if the other person starts insisting they are right, what happens? The first person feels dominated and humiliated. But not “I am right” or “you are right,” but “what is right?” So now, what is right? Sita is already lost. She’s not there. The most important thing is not what went wrong, but what can we do now? So they both started searching for Sita.

Throughout the search, there was no incident of Ram and Lakshmana quarreling with each other because of this. What happens is that when somebody is a little bit too short-tempered or demoniac, it’s generally very easy to behave well when everything is comfortable. But when things become uncomfortable, that’s when the real test comes. How do we behave when things become difficult?

Prabhupada once said that greatness has to be seen by the capacity to tolerate provoking situations. The test of greatness is not in all the great things we achieve, but how we deal with provocations. In the Chaitanya Charita Amrit, there is a story of two demoniac people, Jagai and Madai. They were bullies, but being a bully was the least of their wrongdoings. They would catch someone and beat them up, and if they didn’t have anyone to beat, they would fight with each other. That was how they were.

But Ram and Lakshmana, although they were Kshatriyas and fought when required, were not controlled by that. The worst thing they could have done is start quarreling with each other, but they did not. So, when a difficult situation arises, we can either say, “This difficulty is here, and both of us are together trying to fight it,” or we can let the difficulty come between us and start fighting with each other instead of fighting the difficulty.

Later, when Ram couldn’t find Sita and in his despair and agony, he suddenly became angry. He picked up his bow and said, “Oh trees, tell me where Sita is! Oh gods, you are witnesses to everything! Tell me where Sita is!” But nobody replied. Ram threatened, “If you don’t tell me where Sita is, I will use my mystic powers and destroy the whole world.” As he said this, the whole atmosphere became agitated, and all the birds and animals shrank back in fear. But at that moment, Lakshmana immediately calmed him down.

He said, “Oh Ram, you are the king. You are the ideal human being. Yours is the example that everyone will follow. If you give in to anger amidst distress like this, everyone will follow that example.” Lakshmana continued, “I can understand your anger, but let us first exert our fullest to try to find Sita. If we cannot find her, then I will join you in acting aggressively.”

Here, Ram, of course, is God and beyond all mundane emotions. But Ram is playing Nara Leela—acting as a human being. He demonstrates to us how to deal with various emotions that we may go through. It’s natural for a human being to feel upset, angry, or distressed, especially in the face of great trouble. Sometimes we think being spiritual means we should not have any “non-spiritual” or “anti-spiritual” emotions.

I was in America once, and a devotee came to me and said, “I have not told anyone this, but I want to know what should I do. I’m feeling so angry with Krishna. Because Krishna allowed something bad to happen in my life, I am angry with him. And now I am scared that Krishna will punish me for being angry with him.”

I told him that God is big enough to accommodate even our anger. It doesn’t mean we should routinely yell at God or get angry with him. But the point is, in any relationship, there will be a variety of emotions. If we look at Draupadi, when she was attempted to be disrobed in the assembly in Hastinapur, she called out to Krishna. In some movies, we may see Krishna standing with his hand upraised, and the endless garment appearing. But actually, no one saw Krishna there. The garment just remained endless.

Later, when they were in the forest and Krishna came to meet them, Draupadi broke down and said, “Krishna, I called to you. Why didn’t you come to protect me?” Krishna didn’t say, “I am God, my plan is perfect.” Instead, he explained, “I didn’t know about the gambling match. Had I known, I would have come to prevent it.” Krishna then consoled Draupadi, saying, “Your virtue will be praised forever, and those who have wronged you will be punished.”

Similarly, when Ram got angry, Lakshmana did not just obey and say, “If you want to destroy the world, I will help you.” No, Lakshmana calmed Ram down, and Ram did not get angry with him for doing so. If Lakshmana’s words made sense, Ram accepted them.

So, for all of us, no matter what relationship we are in or what hierarchy exists, it’s important to remember that the hierarchy exists for a purpose. That purpose is to live virtuously, practice dharma, and ultimately attain Krishna.

Once, Prabhupada was in Europe during an initiation ceremony, and because the devotees were new, everything was messed up. They got a banana and made a banana salad, and they got flowers and made a flower garland. One thing after another went wrong. At one point, Prabhupada became very angry and scolded the disciples. Then a hippie came and said, “Swamiji, don’t get angry. Just chant Hare Krishna.” Prabhupada looked at him, picked up his beads, and started chanting Hare Krishna.

What does this mean? Prabhupada’s anger was for Krishna’s service. But when even a person who didn’t know much about chanting told him to chant, Prabhupada took it as an opportunity to teach. He didn’t respond with anger or “how dare you instruct me?” but instead showed us how to accept guidance in any form.

These are all Leelas.

So, Ram is beyond all anger. However, when he comes into this world, he demonstrates how we, as human beings, should face the challenges of life. If we get angry, all of us can feel a certain emotion when faced with difficulties. For example, someone may be a heroic warrior capable of destroying legions of soldiers, but if they are wounded, their strength may falter. A warrior who might fight battles fiercely might need someone to lean on when vulnerable. This doesn’t make them permanently weak, but at that moment, they are.

In our lives, sometimes we become weak too. If we always think of ourselves as being in a higher position and others in a lower position, we might not be able to function effectively in difficult times. Ram showed us this by taking advice from Lakshmana.

Later, when Ram and Lakshmana met Sugriva and helped him regain his kingdom, the rainy season (Chaturmasya) began. Under normal circumstances, when someone is lost, you wouldn’t let something like the rain stop you from searching. But, because Vali, Sugriva’s brother, had been killed, and Indra had become furious, there was unprecedented rage in the air. Even simple movement became impossible due to the fury of the gods, which is why they decided to pause the search for four months.

This period of waiting was agonizing for Ram, as being unable to do anything at all can sometimes drive the mind mad. During this time, Ram spoke to Lakshmana about Sita’s devotion and their memories of her. This was when Ram and Lakshmana grew closer than ever before, as they were alone together, without distractions.

During this period, when Ram was weak, Lakshmana, though younger, stepped into the role of an older brother, consoling Ram. When the four months were over, and Ram saw no progress from Sugriva, he began to feel concerned, then annoyed, and eventually angry. He had fulfilled his part of the deal by helping Sugriva regain his kingdom, but Sugriva had yet to fulfill his promise to help find Sita.

Ram expressed his frustration, asking why Sugriva had forgotten their agreement. Lakshmana, more impulsive, became even angrier and said he would go to Kishkindha to punish Sugriva, or even destroy his kingdom. Ram, however, calmed him down, saying they needed to first find out what was happening and restrain their anger before taking any action.

Lakshmana, in his anger, was ready to act swiftly, but Ram insisted they gather more information before jumping to conclusions. This shows how, even when one is senior, the expression of anger can sometimes be amplified by the younger ones. In the Dakshya pastime, when Lord Shiva was disrespected, his servants became furious and started attacking not only Dakshya but also the other brahmanas present. This is a classic example of anger escalating if not properly controlled.

Ram knew this and advised Lakshmana to calm down. Lakshmana eventually went to Kishkindha, where he saw Sugriva in a state of revelry. His anger only increased, but Tara and Hanuman intervened, reassuring him that Sugriva had already summoned the monkeys and that help was on the way.

There is another key lesson here: it’s important to defend what is right, but we must do so in a way that resolves conflicts rather than intensifying them.

Now, let’s move to another event in the war, where Ram and Lakshmana fought together against Ravana’s forces. Indrajit, Ravana’s son, was the most cunning and dangerous warrior. He managed to strike down both Ram and Lakshmana, but they were revived by Garuda and Hanuman. When Ravana came onto the battlefield in a fit of rage, he targeted Lakshmana specifically, since Lakshmana had killed his son. It became a fierce and intense battle. Lakshmana fought valiantly, but Ravana, in a final act of desperation, unleashed a mystical weapon on Lakshmana, piercing his chest.

The arrow created a massive hole in Lakshmana’s chest, and he fell unconscious, appearing lifeless. Ravana, thinking this was an opportunity, leaped down from his chariot to capture Lakshmana as a hostage, intending to use him as leverage against Ram. However, despite Ravana’s immense strength and multiple attempts, Lakshmana, being an incarnation of Ananta Shesha (the serpent holding the worlds), was immovable. Ravana could not even lift him.

As Lakshmana fell, a shockwave spread throughout the entire Vanara army. Hanuman, who had been fighting far away, saw this and immediately charged toward Ravana. He roared loudly, distracting Ravana. Before Ravana could react, Hanuman leaped onto him and struck him with both fists on the chest. The force of the blow sent Ravana staggering backward. The impact was so powerful that Ravana vomited blood from his mouth, nose, and ears. He was shaken and disoriented. By the time he recovered, Hanuman had already lifted Lakshmana with both hands and rushed away.

Ravana was humiliated. It’s one thing not to be able to lift an enemy, but it was even more embarrassing to be defeated by someone who wasn’t even the highest-ranking member of his own army. Hanuman, a non-leader, had beaten Ravana and lifted Lakshmana in front of everyone.

As the news reached Ram, he hurried to the battlefield. Ravana, feeling humiliated, retreated to his chariot and began fighting from there. Ram, furious, shot a series of arrows, forcing Ravana to retreat for the day.

Ram turned to Lakshmana, tears welling in his eyes, as he feared for his brother’s life. He said, “Oh, Lakshmana, your mother Sumitra entrusted you to my care. When I return to Ayodhya, how will I face her? I may find a wife like Sita, but I will never find a brother like you. Sita, in a way, had an obligation to follow me as my wife, but you had no such obligation. You chose to come with me, enduring discomfort and danger, all for my sake. And yet, I could not protect you.” Ram broke down in grief.

At that moment, Nala and Neela, the sons of the Ashwini Kumaras and the physicians in the monkey army, arrived and confirmed that Lakshmana still lived. They used mystical herbs to revive him, and Lakshmana regained consciousness.

The point here is that Ram acknowledged Lakshmana’s sacrifice. It is often the case that when people are always around us, we start taking them for granted. We are polite with strangers, yet we often forget to show gratitude to those who matter most to us.

In every relationship, there are contributions and expectations. Relationships thrive when both parties contribute. If only one person contributes while the other only expects, the relationship becomes strained. Ram recognized that Lakshmana’s commitment to him was voluntary, and he didn’t take it for granted.

When Lakshmana regained consciousness, Ram again broke down in tears. He said, “If anything had happened to you, I would not have been able to live. Everything in the world would have been meaningless without you. You are my life and soul.” Lakshmana, however, responded, “Please don’t speak like this. We must work together to bring Sita back and punish Ravana.”

Although Lakshmana was the younger brother, Ram did not take his devotion for granted. Instead, he expressed appreciation, understanding that no one is obligated to serve us. Ram knew that people could always choose whether or not to fulfill their duties. He expressed his gratitude, acknowledging Lakshmana’s sacrifices and the importance of his role in his life.

This story teaches us that we often fail to express appreciation for those closest to us. While we might appreciate them internally, it is important to express that appreciation outwardly. If we fail to do so, those who serve us may become discouraged.

A famous British author once said, “I can run on one good compliment for six months.” A simple word of appreciation can sustain us for a long time, just as the body needs food and a car needs fuel, the human heart needs encouragement.

However, there’s a difference between encouragement and flattery. Flattery is when we praise someone for qualities they don’t have in order to manipulate them. Appreciation, on the other hand, is when we genuinely acknowledge someone’s positive qualities and actions. If we make it a habit to appreciate others regularly, we create a more positive and supportive environment.

Sometimes, in our everyday life, we are quick to notice what others are doing wrong, but we should also actively look for what they are doing right. In Kali Yuga, the world is full of faults, and finding faults requires little effort. But if we focus on appreciating the good in others, it will serve as a lubricant to reduce friction and build stronger relationships.

Inevitably, friction will occur in any relationship. However, if we have been regularly appreciating each other, that appreciation will act like a lubricant. When friction arises, the grinding and erosion will be less severe. We see this dynamic in the relationship between Ram and Lakshman. Although they were brothers, they experienced their own ups and downs. But because both were virtuous, these challenges brought them even closer.

Similarly, in life, we will go through difficulties. But if we remain devoted to Krishna and centered on devotion, the challenges we face will bring us closer to one another instead of pulling us apart.

To summarize: I spoke about the dynamics of the relationship between Ram and Lakshman. In any relationship with a hierarchy, the senior may expect or even demand obedience, and the junior may follow. However, if obedience is the only foundation of the relationship, it will not be sustainable.

Although Ram was the older brother and heir, he never demanded obedience from Lakshman. I also mentioned that in the animal kingdom, even a bigger mouse might allow a smaller mouse to win in a game, ensuring that the smaller mouse continues to play.

I discussed four key incidents from the Ramayan involving Ram and Lakshman:

  1. Lakshman’s caution about Maricha: Lakshman was suspicious about chasing Maricha, and his suspicion proved correct. He didn’t say, “I told you so,” which is often tempting for the ego. Instead of focusing on who was right, Lakshman focused on what was right.
  2. Ram’s agony and anger in search of Sita: Ram became so overwhelmed with grief and rage that he nearly destroyed everything with his celestial weapons. At that moment, Lakshman, though younger, calmed Ram down, reminding him that he needed to set an example for others. Ram, instead of becoming defensive, accepted Lakshman’s wisdom.
  3. Sugriva’s unkept promise: Ram became upset when Sugriva didn’t keep his promise, and Lakshman became even angrier. Sometimes, we may use the displeasure of someone we respect as a justification for our own disproportionate anger. Lakshman, in his anger, threatened to destroy Kishkindha, but Ram reminded him to first understand the situation before acting.
  4. Lakshman’s injury: When Ravana’s arrow wounded Lakshman, Ram broke down and acknowledged the tremendous sacrifices Lakshman had made. He expressed his gratitude, showing the importance of appreciating those who support us.

The common thread in these incidents is the expression of appreciation. If we regularly appreciate one another, that appreciation acts like lubrication. When friction arises, it will cause less harm, and we will be able to navigate difficulties and grow closer rather than becoming distant.

In conclusion, relationships are more sustainable when there is mutual respect and appreciation, not just obedience. Whether in the professional or spiritual context, it’s essential to make judgments with kindness. In a work environment, for example, we might need to keep a record to cover ourselves if things go wrong, but that doesn’t mean we should blame others or demean them. There’s a difference between taking responsibility and passing blame.

In the workplace, if someone makes a mistake, it’s important to understand what went wrong and correct it. However, we should not use the opportunity to criticize or belittle others, especially if it’s not necessary. In both professional and spiritual settings, we need to balance being constructive with showing respect. Criticism should be directed toward resolving the issue, not punishing the person.

In the end, even in a professional setting, we should strive to avoid excessive judgment and instead approach challenges with understanding, aiming to help others improve rather than making them feel discouraged.

Making judgments is fine, but being judgmental is like affixing a label to the person. Not only do we attach a label to them, but we also start seeing them solely through that label. For example, let’s say this is my phone, but now imagine that this is like a label or opinion I have about someone. If I find that a person I work with doesn’t do things on time, forgets tasks, or just doesn’t complete their work, I might label them as “irresponsible” or “untrustworthy.”

Now, from an operational perspective, if I need to assign an important task, I might decide not to choose this person based on my past experiences. It’s fine to keep that opinion close to us so that we don’t forget it and can make informed decisions. However, the problem arises if we hold that opinion so closely that we can’t see anything else about the person.

For example, if the only thing I think of when I see a devotee is “irresponsible,” “incompetent,” or “untrustworthy,” that’s unhealthy. It’s important to differentiate between holding an opinion based on past experience and reducing someone to just that label.

If we’ve learned something from past experiences with someone, it’s okay to make note of it to protect ourselves from being caught off guard in the future. But there’s a way to express that concern without demeaning the person. For instance, if I have to assign a task, I could say, “Because the last time this service wasn’t completed well, we’ve decided to assign it to someone else.” This is objective—it addresses the issue without attacking the person.

However, if I say, “You are so irresponsible, so we won’t give you any service,” I am making a value judgment. I’m not evaluating the person’s actions; I’m evaluating the person themselves. This type of labeling can be very alienating.

The key is to make sure things get done without attaching negative labels to people. If we must make a judgment call, we should do so carefully and objectively. We should avoid being so attached to our opinions that we reduce a person to just a label and fail to see their other qualities.

We can’t always avoid difficult situations, but it’s like driving on a road where there’s a pothole. The first time, we might get jolted by it, but the second time, we’ll be more careful. Similarly, if we know there’s a particular person who is difficult to deal with, we can prepare ourselves. There are some people who bring happiness wherever they go, and others who bring happiness when they leave.

There will always be difficult people in our lives. It might be that they’re generally difficult, or it could be that we find it hard to deal with them. Regardless, if we know we have already gone through several challenges and are nearing our breaking point, it’s almost certain that we will eventually break down.

So, how can we handle this? First, we can try as much as possible to anticipate and avoid situations that will provoke us. If we know something will anger us, it’s better to steer clear of it.

Second, some people make a resolution like, “I will never get angry.” This kind of resolution often leads to failure because even if we succeed for 365 days, on the 366th day, when we get angry, we might feel like everything is ruined. Instead, we could make a more positive resolution, such as: “I will respect everyone’s right to be spoken to politely.” This approach focuses on treating others with respect. When we make mistakes, we don’t want people to yell at us, so we should extend the same courtesy to others.

Focusing on self-control alone can feel like a losing battle. But when we consider the other person’s perspective, it helps build empathy. Even if we do speak angrily or impolitely for a moment, we can recognize it and work to apologize and calm down afterward. If we think of it in terms of the effect of our anger on the other person, it becomes easier to correct ourselves.

Third, we need to find our own “pause button.” When anger arises, we can’t simply repress it, as doing so can lead to it turning into resentment or hatred. At the same time, expressing it immediately can harm others. Instead, we should pause and process. The key is to stop ourselves before we react, allowing time to calm down and reflect.

A pause button might be something devotional—a kirtan, a picture of our spiritual master, or a favorite deity’s darshan. When anger starts rising, we can redirect our thoughts toward that anchor. Anger comes like a wave, and trying to fight the wave is difficult. But holding on to an anchor allows us to weather the storm.

Once we’ve paused and calmed down, we can reflect: What exactly made me angry? How can I express myself in a way that solves the issue instead of making it worse?

One approach I use is a 24-hour rule. When I’m angry and feel compelled to send an email or message, I wait 24 hours before sending it. Often, in that time, the other person will clarify the situation, apologize, or I’ll realize it’s not as big an issue as I initially thought. If I still feel the need to address it, I’ll reread the message and soften my words. Most of the time, waiting 24 hours means I can express myself more calmly and effectively.

In summary, we can try three things:

  1. Learn to avoid provoking situations.
  2. View things from the other person’s perspective and respect their right to be spoken to politely.
  3. Find a pause button that helps us process our emotions before reacting.

By practicing these, we can reduce the chances of reacting in anger and better manage our responses.

And then find your own “pause button” so you can process the emotion and respond appropriately. Does that answer your question?

Now, if you’re in a situation where someone is criticizing you or yelling at you in front of other people, how should you react?

If someone is criticizing us publicly, it is definitely a difficult situation. In most cultures and societies, confrontations are dealt with privately. For example, if parents have an issue with each other, they generally won’t quarrel in front of their children. They will likely go to a private room or somewhere else to discuss their issues. The same principle applies to us—it’s best to handle conflicts privately.

However, if someone is criticizing or yelling at us in public, we should avoid escalating the conflict in front of others. How can we do this? There are three broad options:

  1. Confront them, not with counter-accusations, but by presenting the facts.
  2. Clarify to others either in the moment or later on, after the situation has calmed down.
  3. Neglect the situation altogether and not engage in it.

We may feel like we’re losing face when someone accuses us publicly, but it’s important to remember that people are intelligent. If someone is yelling in public, they are also losing credibility. People will see that this is not the appropriate way to behave.

Remember, what we speak about others also speaks about us. While it’s true that we might worry about what others will think of us when someone acts out publicly, we should keep in mind that such situations rarely last long. Those who thrive on gossip may circulate the information for a while, but eventually, they will find something new to talk about.

If this happens, the best approach is to avoid escalating the situation. Sometimes, if someone is making accusations, providing a calm, fact-based statement can deflate the whole situation. Alternatively, we could walk away from the confrontation or address the issue in an appropriate forum later.

Ultimately, we have to find what works best for us in such situations.

Thank you very much.

Srila Prabhupada Ki Jai!
Gaur Bhakta Vrindaki Jai!
Vithai Gaur Priyamanandey!
Hari Hari Bhol!
Jai!

The post Relationships flourish by sharing not by dominating – Rama Lakshmana interactions appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Life Lessons from the Ramayana – Part 2 by HG Chaitanya Charan Das
→ The Spiritual Scientist

In the Name of the Lord, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Let us take this wonderful opportunity to come together and listen to Prabhu’s enlightening discourse. Without further ado, let’s welcome him by chanting:

Hare Krishna! Hare Krishna! Krishna Krishna! Hare Hare!
Hare Rama! Hare Rama! Rama Rama! Hare Hare!
.

Thank you all for gathering here today. Let us quickly recap what we discussed in our previous session.

Yesterday, we explored the four levels at which scriptural stories can be understood: Literal, Ethical, Allegorical, and Devotional. We also analyzed the positives and negatives of each perspective. It’s important to note that scriptures are not limited to one perspective; they are multi-dimensional.

We approached the Ramayana from the ethical perspective, focusing on the events leading to Sita’s abduction. Two primary themes emerged:

  1. Complex Causes of Adversity: Often, multiple factors lead to adverse outcomes. Instead of blaming a single person, it is more constructive to seek solutions while understanding the causes.
  2. Managing Tension in Relationships: Lakshman did not internalize Sita’s harsh words spoken in tension. This teaches us not to assign malicious intent to words said during moments of stress.

Moving forward, as Ram and Lakshman rushed back to the hermitage, Ravana, disguised as a sage, approached Sita. Observing her beauty, he initially sought to win her over through deceit, believing that his charm would suffice. However, his ego and uncontrollable desire led him to plan her abduction.

Here we delve into the concept of Kama (desire) and its relationship with Dharma (righteous boundaries):

  • Kama and Krodha: Desire becomes destructive when it rages against boundaries, often leading to anger (Krodha) when unfulfilled or obstructed.
  • Boundaries: Boundaries—whether physical, social, cultural, or legal—are essential for harmonious living. Dharma, at its core, signifies the principles of harmonious coexistence and belonging to a larger whole.

Even in libertarian societies, there are boundaries, such as consent in relationships, which Ravana blatantly disregarded. His demonic nature rejected these boundaries, leading to his downfall.

In scriptures, explicit descriptions may appear shocking, but they serve specific narrative purposes. For instance:

  1. Romantic: Attraction as part of a deeper relationship.
  2. Erotic: Sensual aspects are more prominent but still contribute to the storyline.
  3. Pornographic: Aimed solely at arousing desire, with no narrative depth—this is absent in scriptures.

The explicit descriptions in scriptures like the Ramayana or Srimad Bhagavatam are part of the storytelling and often highlight the consequences of unchecked desires. For example, in the Mohini Murti pastime from the Bhagavatam’s 8th Canto, the interplay of beauty and desire conveys profound lessons on detachment and devotion.

At that time, there are certain descriptions of Mohini Murthy that are a bit explicit. These descriptions are required to emphasize the dramatic change in the behavior of the demons. Many people are beautiful, but why would the demons—who had fought so long, first collaborated with their enemies, the Devatas, and later fought among themselves for the nectar—suddenly give it up? Her beauty was so captivating that it had a profound impact on them, and the description conveys this intensity.

Similarly, when Hanuman was in Lanka searching for Sita, he peered into various chambers. During this search, there are explicit descriptions of what he observed. The purpose of these descriptions is not to provoke impure thoughts but to highlight Hanuman’s steadfast devotion and purity of mind. Despite being in such situations, Hanuman remained undisturbed, focused entirely on his service to Lord Ram.

In the case of Ravana, when he approaches Sita, his initial goal is to win her over. He first praises her beauty. In many cultures, praising someone’s beauty is a common way to express admiration or interest, though the nature of the praise varies. However, Ravana, consumed by lust, forgets that he is in the guise of a sage. Sita, who has interacted with many sages, finds his behavior shocking and inappropriate.

When Ravana notices Sita’s reaction, he changes tactics. He reveals his true identity and boasts about his wealth and power, claiming he is the King of Lanka and has more wealth than anyone in the universe. He promises Sita comforts and luxuries beyond imagination. However, instead of impressing Sita, his words horrify her. Ravana’s immense ego prevents him from understanding why Sita is not impressed. Being consumed by materialism, he assumes everyone else is motivated by the same desires.

Frustrated, Ravana begins criticizing Lord Ram, claiming that Ram is weak, impoverished, and incapable of protecting Sita. This infuriates Sita, who is disgusted and angered by Ravana’s audacity. Ravana’s criticism of Ram only strengthens Sita’s resolve and devotion. Seeing that his words have no effect, Ravana decides to abduct her forcibly.

This account broadly follows the Valmiki Ramayana. However, there are later embellishments, such as the story of the Lakshman Rekha (Lakshman’s protective line). These embellishments are not found in the original Valmiki Ramayana but have been accepted over time as they align with the spirit of the original text.

The Lakshman Rekha story adds a mystical element to the narrative. Before leaving to search for Ram, Lakshman draws a protective circle around the hermitage, instructing Sita not to step outside it under any circumstances. When Ravana, disguised as a sage, arrives, he cannot cross the protective barrier. Sita, following her values of hospitality, offers to serve him food but asks him to wait until Ram or Lakshman returns. Ravana manipulates the situation, exploiting Sita’s virtuous nature. He insists he is hungry and demands food immediately. Unable to step outside the circle to hand him the food, Sita eventually crosses the boundary to fulfill her duty, inadvertently allowing Ravana to seize her.

The Lakshman Rekha story serves as an embellishment that enhances the narrative without contradicting the original. It illustrates Sita’s virtue and the cunning manipulation of Ravana. Similarly, stories like Shabari offering berries to Ram, although not found in the Valmiki Ramayana, are widely accepted because they align with the devotional essence of the epics.

As we discussed yesterday, Shurpanakha exploited Ravana’s lustfulness to set events in motion. However, the nature of the world is such that even virtues can be exploited. While vices like greed or anger make us vulnerable, even positive traits such as a tendency to do good can be manipulated by others. For example, a charitable person who is always willing to help may become a target for exploitation. Instead of working to improve their own situation, someone might repeatedly depend on this charitable person, potentially leading to their exhaustion or even financial ruin.

In this story, Ravana exploits Sita’s virtuous service attitude and respect for sages. Disguised as a mendicant, Ravana approaches Sita and demands food, insisting, “I am very hungry. Please give me food immediately.” When Sita requests him to wait for her husband and brother-in-law to return, Ravana pressures her further, saying, “Have you not heard of the anger of sages? If you offend a sage, you and your entire family will be cursed.”

Already burdened with anxiety over Ram and guilt for sending him into the forest in pursuit of the golden deer, Sita feels deeply unsettled. She begins to think, I don’t want to cause further trouble for Ram or my family. Overwhelmed by fear and confusion, she steps out of the Lakshman Rekha—the protective line drawn by Lakshman—and unknowingly exposes herself to Ravana’s treachery.

The moment Sita crosses the boundary, Ravana reveals his true form and intentions. Her reluctance to go with him enrages him, and he forcibly abducts her. This betrayal of Sita’s virtue is especially painful because it highlights a deep truth about the world: the possibility that our good qualities may be exploited.

In life, we encounter different kinds of suffering. There is adversity, such as losing money in a stock market crash or a job during a pandemic. This kind of suffering arises from natural or circumstantial events. Then, there is atrocity, which involves a human agent actively trying to harm us. The pain of atrocity is often greater because it is targeted and deliberate.

Now, imagine doing good for someone—helping them, trusting them, elevating them—and in return, being betrayed by them. This type of suffering is the most damaging because it not only shatters our trust in that individual but can also shake our faith in human nature itself.

Sita’s situation illustrates this point painfully. Her respect for sages and her service attitude—virtues that should be cherished—are exploited by Ravana for his malicious purposes. This serves as a reminder that virtues, like vices, require boundaries. Without discernment, even the best of intentions can lead to harm.

In relationships, we must strike a balance between trust and caution. Too much trust makes us naive, leaving us vulnerable to exploitation. Too little trust makes us cynical, closing our hearts to love, trust, and meaningful relationships. To find this balance, we must combine good intentions with good intelligence.

For example, during a pandemic, our desire to help others must be accompanied by caution. If we offer help without taking proper precautions, such as wearing a mask, we risk harming ourselves and potentially others. Similarly, in spiritual communities, the desire to serve is important, but we must also recognize our human limitations. Overcommitting to everyone’s requests can leave us overwhelmed and feeling abandoned when we need help ourselves. Saying “no” when necessary is not a lack of service—it is an understanding of priorities and boundaries.

Boundaries are essential not only for controlling vices but also for protecting virtues. In Sita’s case, her virtue of serving sages is what Ravana manipulates to gain access to her. Once she realizes Ravana’s true identity, she tries to escape, but his strength and speed overpower her. Ravana drags her to his chariot and abducts her.

At this point, Ravana has not brought his Pushpaka Vimana (his magical aerial vehicle) but instead uses a regular chariot to remain discreet. As the chariot races away, a chilling silence falls over the forest, as if all of nature is horrified by the calamity. Yet, Ravana’s terrifying power ensures no one dares to intervene.

While fleeing with Sita, Ravana encounters someone who attempts to stop him: the mighty vulture Jatayu.

Sita sees Jatayu resting atop a tree. Despite being in distress, her Kshatriya upbringing allows her to quickly assess the situation. She realizes that Jatayu, though valiant, is no match for Ravana. Still, desperate for help, she calls out, “Oh Jatayu, please help me! But don’t fight him—just inform Ram that I have been abducted.”

Jatayu hears her plea and notices Ravana’s chariot racing away. Despite Sita’s warning, Jatayu cannot simply stand by. Though he is old, his fierce Kshatriya spirit and his bond of friendship with Dasharatha compel him to act. To Jatayu, Sita is like a daughter, and the thought of her being abducted fills him with righteous fury. He knows he might not succeed, but he cannot bear the thought of living with the guilt of inaction.

Jatayu takes flight and approaches Ravana, determined to stop him. As he nears, Jatayu chastises Ravana, trying to provoke his Kshatriya pride. “You call yourself a hero, Ravana? What kind of coward abducts a defenseless woman? If you want Sita, challenge Ram! Fight him and prove your strength!”

Ravana, however, is consumed by lust and dismisses Jatayu’s words as mere noise. He is confident in his victory and sees no reason to engage. But Jatayu’s sense of duty propels him forward—he decides he must fight. His position as a protector of dharma and his disposition as a fierce bird of prey leave him no other choice.

With unwavering determination, Jatayu launches his attack. Initially, Ravana underestimates him, dismissing him as a pesky bird. But Jatayu fights with ferocity born of love and righteousness, tearing at Ravana’s hair and humiliating him. Ravana realizes too late that Jatayu is far more formidable than he had assumed.

The battle intensifies. Jatayu even destroys Ravana’s chariot, forcing him to the ground. This is a significant feat, as it disrupts Ravana’s escape. However, this victory inadvertently leads to Jatayu’s downfall. Fighting in the air had allowed Jatayu to swoop and retreat, but now, battling Ravana on the ground, he must repeatedly descend and ascend, which begins to exhaust him.

Ravana, observing this, decides to fight dirty. He dodges Jatayu’s attacks, forcing the aging bird to expend more energy each time he swoops down. Gradually, Jatayu’s movements slow. Finally, in a critical moment, as Jatayu charges forward, Ravana sidesteps and slashes one of Jatayu’s wings. Jatayu trembles, trying to fight on, but Ravana strikes again, severing the other wing. Jatayu collapses to the ground, bleeding and powerless.

Ravana, seeing Jatayu incapacitated, doesn’t bother to kill him. He sneers, leaving the noble bird to die slowly, and resumes his flight with Sita. Despite her efforts to escape, Ravana drags her back into his grasp.

Jatayu lies on the ground, gravely wounded. To some, his fight may seem in vain—after all, he couldn’t stop Ravana. But Jatayu’s sacrifice is not meaningless. His actions carry profound significance in three ways:

  1. A Moral Victory: Jatayu upheld dharma to the very end. Even knowing the odds were against him, he fought to protect what was right. His actions serve as a timeless example of selfless courage and duty.
  2. Critical Information: Jatayu, though gravely injured, survives long enough to convey the vital information about Sita’s abduction to Ram and Lakshman. This becomes a turning point in Ram’s journey to rescue Sita.
  3. Divine Recognition: Jatayu’s sacrifice earns him eternal glory. Later, when Ram finds Jatayu, he personally performs the last rites for him, granting him liberation (moksha). This extraordinary act demonstrates the Lord’s appreciation for Jatayu’s devotion and valor.

Jatayu’s story reminds us that success is not always measured by immediate results. Sometimes, the true victory lies in the courage to stand up for what is right, even in the face of overwhelming odds. While setbacks and losses are inevitable in this world, the spirit of sacrifice and devotion leaves an indelible mark—both in the hearts of those who witness it and in the eternal service of the Divine.

In Vedic times, rituals like yajnas were common. While today we often associate yajnas with religion, back then they were more akin to technology. Through yajnas, individuals could access extraordinary powers, regardless of their moral standing. Even demons performed yajnas to gain strength. For example, when Ravana fought his battles, he had his own priests, known as Yatudhanas, performing yajnas to secure his victories.

Yajnas, like modern technology, were neutral tools. Their value depended on the user’s intent. Just as technology can be used by the military to protect people or by terrorists to harm them, yajnas could serve both righteous and unrighteous purposes. That’s why Krishna, in the Bhagavad Gita, explains that yajna, dana (charity), and tapa (austerity) exist in three modes: sattvic (goodness), rajasic (passion), and tamasic (ignorance).

Interestingly, Ravana consulted an astrologer before abducting Sita—a heinous and utterly inauspicious act. He wanted to know the best muhurat (auspicious time) for such a deed. However, there is no “right time” for committing something so wrong. The delay caused by Jatayu’s fight with Ravana disrupted Ravana’s timeline. Later, when Jatayu confronts Ravana, he recalls astrological principles and states, “Anything lost during this time will eventually be regained.” Thus, Jatayu’s sacrifice played a significant role in Sita’s eventual rescue.

Jatayu’s Three Successes

  1. Astrological Delay: Jatayu’s brave resistance delayed Ravana’s flight, ensuring that the astrological window favored Sita’s return to Ram.
  2. Fulfilling His Duty: Despite being gravely wounded, Jatayu remembered Sita’s plea to inform Ram about her abduction. He held onto life long enough to fulfill this duty, demonstrating that even if he couldn’t prevent Sita’s abduction, he could still complete the task she entrusted to him.
  3. A Glorious Departure: Jatayu’s death was not ordinary. He departed in the lap of Lord Ram, who personally performed his last rites. Ram even honored Jatayu as a father figure, a distinction greater than Dasharath Maharaj, whose last rites Ram could not perform due to his exile. To die in the presence of the Lord, embraced by Him and receiving His gratitude, is the ultimate blessing.

Thus, while Jatayu may seem to have failed in stopping Ravana, his sacrifice had profound and lasting significance. He delayed Ravana’s plans, relayed crucial information to Ram, and achieved an auspicious departure that few could dream of.

Ram and Lakshman’s Search for Sita

After Jatayu’s passing, Ram and Lakshman continue their search for Sita. They reach the clearing where Sita was taken but find no sign of her. As they search, they notice subtle signs of a scuffle but no definitive clues about her fate. Ram’s anxiety grows, and it soon transforms into anger. Consumed by his emotions, Ram threatens to destroy the universe if the gods, nature, or celestial beings do not reveal Sita’s location. His rage is so intense that the entire universe trembles.

This scene highlights a striking role reversal. Typically, Lakshman is the one known for his fiery temper, while Ram remains calm and composed. For instance, Lakshman grows angry when Ram is exiled, when Bharat arrives with his army, and in other instances where Ram has to calm him down. However, in this moment, it is Lakshman who plays the role of the peacemaker.

Lakshman consoles Ram, saying, “Oh my brother, I understand your pain. But I will speak the words I have heard from you before. If we give in to anger during distress, what example will we set for the world? How will people learn to handle difficulties without resorting to destruction? Let us first do everything we can to find Sita. If we fail, then you may unleash your fury. But first, let us fulfill our duty.”

Ram, despite being God incarnate, humbly accepts Lakshman’s advice. This shows his role as an ideal being, one who is willing to take good counsel, even from someone younger. It is easier to accept instruction from elders or sages, but taking advice from juniors requires true humility. Ram’s anger was justified, given the circumstances, but even when anger is justified, it is not always right to act on it.

In contrast, Ravana’s behavior later demonstrates the destructive consequences of arrogance. When Vibhishan offers him good advice, Ravana rejects and humiliates him. Ram’s humility stands in stark contrast, showing the importance of controlling one’s emotions and being open to guidance.

A Lesson in Humility and Control

Even when we have a right to be angry, acting out of anger can often make things worse. Ram’s ability to calm himself and accept Lakshman’s words highlights the deep humility required to navigate distress without causing destruction. This incident teaches us the value of self-control, especially in moments of great pain and provocation.

This quality of Ram serves as an example for all of us. Whether the advice comes from elders, peers, or juniors, what matters is its validity, not the source. True greatness lies in setting aside ego and embracing wisdom, even when it challenges us.

During a fire sacrifice, Prabhupada noticed that several arrangements were not done properly. Flowers, fruits, and ghee were missing, and he began chastising the devotees. At that moment, a hippie who had come to watch the ceremony approached Prabhupada and said, “Swamiji, don’t get angry. Just chant Hare Krishna.”

Initially, Prabhupada glared at him in anger, but then he paused, picked up his bead bag, and began chanting. Without saying another word, Prabhupada walked away from the scene. This incident illustrates that even Prabhupada’s anger was transcendental—it stemmed from his concern that Krishna’s service should be performed properly. However, it also shows his ability to calm himself and accept a lesson, even from someone seemingly insignificant.

This ability to take good advice—even from juniors or unexpected sources—demonstrates true character and humility. Similarly, we see this principle in the Ramayana, where Jatayu, Ram, Lakshman, and even Sita each did what they could within their capacity.

Jatayu’s Role in the Ramayana

Jatayu fought bravely to stop Ravana from abducting Sita. Although he was defeated and mortally wounded, he delayed Ravana long enough to disrupt his plans and provided vital information to Ram about Sita’s abduction. Jatayu’s sacrifice highlights that even in apparent failure, there can be success when one does their best under difficult circumstances.

Sita’s Resourcefulness

Sita, despite being in a dire situation, displayed remarkable composure and resourcefulness. As Ravana was abducting her, she realized that screaming for help was futile—her throat was hoarse, and there was no one nearby to rescue her. However, as they passed through the Madana Parvat region, she noticed beings who appeared to be half-human, half-monkey. These were Sugriva, Hanuman, and their Vanara companions.

Sita, using her presence of mind, ripped a piece of her cloth, tied her jewelry in it, and dropped it where the Vanaras could see. This was done in mere moments, as Ravana did not slow down for her. Her quick thinking provided Ram with a crucial clue later, proving that she was alive and leaving a trail for him to follow. When Ram received her jewelry, he was deeply moved, understanding her resilience and hope.

Sita’s actions teach us an important lesson: even when circumstances seem overwhelmingly out of our control, we should focus on what is within our power. Instead of panicking or lamenting over what couldn’t be done, Sita utilized the limited resources available to her to ensure Ram could find her.

Resourcefulness: A Key Virtue

The Sanskrit word Dakshyam signifies expertise or resourcefulness. While resourcefulness literally means being full of resources, its true essence lies in making the most of whatever is available. Even when we have very little in our control, we can choose to focus on what we can do, rather than fixating on what we cannot.

For instance, when life throws us into unexpected and uncontrollable situations, our natural tendency might be to panic or get angry. But instead of succumbing to frustration, we should ask ourselves, “What can I do in this situation?” This attitude enables us to act decisively and make the best of challenging circumstances.

Prabhupada’s Resourcefulness in Adversity

When Srila Prabhupada first came to America, he faced tremendous challenges. After arriving in New York, he stayed briefly with David Allen, a hippie who seemed receptive to Krishna consciousness. Prabhupada even wrote to his Indian sponsor, Sumati Morarji, saying that David might become the first American Vaishnava to take initiation.

However, David eventually relapsed into drugs and, in a crazed state, attacked Prabhupada. Alone and vulnerable, Prabhupada fled down three long flights of stairs into the dangerous streets of the Lower East Side. This area was notorious for crime, drug abuse, and homelessness. Prabhupada found himself homeless, surrounded by unconscious or stoned hippies lying on the streets. The atmosphere was grim, with crows circling above and gun violence rampant.

For a moment, Prabhupada must have wondered whether his efforts were futile. The person he had hoped would become a devotee had turned against him. Prabhupada had come to America on a two-month visa, which he extended multiple times, and he had an open invitation to return to India on the same cargo ship he had arrived on. It would have been understandable if he had chosen to leave, given the hardships he faced.

But Prabhupada’s resolve and resourcefulness shone through. Despite feeling discouraged, he stayed in America and persevered. He adapted to his circumstances, engaging with the people he met, no matter how challenging they were. From those seemingly hopeless beginnings, the Krishna consciousness movement began to grow, eventually spreading worldwide.

Lessons for Life

Whether it’s Sita’s quick thinking, Jatayu’s sacrifice, or Prabhupada’s perseverance, these stories teach us the importance of doing our best with what we have. Life may place us in situations where we feel powerless, but there is always something within our control. By focusing on what we can do, we can rise above adversity and make a meaningful impact.

When David attacked Prabhupada in a drug-induced frenzy, Prabhupada quickly left the building and went to a nearby phone booth—there were no mobile phones back then. He called one of the people who regularly attended his programs. This individual wasn’t particularly serious about Krishna consciousness, as no one at that time had shown significant commitment.

Prabhupada explained what had happened. Initially, the person was skeptical, saying, “David? He’s not a dangerous person.” But Prabhupada insisted, “He’s mad with drugs. He doesn’t know what he’s doing.” Hearing this, the individual offered to return to the apartment with Prabhupada. However, Prabhupada said, “I cannot stay there.”

They arranged for Prabhupada to stay temporarily at someone’s house, and later they found a new location for him—a small storefront on 26 Second Avenue. This place would become the foundation of the Krishna consciousness movement in the West. It was here that Prabhupada began attracting serious followers and where his efforts started bearing fruit.

At that time, Prabhupada had no followers, no permanent residence, and seemingly no prospects for expanding his outreach. Yet, he didn’t give up. Being resourceful means not lamenting over what we lack. It’s the opposite of being resentful. Resentment focuses on what we don’t have and leads to anger: “Why don’t I have this? Why was this taken from me?” But resourcefulness focuses on what we do have and asks, “What can I do with what I have?”

Despite the severe setbacks, Prabhupada used the limited resources available to him and pressed on. This spirit of resourcefulness is an essential lesson, not just from Prabhupada’s life but also from the Ramayana, especially during the traumatic events surrounding Sita’s abduction.

Lessons from Sita’s Abduction

Sita’s abduction was a terrible and tragic event. Yet, every character involved—Ram, Lakshman, Jatayu, and even Sita herself—responded with remarkable resilience and resourcefulness. While the situation was undoubtedly painful, it ultimately led to the great victory of good over evil and the liberation of the universe from Ravana’s tyranny.

What’s notable is that there was no miraculous intervention during Sita’s abduction. Instead, the story teaches us how to navigate tragedy by making the best of a bad situation. Each character did their part, and through their collective efforts, something extraordinary emerged.

Key Lessons Discussed

We explored four key points today:

  1. Virtue and Boundaries
    • Ravana exploited Sita’s virtue—her hospitality and compassion for a guest—to kidnap her. This highlights the need for balance. Too much of even a good quality, without proper boundaries, can lead to harm.
    • We discussed avoiding two extremes: naïveté and cynicism. Instead, we should aim to be caring yet careful, extending trust in small steps rather than blindly or distrustfully.
  2. Jatayu’s Martyrdom
    • Jatayu fought valiantly against Ravana, sacrificing his life in the process. Although his efforts seemed futile, they were not in vain. His actions delayed Ravana, provided Ram with vital information, and enabled him to depart this world gloriously.
    • This reminds us that success doesn’t always come in the forms we expect. Even apparent failures can carry profound significance.
  3. Ram’s Anger
    • Lord Ram’s response to Sita’s abduction shows that even the noblest individuals can feel overwhelmed by painful situations. His initial anger toward Lakshman reveals that even righteous anger can lead to improper reactions.
    • However, Ram’s willingness to accept counsel—even from juniors like Lakshman—demonstrates humility and gracefulness. It shows the value of seeking and accepting guidance, regardless of the source.
  4. Sita’s Resourcefulness
    • Sita’s actions during her abduction were a testament to her composure and resourcefulness. Instead of panicking, she thought quickly and dropped her jewelry wrapped in her cloth as a clue for Ram to find her.
    • This teaches us the importance of doing what we can, even in seemingly helpless situations. Resourcefulness is the antidote to resentment.

Resourcefulness vs. Resentment

When adversity strikes, our mindset determines how we respond. A resentful attitude focuses on what we lack, leading to frustration and despair: “Why is this happening to me? Why isn’t God intervening?” A resourceful attitude, on the other hand, asks, “What can I do in this situation? How can I serve God even now?”

For instance, Prabhupada could have asked, “Where is Krishna when David is attacking me? Does Krishna care?” Instead, his focus remained, “Am I there for Krishna? What does Krishna want me to do in this situation?” This shift in perspective enables us to turn even the most difficult situations into opportunities for growth and service.

Conclusion

Adversity is inevitable in life. But through the examples of Sita, Jatayu, Ram, and Prabhupada, we see how resourcefulness, humility, and unwavering faith can transform tragedies into triumphs. By focusing on what we can do and asking, “Am I there for God?” we allow ourselves to become instruments of the divine, capable of extraordinary achievements.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Q&A

Question: You mentioned anger and how it can overwhelm us. But sometimes, isn’t anger necessary, especially in situations of survival or self-defense?

Answer: That’s a very important question. When faced with mistreatment or injustice, there are two extremes to avoid.

  1. Aggressiveness: This is often driven by rajoguna (passion) and involves retaliating impulsively—“You did this to me, so I’ll do this to you.”
  2. Passiveness: This is often driven by tamoguna (ignorance) and involves complete inaction—“What can I do? This person is too powerful. I just have to endure it.”

Both extremes are unbalanced. True strength lies in responding with sattvaguna (goodness)—acting with wisdom and composure.

For example, when Lord Ram was exiled, Lakshman suggested leading a rebellion against Dasharath. He was even prepared to shoot arrows at anyone who stopped him. But Ram, in his calm wisdom, told him, “If you shoot arrows at Dasharath, those arrows will have to go through me.” Ram chose to honor his father’s word, demonstrating that not all battles need to be fought with aggression.

This doesn’t mean we should passively accept abuse. We need to assess each situation wisely. Sometimes, taking a firm stand is necessary, but it should be done thoughtfully, not impulsively.

Since this is destiny, it should be accepted.
When Lord Ram was exiled to the forest, he accepted it as destiny. It’s a long and elaborate incident, but essentially, he saw it as a service to his father and a part of his duty. However, when Sita was abducted, he did not accept it as mere destiny.

How do we respond when bad things happen?
When adversity, tragedy, or an atrocity strikes, the focus should not be on assigning blame or trying to figure out whose karma caused it. Nobody told Sita that it must have been her karma that led to her abduction, and nobody told Draupadi that her suffering was solely her karma. Instead, the focus in such situations should be: What is my dharma in this moment? What is the right thing for me to do now to fix the situation or act constructively?

For Lord Ram, his dharma while being exiled was to serve his father. As an obedient son, he was ready to ascend the throne if his father wanted him to, and equally ready to go to the forest when instructed to. His focus wasn’t simply, “This is all karma; I must accept it.” Rather, he acted according to dharma.

Similarly, when Sita was abducted, Lord Ram pursued her relentlessly. He fought Ravana and did whatever was necessary to bring her back because that was his dharma.

This teaches us that while understanding karma can make us tolerant, tolerance does not mean passivity. Tolerance doesn’t mean we just accept everything that happens and do nothing. Tolerance means we don’t react impulsively or aggressively but act with a sense of duty and purpose.

For instance, if we fall sick due to past karma, our dharma is to take care of our body by seeking treatment. Accepting karma doesn’t mean we don’t address the problem. Similarly, in difficult situations, we shouldn’t be aggressive or passive. Instead, we should be assertive—focused on our dharma, playing our role effectively.

If someone says everything is karma and we should tolerate it, consider this: Imagine someone giving a spiritual discourse, and a baby starts crying loudly. The speaker might ask the mother to take the baby out so the audience can focus on the talk. Does that mean the speaker is not tolerating karma? No. The dharma in that situation is to ensure the class is heard, and the obstacle is dealt with gracefully—without aggression toward the mother or passivity in letting the disturbance continue.

Assertiveness means handling situations constructively. It is about responding with clarity and purpose. Anger, for instance, is a natural emotion, and sometimes we have a right to feel angry. But how we express that anger or act on it makes all the difference. Lakshman told Lord Ram to channel his anger into searching for Sita and confronting Ravana rather than venting it aimlessly.

Anger as a Messenger, Not a Master
As one of the devotees mentioned, emotions like anger are like pain—they serve as messengers providing valuable information. Just as pain warns us of a problem in the body, anger signals that something important to us is wrong. For example, if we see a bully harassing a smaller child, we feel anger because we care about justice and fairness.

However, emotions should be messengers, not masters. When they become masters, they dictate our actions, often leading to destructive outcomes. Anger, when allowed to control us, can harm not only others but also ourselves. Instead, we need to process the emotion:

  1. Listen to the message it conveys (e.g., something is wrong).
  2. Deliberate on how to act using intelligence and patience.
  3. Respond constructively, not impulsively.

Repressing emotions—ignoring their message—is unhealthy. But blindly acting on emotions is equally unhealthy. Between repression and expression lies processing: understanding the emotion, acknowledging its message, and responding thoughtfully.

Conclusion
In summary, whether it’s anger, fear, or any other strong emotion, it is a natural part of being human. The key is to neither suppress nor blindly act on emotions but to process them and act according to dharma. Lord Ram exemplifies this balance—he remained assertive, purposeful, and dharma-focused in every situation.

Thank you all for your time and attention. Hare Krishna.

The post Life Lessons from the Ramayana – Part 2 by HG Chaitanya Charan Das appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Life Lessons from the Ramayana – Part 1 by HG Chaitanya Charan Das
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So, I have a very big ego. When I am writing on the board, I notice people often look away from me. I don’t like that. Maybe it’s true that I’m overly conscious of it. One devotee even joked with me, saying I must be doing a lot of neck exercises from all the glancing around! Anyway, I will write and draw on the board as we discuss. Thank you all for coming today.

Today, we will address a common challenge we all face in life: what to do when things go wrong. We plan for one outcome, but something completely different happens. Sometimes things go slightly wrong; other times, they go severely or even catastrophically wrong. And often, our reactions to these situations can make things even worse.

To explore this, we’ll look at a traumatic incident in the Ramayana and analyze how the characters involved responded. The session will have three parts:

  1. Four Approaches to Understanding Sacred Texts – We’ll explore how to interpret stories from the Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Bhagavatam.
  2. The Incident Analysis – We’ll discuss the specific event, the underlying psychology, and the thought processes of the characters involved.
  3. Virtue and Aversion to Fault-Finding – Inspired by Bhagavad Gita 16.2, we’ll explore how to avoid blame and focus on resolving the situation.

Today, we’ll cover the story up to the point where Sita is abducted. Tomorrow morning, we’ll discuss what Rama, Lakshmana, Jatayu, and Sita herself did afterward. We’ll see how each contributed, in their own way, to resolving the crisis.

Understanding Sacred Texts: Four Levels of Approach

When we hear stories from sacred texts, we often enjoy their novelty, adventure, and moral lessons. These stories are woven with drama, action, romance, betrayal, and intrigue. Many of us might have grown up hearing these tales from the Ramayana or Mahabharata or encountered them through movies, TV shows, or as part of our journey into Bhakti.

The richness of these stories allows us to approach them at different levels. I use the acronym LEAD to explain these levels:

  1. Literal
  2. Ethical
  3. Allegorical
  4. Devotional

Each level offers unique insights, but each also has its limitations. Think of these approaches as different perspectives—just like when buying a house, we examine it from various angles to get the full picture.

1. Literal Level

The literal level involves understanding the story as it is—what happened, where, and to whom.

Positive Aspects:

  • Entertainment: These stories are not only engaging but also filled with pious values.
  • Appeal to All Ages: They serve as enjoyable tales for children and often convey good moral lessons.

Limitations:

  • Repetition and Boredom: Knowing the story beforehand might reduce interest.
  • Superficial Understanding: Intelligent or analytical individuals may dismiss them as unsophisticated or overly miraculous.

For example, when I first heard these stories, I sometimes felt intellectually underwhelmed. It was only later, as I studied the works of great Acharyas like Vishvanath Chakravarti Thakur, Baladeva Vidyabhushana, and Bhaktivinoda Thakur, that I saw the depth in these stories.

2. Ethical Level

At this level, we analyze the actions of characters to extract moral lessons and guidance for decision-making.

Examples:

  • Kaikeyi’s downfall illustrates the danger of listening to biased advice, as seen when Manthara poisoned her mind.
  • Rama’s obedience to his father serves as an example of filial duty.
  • Lakshmana’s devotion to Rama demonstrates the importance of loyalty to one’s elders.

Even Srila Prabhupada emphasizes ethical principles in his purports. For instance, in the first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, he praises Arjuna’s thoughtfulness, which qualifies him to receive Krishna’s teachings.

Limitations:

  • Judgmental Views: We might unfairly criticize sacred characters for perceived flaws (e.g., questioning Yudhishthira’s decision to gamble).
  • Focus Shift: Ethical analysis might shift our focus from learning lessons to judging who was right or wrong.

To avoid this, our focus should remain on what is right, not who is right. These are sacred personalities, and we must respect them.

3. Allegorical Level

At the allegorical level, we interpret the deeper symbolic meanings behind stories.

Examples:

  • Bhaktivinoda Thakur explains how demons in Krishna’s pastimes represent various anarthas (inner impurities). For instance, Putana represents a false Guru.
  • Similarly, Madhvacharya and other Acharyas provide allegorical insights into the Ramayana and Mahabharata.

This approach enriches our understanding by revealing the stories’ spiritual significance.

4. Devotional Level

Finally, the devotional level focuses on the characters’ relationships with the Supreme Lord and the transcendental emotions involved.

This level inspires Bhakti by showing how sacred personalities demonstrate devotion in their actions, thoughts, and lives. At this level, we see how their stories are not just lessons but reflections of their love for the Lord.

Each level of interpretation has its place and purpose. When we combine these perspectives, we can fully appreciate the depth of sacred texts and apply their wisdom in our lives.

Tomorrow, we will continue exploring the responses of Rama, Lakshmana, Jatayu, and Sita to Sita’s abduction and learn how their actions exemplify the ideal balance of Dharma and emotional intelligence.

Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to continuing this discussion.

At the same time, these sacred characters exist in the material world, which is inherently a messy and unpredictable place. As a result, they may sometimes make decisions that seem flawed or questionable. We will explore the reasons for these decisions from different perspectives later. However, our primary focus should not be on judging these characters or placing ourselves in a superior position—thinking, “This character was foolish” or “This character was short-sighted.” Instead, we should focus on what we can learn from their experiences. The emphasis should be on understanding what is right rather than who is right.

This is why Śrīla Prabhupāda, in the first chapter of the Bhagavad Gītā, highlights Arjuna’s thoughtfulness and deliberate reflection, encouraging us to be thoughtful like Arjuna. However, in the second chapter, the focus shifts. While being thoughtful is important, without a foundation of knowledge, thoughtfulness alone cannot guide us effectively. Thoughtfulness needs to be anchored in spiritual knowledge to be meaningful and transformative.

Prabhupāda often employs this dual perspective. For instance, in the sixth canto of the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, during the pastime where Maharaj Citraketu laughs at Lord Śiva’s unusual behavior and is subsequently cursed by Pārvatī, Prabhupāda offers nuanced lessons. When Citraketu laughs, Prabhupāda remarks that great sages present in the assembly refrained from laughing—highlighting the importance of not passing judgment or acting disrespectfully toward great souls, especially when we do not fully understand their actions. However, when Pārvatī curses Citraketu, and Citraketu responds with composure and devotion, Prabhupāda emphasizes that Pārvatī could have considered the restraint shown by the sages and Lord Śiva himself before rushing to judgment. From this, we learn two key lessons:

  1. Avoid being quick to judge or mock others, especially when their actions appear questionable.
  2. If someone does act disrespectfully, those in positions of power should avoid immediate punishment and instead seek to understand the situation more deeply.

The focus, therefore, remains on discerning what is right rather than assigning blame or determining who is right.

Moving on to the third approach: the allegorical level. This level appeals to those with an analytical and intellectual inclination, as it explores the symbolism in the sacred texts and the universal themes they represent. For instance, rather than focusing solely on who Rāvaṇa is, we consider what Rāvaṇa represents. While Rāvaṇa is historically a demon from a particular time, he also symbolizes uncontrolled lust—a destructive force when it disregards dharma.

Similarly, in the story of Devakī’s six slain children, the six children are said to represent the six anarthas (lust, anger, greed, envy, pride, and illusion). Devakī’s womb symbolizes the heart, and once these anarthas are removed, the spiritual master (symbolized by Balarāma) and the Supreme Lord (symbolized by Kṛṣṇa) manifest fully in the heart, enabling spiritual transformation.

This allegorical approach can enrich our understanding of these pastimes, providing deeper insights. However, it also carries risks, especially when taken to an extreme. Excessive reliance on allegory can lead to deconstruction, where the stories are stripped of their historical and literal significance. For example, some commentators have interpreted Kurukṣetra symbolically as the human body, with the Pāṇḍavas representing virtues and the Kauravas representing vices. While such interpretations can offer additional meaning, Prabhupāda cautions against reducing these sacred texts to mere symbolism, insisting on recognizing their historical reality as well. The symbolism should complement the literal understanding, not replace it.

Finally, at the devotional (or transcendental) level, the stories are viewed as divine pastimes (leelas), where everything that happens is understood as the Lord’s arrangement. This perspective emphasizes the glory of the Lord and His devotees, as well as the Lord’s reciprocation with His devotees. For example, Prabhupāda explains that Arjuna’s initial confusion in the Bhagavad Gītā was orchestrated by Kṛṣṇa to set the stage for sharing this profound spiritual wisdom with the world.

While this perspective fosters deep devotional absorption, it can sometimes feel ethically or intellectually unsatisfactory. If everything is attributed to the Lord’s arrangement, it may seem to negate human free will or the need for deliberate action and decision-making. For instance, if a plane crashes, one could superficially claim that gravity caused it. While gravity is undeniably a factor, the real question lies in identifying why the mechanisms of the plane malfunctioned. Similarly, while acknowledging that everything is ultimately Kṛṣṇa’s arrangement, we must also consider the human choices and circumstances that play a role in these events.

Thus, the devotional approach should inspire reverence and absorption in the Lord while still leaving room for thoughtful ethical and intellectual deliberation. By integrating these four approaches—literal, ethical, allegorical, and devotional—we can gain a more holistic and enriching understanding of sacred texts and the lessons they offer.

Especially for someone who is approaching these stories and has not yet accepted the supremacy of Krishna—or, more specifically, Krishna’s benevolence—this can be challenging. Krishna is described as suhridam sarva bhutānām—the well-wisher of everyone. For such a person, they might think, “The way you’re looking at these stories neglects the moral aspects.” So, the devotional approach is especially valuable for experiencing a transcendental level of understanding.

Different approaches to these stories can be used. Which approach is appropriate depends on the individual. For children, a literal approach works well. This is also true for people who are not very analytical or those who seek thrill and entertainment—someone who can be a good storyteller would resonate with them. For people who are more analytical, the ethical and allegorical approaches are more fitting. These analyses can come from various perspectives, often focusing on learning life lessons or values.

As Bhaktivinoda Thakur explains, the literal approach is suitable for the kanishtha devotees—the first level of devotees. They take everything literally and focus primarily on worshiping the deities in temples without associating much with other devotees. At this stage, their focus is on the literal meaning. The madhyama level devotees, who are a bit more analytical, can delve into the non-literal or symbolic meanings of these stories.

In the course of these teachings, Bhaktivinoda Thakur recognizes that analytical individuals may sometimes dismiss the kanishthas, seeing their focus on literal meanings as primitive or naïve. But he encourages respect for their level of devotion and acknowledges that being analytical and thoughtful is important. However, he also highlights that the devotional level, which encompasses the experience of rasa (spiritual bliss), is the highest. At this level, the stories transport us into a deeper reality, allowing us to experience Krishna’s love and intimacy in a profound way.

For pure devotees or those aspiring to be, the devotional approach is the most enriching. For example, during Janmashtami, devotees may focus deeply on the appearance of Krishna and relish the details of that moment, immersing themselves in the story again and again. This kind of love for Krishna allows us to experience ever-new realizations, as Krishna is eternal and expansive.

Now, in our discussion here, we will focus on the ethical level. We will explore how to deal with challenges and mistakes in life. While the devotional perspective is important, we will focus more on the ethical side, analyzing how we handle difficult situations. If someone suffers because of a mistake, it wouldn’t be helpful to simply say, “It’s Krishna’s arrangement.” That could sound dismissive or even offensive, especially when someone is genuinely suffering due to our actions.

In such cases, rationalizing with phrases like “It’s Krishna’s arrangement” can be harmful. While philosophy can help us understand certain aspects of life, it should not be used to justify our wrongdoings. Sometimes, we may try to justify poor actions with seemingly rational explanations, but this only leads to more confusion.

Let’s now explore the story of the Ramayana, particularly the sequence that leads to the abduction of Sita. When the exile began, there was heartbreak for everyone except Kaikeyi. Ram, Sita, and Lakshman went to the forest, initially staying in Chitrakoot. This period brought them closer together, as they had more time for each other in a peaceful environment. But eventually, they moved southward to explore more of the forest and meet with sages.

This is when the traumatic events occurred that led to Sita’s abduction. It’s important to analyze where the causal link begins. Some might say it was Kaikeyi’s plot that set everything in motion, but how far back can we trace the origin? It could be said that if Ram and Sita had stayed in Chitrakoot, nothing would have happened. But the chain of events continued, and soon they encountered Shurpanakha, who was wandering the forest.

Shurpanakha, after smelling human flesh, followed the scent and saw Ram. At first, she was attracted to him and proposed a relationship, but Ram politely turned her down. He explained that he was already married and had taken a vow of monogamy. She then approached Lakshman, but he also rejected her, leading her to become furious and act impulsively. In her anger, Shurpanakha attacked Sita, which led to a series of unfortunate events.

The story highlights the difference between divine and demoniac natures. Divine beings live within boundaries, respecting them even when angry or hurt, while demoniac beings disregard boundaries altogether. Shurpanakha’s actions, fueled by lust and anger, led to violence and the eventual abduction of Sita by Ravana.

Through these stories, we see the consequences of crossing moral boundaries. While it is natural to feel hurt or angry when rejected, it is how we respond that defines us. Respect for boundaries is essential, and the actions of Shurpanakha show the dangers of ignoring this principle.

In this discussion, we will continue to analyze how ethical and moral boundaries are important in dealing with life’s challenges and mistakes.

And when he saw the power of Ram, he just ran away. He ran all the way to Lanka. His name was Akampan. But when he came before Ravana, he was trembling in fear. And then he told Ravana what had happened. Ravana was enraged. He said, “I will destroy all of them.”

Akampan, however, told him, “I have seen Ram’s powers. He is an extremely powerful warrior. It might be very difficult to face him in battle.”

Akampan spoke cautiously because he was a king and did not want to downplay Ravana’s power. Ravana also respected Akampan as a skilled fighter. But Ravana, feeling insulted, responded, “Do you expect me to take this advice? I will never back down.”

He added, “I have a strategy. I saw that Ram brought his wife with him. This shows he must be very attached to her. If you can abduct his wife, he will become mad. He will be so dejected, his attachment will become his weakness.”

This logic, though, is flawed. Generally, when someone attacks the family of a hero, it only makes them angrier. But Ravana, confident in the security of Lanka, believed this could work. He thought, “We are protected on this island. They will never be able to reach us. And when Ram is unable to find Sita, he will become disheartened, and then we can defeat him.”

Ravana then went to Maricha, and when Maricha heard the word “Ram,” he said, “Who told you to mess with Ram? Ram’s arrows are so powerful that they threw me miles away. I live in constant terror. Just hearing the name ‘Ram’ makes me tremble. Whatever has happened, forget it.”

At this point, Ravana no longer had any personal interest in Sita. He saw her only as a means to provoke Ram. He returned to Lanka, but when Shurpanakha came back to him, she was furious. She said, “What are you doing? Enjoying the music of dancers, when your own army has been destroyed, and your sister humiliated?” Ravana, feeling embarrassed, needed a way to save face. He asked her what had happened, and Shurpanakha recounted the events.

However, Shurpanakha, not expecting Ravana’s reaction, quickly spun the story. She told him, “I didn’t go there just to attack them. I saw how beautiful Sita was. She would be the perfect jewel for you. I went to get her for you.”

As Ravana heard about Sita’s beauty, his desire grew. The mention of her beauty sparked his lust, and he became interested in Sita not to get back at Ram, but to have her for himself.

Initially, Ravana’s motivation was his pride, which was hurt when Ram rejected Shurpanakha. But once his lust was triggered, his pride was overshadowed. This is a reminder that our attachments, our desires, can often become our weaknesses, and others can exploit them.

Shurpanakha’s manipulation had worked. Ravana, now obsessed with Sita, disregarded Maricha’s warnings and commanded him to help abduct her. Maricha, understanding the danger, thought, “My end has come.” But he resolved that if he was going to die, it would be better to die at the hands of Ram, as that would lead to a more auspicious end, rather than dying at the hands of Ravana.

At one level, Maricha’s actions show a certain understanding that being killed by the Lord brings auspiciousness. But what is he doing? He is seeking his own elevation or liberation at the cost of harming the Lord. So, he is becoming a pawn in the hands of the one who wants to hurt Ram. This is a knowledgeable but selfish calculation. It is not a service-oriented one. You could say it is Maricha’s miscalculation. This was also a contributing factor to what happened next.

Maricha came to Ram’s hermitage in the form of an extraordinarily beautiful and enchanting deer. Sita, sitting in the hermitage, looked out the window and said, “Hey Ram, Lakshman, come here. Can you see how beautiful this deer is?” The deer pranced around, capturing her attention, much like a small pet that looks so cute and attractive. Sita asked, “Can you bring this deer back as a pet for me? We can have a nice time with it. When we return to Ayodhya, we can give it as a gift to Mandarakaikai.”

Now, one might say that Sita’s desire for the deer was the cause of the problem. Was her desire selfish? Not necessarily. You could argue that it was innocent. She was in the forest and simply wanted something for recreation—a lighthearted wish. It could even be seen as a selfless desire, given that it was not about personal gain but more about enjoyment.

Laxman, ever watchful, had always been on guard duty and found the situation suspicious. He said, “This deer seems too good to be true. Normally, a deer is an innocent creature, and when it plays, other animals are usually around it. But this deer is alone. It doesn’t seem right. It could be a demon in disguise.”

Sita, however, dismissed his concerns, saying, “Laxman, you are too suspicious. It’s just a beautiful deer.” She then turned to Ram and said, “Please get it for me.”

Ram, moved by Sita’s request, thought, “She has sacrificed so much for me—she left the kingdom to come with me into the forest, and she’s never complained about the hardships of forest life. She’s asking for something simple, so I should get it for her.” He disregarded Laxman’s warnings and decided to chase after the deer.

We can say that Ram’s decision to chase the deer led him farther away, but it wasn’t the sole cause of what eventually happened. Rather, it was a contributing factor.

As Ram pursued the deer, it seemed to leap just out of his reach, jumping enormous distances. Slowly, Ram’s suspicions began to rise. He still wanted to catch the deer for Sita, but he could no longer ignore the growing doubts in his mind.

At one point, after a particularly large leap, the deer turned around, grinning mockingly as if it were enjoying itself at Ram’s expense. This pushed Ram to the breaking point. He thought, “Enough is enough.” By now, he had been led far away from Sita and Laxman, and the time for patience had passed.

He decided to use his arrow. Ram is known as the “Amogha Sharana,” whose arrows never fail. His arrow struck the deer, and it fell to the ground with a loud thud. Immediately, the deer’s body transformed, revealing Maricha in disguise. As Maricha fell, he cried out in a voice that mimicked Ram’s, calling, “Hey Sita! Hey Laxman!”

Upon hearing this, Ram realized that this was a full-blown conspiracy. Something deadly was afoot. He quickly rushed back to where the sound had come from, determined to put an end to it.

I once told this story in Australia, and a devotee asked me, “If Maricha screamed, ‘Hey Sita! Hey Laxman,’ why didn’t Ram immediately tell them, ‘That was not me?’” The answer is that while the Lord is indeed God, He does not always act as God in His Leela (divine play). If Ram were acting as God at that moment, He wouldn’t have needed to chase the deer. He could have simply commanded it to stop.

Instead, Ram demonstrates how an ideal human being would act. He stays within human limitations and doesn’t rely on divine powers unless necessary. Thus, while Ram is God, He acts according to the role of an ideal human in this story.

In the universe, there are many hierarchies—physical and ethical. In the ethical hierarchy, humans are above demons, and devatas (gods) are above both. However, in the physical hierarchy, devatas are above humans, but demons are almost as powerful as devatas. This explains why Maricha’s voice was much louder than Ram’s.

Ram’s decision to chase the deer was guided by human limitations, and this ultimately led to the tragic sequence of events.

Meanwhile, Sita grew more anxious. Although she had initially dismissed Laxman’s warning as unnecessary suspicion, his words lingered in her mind. She thought, “Ram should have caught the deer by now and returned.”

As time passed, Sita’s anxiety deepened. In a way, this mirrors a scenario where you ask someone to do something small, but then they don’t return as expected. You begin to wonder: Is something wrong? Has something happened to them? What if the storm is worse than we thought?

As Sita waited, her feelings became more complex. She was not only anxious, but also guilty. “Was I responsible for bringing this trouble upon Ram? Was my desire for the deer the cause of this?”

Eventually, when she heard the voice calling, “Hey Laxman! Hey Sita!” she immediately told Laxman, “Your brother is in trouble. Please go and help him!”

Laxman, however, remained calm and unshaken. He said, “That is not Ram’s voice. It is likely the demon imitating him.” Sita, desperate, pleaded, “Don’t you recognize his voice? It is my husband’s voice! Go immediately and help him!”

Laxman, though firm in his decision, was not ready to leave his post. He explained, “Ram told me to stay here and protect you. There is no danger. Ram is powerful and can take care of himself.” But Sita, growing increasingly upset, insisted, “Please go! Ram needs help!”

Laxman, trying to calm her down, remained steady. However, Sita, overwhelmed by her fears, could not understand why he wasn’t reacting as she thought he should. As Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita, self-destructive desires often cloud our judgment, making it difficult to think clearly or rationally in times of distress.

It can refer to any desire or emotion, any self-destructive desire or emotion that arises within us. It exists at the level of the senses, the mind, and can also manifest at the level of the intelligence, as described in verse 3.40 of the Bhagavad Gita.

So, what does this mean? At the level of the senses, we see something and become agitated. At the level of the mind, what we have seen keeps replaying in our thoughts. When it reaches the level of intelligence, we begin to scheme—thinking, “How can I do this?”

If we know something is wrong, but we think we can get away with it without getting caught, we start scheming. For most of us, when there is some temptation, the mind pulls us towards it, but the intelligence says, “No, don’t do it; it’s not good for you.” However, sometimes the mind becomes so powerful that it not only drags the intelligence along, but it also uses the intelligence to justify the action.

For example, the mind might say, “This isn’t really wrong. Why do people consider this wrong? Everyone does it.” We rationalize our actions by coming up with various justifications.

For Sita, her mind was extremely agitated. Now, at an ethical level (not a devotional one), we see that Sita, in her anxiety, was trying to make sense of things. When we are under stress, we often don’t even realize what we’re doing. In her state, she somehow convinced herself that Lakshmana wasn’t going to help because he had evil intentions toward her. She accused him of wanting to possess her, even though Lakshmana had served them faithfully for years. These words were like a thunderbolt to Lakshmana.

To be accused of something we haven’t done is painful enough, but to be accused by someone we trust—someone who should trust us—is even more unbearable. Lakshmana, trying to pacify Sita, said, “Oh, Sita, please don’t speak such words. Ram will come back soon.” But Sita was so consumed by her anxiety that she shouted, “You will never fulfill your evil desire. If Ram doesn’t come back, I’d rather die than be touched by you.”

Hearing these words, Lakshmana could no longer bear it. He said, “I cannot stay here and hear what you are saying. I must leave.” And with that, he left.

As Lakshmana ran toward Ram, he was deeply hurt by Sita’s accusations. He hoped he would find Ram and explain everything. When Lakshmana found Ram, he was relieved, but Ram was agitated and asked, “Why are you here? Why aren’t you with Sita? Is something wrong?”

Lakshmana could not immediately repeat the painful words Sita had spoken. He tried to find the right words, but as Ram pushed him for an answer, Lakshmana finally shared the harsh words Sita had said. Ram, however, was calm and said, “She must have spoken out of anxiety. Why are you taking her words so seriously?”

Lakshmana could have turned back and said, “But Ram, you should have listened to me when I warned you about the deer.” However, they didn’t dwell on it. They turned around and began looking for Sita.

Even though Ram had told Lakshmana not to take Sita’s words seriously, he didn’t blame him. Similarly, Lakshmana didn’t blame Ram for chasing the deer. Instead, they both focused on the real issue: Sita was missing.

When something bad happens, people often look for someone to blame. However, in moments of crisis, both Ram and Lakshmana understood the importance of perspective. Sita’s hurtful words were painful, but the far greater danger was her abduction. At that moment, neither Ram nor Lakshmana blamed each other, but instead, they focused on finding Sita.

Finally, it’s important to note that human nature often leads us to personify problems. Instead of addressing the root cause, we tend to blame or give our troubles a “face,” often making them seem more personal than they really are.

When a problem arises, if it doesn’t have a face, it becomes difficult to deal with. Often, we want to pin the blame for a problem on a person and target them. This tendency can lead to scapegoating.

Now, regarding the Lakshmana Rekha, in the Valmiki Ramayana, there is no mention of it. The concept of Lakshmana Rekha appears in later retellings, especially in the Ramcharitmanas. Sometimes, it is said that Sita’s abduction occurred because she stepped outside the Lakshmana Rekha, and that it was her mistake. This analysis can sometimes lead to victim-blaming, as if to suggest, “What did you do to bring this on yourself?” Such thinking is harmful.

The Valmiki Ramayana, however, does not support such an interpretation. It clearly states that Ravana abducted Sita, and it doesn’t suggest that Sita had any responsibility in this. The important point here is that neither Ram nor Lakshmana blamed anyone for the situation; they focused on what could be done now that the problem had occurred.

Our natural tendency is often to find someone to blame when something goes wrong, but real life is far more complex, with many factors at play. The primary cause of Sita’s abduction was Ravana, not any of the other circumstances surrounding it. Sometimes, when bad things happen, we excuse the wrongdoer, saying, “They’re just bad people, and this is what they do,” but we shouldn’t shift the blame onto those who are not at fault, especially good people. It’s crucial to avoid this tendency to blame others for every misfortune. While we can learn from mistakes, we shouldn’t let the habit of blaming others worsen the situation or damage relationships.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna speaks of “Aparigraha”—the aversion to fault-finding, which is considered a characteristic of a godly nature. We should avoid jumping to conclusions and blaming others without understanding the situation fully.

Even Lakshmana, after the war was won and they were reunited, didn’t hold a grudge. He could have said, “When are you going to apologize for the words you spoke to me?” But there is no mention of this in the text. Often, words spoken in tension should not be taken as the person’s true feelings. Sometimes, life is so stressful that even the best of us may say things we regret.

For example, I once met a devotee in America who was hosting me. He had brought his father to the U.S. in hopes of helping him immigrate. However, his father was emotionally distant and unresponsive, which troubled the devotee. He confided in me that no matter what he did for his father, the father remained cold. I spoke to the father, and he shared a painful memory. He said that when his wife passed away, he was doing his best to care for his son, despite the grief he felt. One day, during his son’s 10th-grade exams, the son had asked him to wake him up early. The father did so, but the son was upset when he was woken up late, and in his frustration, he said, “It would have been better if you had died instead of my mother.”

The father explained that this hurtful remark had remained with him, and since then, he had found it hard to show affection. I spoke with the son, who didn’t even remember saying such words. He explained that he had been under immense stress and didn’t intend to hurt his father. After hearing each other’s perspectives, they reconciled.

This is a clear example of how words spoken in tension can be misinterpreted. While the son’s words were harsh, they came from a place of anxiety and not malice. Similarly, the harsh words spoken by Sita to Lakshmana during her anxiety were not reflective of her true feelings.

So, we need to understand that, especially in times of tension, we should not read too deeply into harsh words spoken in the heat of the moment. People may say things in such moments that they don’t truly mean. It’s important to let these things go, as long as the overall relationship is affectionate and respectful.

When we focus on how to avoid blaming others, we need to understand the difference between being responsible and blaming. The key difference lies in the focus. In blaming, we focus on the cause of the problem, while in being responsible, we focus on the solution. Understanding the cause is important, but the focus should always be on how to resolve the issue.

Sometimes, in life, we may not be able to understand the cause of a problem. I have a friend in California who is a firefighter. California is prone to wildfires, and when a fire breaks out, the first question is always, “What caused the fire?” Was it an accident, or was it intentional? But sometimes, the cause of the fire is unclear, and there are no clues. However, even if the cause is unknown, the firefighters still focus on putting out the fire and saving lives. The priority is always the cure, not the cause.

Life can be the same. We might not always understand why something happened, but we should focus on resolving the problem, not blaming someone for it.

When a problem arises, it’s difficult to deal with if we can’t assign a face to the problem. Often, we want to pin the blame on someone and target that person, which can lead to scapegoating.

Regarding Lakshmana Rekha, in the Valmiki Ramayana, there is no mention of Lakshmana Rekha. It is only introduced in later retellings, especially in the Ramcharitmanas. Sometimes, people argue that Sita’s abduction happened because she crossed the Lakshmana Rekha, implying it was her mistake. This kind of analysis blames the victim, as if to say, “You must have done something to provoke this.”

However, the Valmiki Ramayana doesn’t blame Sita. It simply states that Ravana abducted her, without assigning fault to her. Neither Rama nor Lakshmana tried to blame anyone. Instead, they focused on the bigger picture, which is a healthier approach to problem-solving.

In real life, problems often arise from multiple factors, and it’s important not to jump to conclusions or immediately place blame. While there may be contributory factors, the primary cause of Sita’s abduction was Ravana, not Sita’s actions.

Blaming others, particularly the victims, can make matters worse. We need to avoid this tendency. Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita says that aversion to fault-finding is a characteristic of the godly nature. So, we should avoid blaming others, especially in moments of tension.

Lakshmana’s reaction after the war was an example of this. When he asked Rama, “When will you apologize for what you said to me?” it was after they had won and their emotions had calmed. Similarly, during tense moments, people can say hurtful things, but we shouldn’t take those words as definitive. Instead, we should consider the circumstances.

I had a personal experience with a devotee in America. His father was very cold towards him, and the devotee couldn’t understand why. The father, when we spoke, revealed that many years ago, after the devotee’s mother passed away, the son, in his anxiety, said some harsh words to his father, including, “It would have been better if you had died instead of my mother.” These words had scarred the father, who had never been able to show affection towards his son since then. The son, when he heard this, was shocked, as he didn’t remember saying it. After apologizing and understanding the situation, they both embraced, clearing up the misunderstanding.

This example shows that in times of tension, we can say things we don’t mean. We must avoid seeing those words as reflective of someone’s true feelings.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna faces the difficult situation of fighting his own relatives. Krishna doesn’t dwell on past lives or causes but instead focuses on the present: “What can we do now?” The focus is on the solution, not the cause. This is a powerful lesson for us. In life, when faced with problems, we should ask, “What can I do to solve this?” rather than getting lost in why it happened.

Take the example of a forest fire. Fires can happen naturally, and we may not always know the cause, but we still need to act. The first thing we do is fight the fire, and only later do we look for the cause. Similarly, in life, the focus should be on the solution, not on finding the cause, especially when it comes to blame. Being responsible means focusing on fixing the problem, even if the cause is unclear.

To summarize, we discussed three main points today:

  1. Approaches to Scripture: We looked at the four approaches to studying scripture—Literal, Ethical, Allegorical, and Devotional (L, E, A, D). Each approach has its own value depending on the person’s level of understanding.
  2. Blaming and Responsibility: We discussed how to avoid the tendency to blame and instead focus on responsibility. Blaming only worsens the problem, while responsibility focuses on the solution.
  3. Words Spoken in Tension: We also discussed the importance of not taking words spoken in moments of tension personally. We all can say things we don’t mean when under stress.

The key takeaway is that when we face a problem, we should focus on finding a solution, not on blaming someone. It’s important to take responsibility and act with a constructive mindset.

Thank you very much.

The post Life Lessons from the Ramayana – Part 1 by HG Chaitanya Charan Das appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

How temptation attacks visibly and invisibly – Lessons from Indrajita’s attack on Rama-Lakshmana
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. Hare Krishna. Thank you for coming today evening. Am I audible to you? Can you hear me?

Okay. Can you hear or difficult? Loud. Okay. Thank you.

So, I’ll speak today on the topic of, winning the inner war. All of us have a war going inside us between the part of us that wants to be good and the part of us that is short term, short sighted, that craves for various kinds of desires. So, since today is the pandan New Jalikadashi I’ll talk something from the Ramayana as well as something from the Mahabharata about the Pandavas. Now it’s interesting that both the epics the Ramayana and the Mahabharata have war as quite central to them. Now Srila Prabhupada was quite categorical that we should not interpret the war as simply, metaphorical.

It is not symbolic, but it is not it is not that it is not symbolic it is not just symbolic. In the Chaitanya Shikshamrut by Bhaktiv Nod Thakur, he states that he gives, for example, how various demons in Krishna Lila represent different things. So, Putana represents a misleading teacher that is like a teacher is meant to nourish the student with knowledge. So, a nurse is meant to nourish a child with milk but Puthana comes in through the medium nourishment trying to kill. A misleading teacher is meant to give knowledge but creates ignorance.

These are symbolic meanings. But, these metaphorical meanings, he does not say that Krishna did not happen. But along with that there are some further lessons to be taught also. Madhacharya says that the epics can be understood at 3 levels there is literal, ethical, and metaphorical. So, literal means that this is how things happen and if you just hear them, recite them, they will get purified.

About the Ramayana said that or even one letter if you recite, it can actually free us from great sins. So, that is the literal level just hear the story and relish it that will purify you. Now, the ethical level is where we see these characters as confronted with various decisions and sometimes they make a right decision sometimes they make a wrong decision and from that we can learn what kind of decisions we should make that is the ethical level and then beyond that is the metaphorical level. So, metaphorical level the important thing is that the metaphorical level should not replace the literal level it can expand the literal. So, for example, some people say the Kurukshetra war never happened.

Kurukshetra simply represents our human body and just as in us the lower desires are many and the higher desires are few. So, like that the Kauravas were 100 and the Pandavas were 5. Now, this is okay you can Prabhupada also talked about how when we surrender to Krishna when we take initiation when we surrender to our guru and Krishna, what is happening? We are in a war and we make Krishna the charioteer we hand the reins of our the chariot of our life to Krishna and then Krishna will lead us to safety and victory. So, Prabhupada has also spoken like that.

So, it is not that this meaning is wrong, but when this meaning is used to replace the normal meaning, then it is a problem. In Shri Vaishnav Sampradaya, there are many acharyas who have commented on the Ramayana. Govindraj is one of the prominent commentators. And he often gives some little bit symbolic meanings of various Ramayana characters. So, with this brief background, let us look at the Ramayana War and how it can also reflect the war in our own hearts.

Hearts. Now, this war probably we don’t experience it on a daily basis but especially when we try to do something. Now, some people say that if you tell them that we chant Hare Krishna, practice bhakti, you are going to control your mind. I do not need to control my mind my mind is already in control. So, actually, what it is the mind is in control, but how is it in control?

Because the mind has controlled them. They are not in control of the mind the mind is in control of them. Sometimes we decide to say I am going to do this I’m going to wake up early in the morning. I’m going to do this particular spiritual discipline. I’m going to do this, and we do it for a few days.

And then he said that, give it up. And he asked, what happened? Why did you change your mind? What happened? He said no I just changed my mind actually you did not change your mind your mind changed you.

So, what happens is things change and we generally do not realize the inner war going on and that we are fighting something unless we try to do something determined. Say for example, now on a day like Ekadashi when we try to fast at that time we try to fast and our mind attacks us fast. What it does? Come on, eat something, eat something, eat something, eat something, drink something, do this, do that. So, it’s only when we try to exert ourselves to do something that’s when we start understanding that there is something within me which is working against me and I have to fight against it.

It’s just like suppose an invader has attacked a country. Now, if all the citizens of the country obey that invader, then there is no war. Now, there is no war, but then there is no freedom also. All the citizens have to obey whatever the invader is saying. So, like that as long as we obey what our mind and senses are saying, then there is no war.

You just go along doing whatever the mind and senses do. Of course, even then there is struggle because what happens is the mind and senses make so many demands that we cannot fulfil all of them. So, manna hasha sthanidriyani prakrtisthaani karashati struggle and suffer because of the inner war that goes on between the goes on because of our mind and senses pulling us in various directions. So, similarly, there is a war in the epics. So, in the Ramayana, there is the war and between whom is the war primarily?

Ravan. Ravan and Ram. So, in South India I was giving a class and after that one person came to me, he says, I belong to the RPC. I says, what is RPC? RPC, the Rawan protection committee.

So Rawan protection committee, what is that? So basically somehow in India it is very strange that the whole Ramayana war actually it is primarily an ethical battle. Rawan is demonic and he has committed horrendous activities and the last activity last terrible activity that he does is abduct Sita and then Ram punishes him for all that. So, actually we can very clearly see that Ravan is a bad person and Ram is a virtuous person. Now, there could be some shades of gray in between, but broadly speaking, Ram is virtuous, Rama is vicious.

But somehow, some politicians and some political writers in India have recast this whole story and they have made it like a battle between North Indians and South Indians. And they said, Oh, you know, actually, Ram was Aryan and Ravan was a Dravidian and Aryan attacked the Dravidians. It is so crazy. And then there is a North Indian politician who tried to problematize this, and he said, Actually, Ravan is also from North India. So anyway, all this kind of interpretation keeps happening.

So that is why they feel that there are some people who feel that Ashish Rao was a Dravidian and he needs to be protected. So Ravan protection committee That’s why they had that idea. But the battle is not it’s not political, it’s not territorial, it’s not geographical. If it had been a territorial battle, then Ram after he won Lanka and Lanka was a golden city. It was very prosperous.

Rama could have annexed that and made that into a part of the Kusal Kingdom but he did not do that. What did he do? He gave it to Vibhishan and not only gave it to Vibishan after winning the war even before only he gave it that means when Vibishan came and surrendered to Ram at that time, Ram directly enthroned him as the king of Lanka. Now, by this, he reassured Vibhishan that I am confident that I will win the war and when I win, I have no desire to conquer this territory. So when when Rav would heard this, he was shocked.

He said, I am still alive and already somebody has been enthroned as the king. So there, he just dismissed it. He said that what is this? One beggar has enthroned another beggar as the king. He tried to minimize them but eventually, there was Rama’s confidence.

So, the point here is that the war, it is primarily an ethical war and in this ethical war which is also similar to the war that goes on in our own consciousness in our consciousness, we all experience this war sometimes say we wake up early in the morning and the alarm is ringing wake up and something inside us is go to sleep and the competition the war happens between the outer sound and the inner sound. The inner sound is softer, but it is louder nobody else can hear it, but we cannot hear anything except it. And then that sound becomes so loud just like sometimes when we are hearing a class very attentively or we are trying to hear a class attentively and somebody starts speaking, then what do you do? Shh, be silent, is not it? So, like that we hear the mind’s voice go to sleep so loudly that tuck we start to switch off the alarm shut up we switch off the alarm.

So, basically, there are times when we experience this inner conflict not always, but sometimes we do experience it. So, the war in the Ramayana mirrors in many ways the war within our consciousness and while this war is going on, at one level, we say Ram and Ravan are fighting with each other. But, in our case, actually, we could say that the divine side and the demonic side both are there and which side wins is based on which side we empower. So, both are there whichever side we focus on, we give our attention to, which we dwell on that will grow. I will come to that point of how the inner war is similar to and different from the outer war.

But let us look at one significant incident in the Ramayana war, which illustrates the dynamics of that warfare. Now, normally whenever a war takes place, say there is an attacking side and there is a defending side. So, usually which is better situated Which is on home territory? The defending side, is not it? It is like say if a cricket match is going on, then now the World Cup is going on.

So, so then what happens is if a match is going on in the home turf, then the team, which is playing over there, they are much more confident they know the territory they have their whole team over there if somebody gets injured, you can immediately replace someone else. So, generally, the home turf advantage is there. Now, in this case, see in both these cases in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, externally, the war begins with the good side launching the first attack, but actually it is the bad side which has launched the attack before but it was not overt war. Like in the Mahabharata, the Kauravas did such terrible things. They stole all the Pandavas’ property.

They tried to disrobe Draupadi. They had horrendous wrongdoing. So, similarly, Ravana abducted Sita. It’s a grievous wrong. And so now they had done so much wrong, but they did not provoke the war they did not start the war.

See, there is a cause of the war and there is a trigger for the war. The cause of the war means say for example, if somebody has a gun and they shoot the gun. Now, the trigger being pressed is the cause by which the bullet shoots out, but before that the gun has to be there before that, the bullet has to be there in the gun otherwise, you press the trigger and nothing happens. So, every action has multiple levels of causes. So, although Ram was the person who attacked Ravan, but it was Ravan who had provoked Rama beforehand.

And Ram gave every chance to Ravan to have a peaceful resolution, but Ravan was just not ready to listen. I have another class on Ramlila about how Ravan had 10 heads but he had 0 brains. In fact, corresponding to those 10 heads, actually, Ravana got 10 warnings. 10 very wise people or powerful people, they came and warned him. It started from Maricha only first warned him don t abduct Sita.

Then after that Jata yu warned him don t abduct Sita like this. Then after that Hanuman came there and Hanuman warned him. If you don’t return Sita, everything will be destroyed. Then Rupeshwar warned him. If you don’t return Sita, everything will be lost.

Then after that, as before the war, Kumbakaruna warned him that that you should not have abducted like this. Then just before the war, Angad came and warned him the last option. Now, if you return everything, otherwise, now also we will go back peacefully to Sultan Sita. Then after Angad came, then 2 elders, Malayavan and Maya. Malayavan was the uncle of Ravan and Maya was the father-in-law.

So, they came and warned him and like that everybody came and warned him, but he just did not listen. So, this war started and when this war started, Ravan had the home turf advantage but Ravan was so overconfident. These monkeys, what can they fight? They cannot defeat him. So, he foolishly never used his full force.

What he did was he was inside the fort and he sent 1 by 1 his generals out with a whole army to with an army to support them, but he did not bring out his full forces at all. He thought, these monkeys what can they fight against? And even when 1 by 1 by 1 big big generals just fell still he just didn’t accept it. And then finally, Ravar himself came out to fight. And Ravar came out to fight.

He just was furious. And he fought and he fought with the monkeys and he wounded many of the monkey leaders. And finally, Ram came to fight with him. And he started terrorizing the monkeys. Ram came forward.

And Ram and Ravana had a fierce fight. And after that fierce fight, Ram fought so expertly that Ravana’s bow, arrow was broken, his chariot was broken, his horses were broken, his helmet was knocked off, his crown was knocked off, his armor was broken and now Ram has had to shoot 1 arrow and finish him. And at that time, Ram lowered his bow and he said that there is no fun in killing a warrior who is weaponless. You already fought with many monkeys today, you must be exhausted, go back, rest, come back tomorrow and I will kill you tomorrow. This was humiliating for Ravan.

It is one thing to be defeated, but after being defeated, to be spared! And Ravana just couldn’t do what to do and he had to walk away. He couldn’t even go because his chariot was there. So he had to get off his chariot and run away from there. He felt so humiliated by that.

He didn’t know what to do. Now seeing this, in Sanhedrin, he says, I will go and I will destroy the entire army. I will revenge this. So Ravan nodded and Indrajeet came the next day. Now Indrajeet was an extremely skilled, fierce fighter and he and Lakshman fought fiercely.

Then, he wounded Lakshman, then he fought Radhram. But Ram and Lakshman were fighting fiercely and soon Indrajit realized that I can’t win against them. He had thought I will just crush them but he just could not crush them because he found that they were way too powerful. And then he decided to use demoniac trick. And what is demoniac trick?

He became invisible. Now generally speaking, what happens in today’s world, there is also violence in the name of religion and because of that when people hear how in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana there is war, how the Bhagavita was spoken and after which a war took place, people become very uncomfortable with that. But there is a big big difference between whatever war, whatever violence happens in the name of religion, say for example, terrorism and the wars that happened in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. What is the difference? The difference is these were wars were fought according to war codes.

What do you mean by war codes? If you look at the Kurukshetra war, both the Pandavas and Kauravas knew that they were going to fight and they both came to an area where there was no civilians. It was a big plane which was that plane? Kurukshetra. So, the first rule of the Kshatriya warfare was no civilians would be attacked No civilians would be attacked terrorists only civilians are attacked.

The terrorists do not have the guts to fight against an army. And even when warriors are fighting with each other, the Kshatriya code is such that the warriors one warrior will fight only against another warrior who is an equal that means a charioteer will not fight against a foot soldier soldier. A foot soldier will fight as a foot soldier, a charioteer will fight against a chariot. Of course, now while 1 charioter is fighting against another charioteer, the arrows might injure or kill somebody else, but you do not directly target those who are not equal to you. So, the idea is equal should fight with equals and not only equal should fight with equals, equal should fight with equals when they are equipped.

So, the warrior should be equal, they should be equipped and they should be alert. So, in a sense, the wars in those times were like sports. You could say it is quite a sports in bloodshed, but people at that time knew that life does not end with death. Even the Kauravas knew that if we die, we will go to next destination. So, the war was like sports and in sports, primarily, it is very intense competition.

For example, it is cricket. It is said to be like a war without bullets. So, sports can be very intense at times, but there are rules And, actually, it is the rules that make the sports enjoyable. If the rules are not followed say, if a bowler bowls and the batsman hits and the ball goes into the air and then the wicketkeeper is coming to take the catch, and the batsman raises the bat and hits the wicketkeeper. If the rules are flouted like that, then there is no it is not a test of skill anymore, and nobody wants to watch a match like that, is it?

I think a year or so ago 2 prominent cricketers from Australia were caught for cheating and there is a big worldwide outrage against them they are banned for some time. Why? Because in sport the idea is that skills are to be tested and if rules are broken, then it’s no longer a test of skills. And then, the joy goes out of it. Similarly, when Kshatriyas would fight, the war was a test of skills, a test of strength and the warriors would fight honorably.

But, not all warriors were honorable. And, Rawa and his associates could say had a PhD in being dishonorable. So, what happened? When Indrajeet saw that he couldn’t win, he adopted a dishonourable strategy and that was he became invisible. Now, some people say that all these scriptures are filled with so many things they are mythology.

They’re just they’re just, like, poetic writings by some peoples based on their imagination. They, they’re they’re not real because so many fantastic things are described over there. Mhmm. So how can anybody become invisible? Or say in in Krishna, I’d describe that Krishna lifted Govardhan Hill.

Now how can somebody lift up a mountain or Hanuwa lifted up a mountain? How can anybody lift up something like that? This is just a story. Yeah, it is a story but it is not just a story. Why?

Because there are higher factors involved in it. See, whether when Krishna lifted Govardhan Hill or Hanuman lifted the hill which contained the medicinal herbs. So, at that time, they say, Oh, people just believed anything over there people were superstitious and they believed any kind of story. But there is a logic and reasoning even in the stories. If people could believe anything and everything, then why did anyone and everyone lift up a hill?

It is not that any monkey could lift up a hill it is not that when Hanuman lifted up the hill and rot, Nobody does that everybody is astounded how did you do that? So, when Krishna lifts up a hill, somebody may ask, say, okay, this is a phone. Now even if I have to lift up a phone on one finger, in physics, you have to find out the center of gravity of the point. And you have to have your finger right at the center of gravity only if it is there, then the phone will be held and a phone is a tiny object. Suppose a skeptic asks when Krishna lifted over the hill, how did Krishna find the center of gravity of gold?

Now, Krishna doesn’t have to find the center of gravity because he is the source of gravity. He is the source of gravity. So, because he is the source of gravity, the laws of gravity act by his will And in extraordinary situations, those laws can be suspended by him. And similarly, those people who have special powers, they can do something which ordinary people cannot do. So, miracles aren’t against science.

Miracles are above science. When God does something, it is not something special it is not a rejection of science. It is an acknowledgment that science studies things in a particular framework, but there is more to reality beyond what science studies. So, when we talk about Indrajit becoming invisible, now, what does it mean? He had some special powers.

So, if we consider 50 years ago or 100 years ago, if somebody had said you can go to any part of the world and just pick up a box and through that box you can talk with anybody else in the world, people would have said that’s a fairy tale. Somebody has written some fiction, they would have said. So, there can be subtle mechanisms by which certain things can happen. Anyway, we are not going into the technicalities of this. The important thing is that he became invisible and invisibly he started attacking.

It is very difficult how do you fight against an invisible enemy. So, imagine if a cricket match is going on and the batsman can’t see the bowler and all the batsman sees that the baller is coming and hit me. Hey, what do you do? How do you play? So it was patently unfair and started attacking, and now Ram and Lakshman were very, very swift.

As soon as they would sense an arrow coming in their direction, they would immediately turn, they would bear the pain of the arrow and they would still shoot shoot back. But Indrajit was also very swift and he would constantly keep moving constantly keep moving. But because he was attacking invisibly, Rama and Lakshmi were fighting fiercely but one after one after another the arrows were cutting into their bodies and they were heroically fighting but their whole body became covered with arrows. And some arrows entered into their body and stuck there some arrows pierced through their body. And Ram and Lakshman now they were warriors, but at this point they were exiles.

So, they didn’t have any royal armor with them also they were defenseless in a sense no armor. And Rama and Lakshman were just pulling out the arrows that were coming in their body just pulling the arrows, throwing it away, and fighting on. And Indrajit became incensed, he said. I have become invisible and I am attacking and still they are not falling. What is happening?

Finally, he decided to use an extremely dangerous weapon which was the namala. Later, here he used the nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha nagaastha n and these arrows were such that the arrows would not only pierce the body but after piercing the body, there would be, like, the snakes would be associated with these arrows and the snakes would bite and poison would spread all over the body. And when these arrows started shooting, shooting had been shot, one after another after another, the arrows kept hitting and then eventually Lakshman toppled over the unconscious. And Ram was fighting. Ram looked at Lakshman but he couldn’t do anything to help Lakshman also.

And then Indrajit concentrated all the attack on Ram and Ram toppled over. And as soon as Ram fell, now already multitudes of arrows had pierced his body and now these several snake arrows pierced his body. Indrajeet roared in joy and started shooting arrows at all the remaining monkeys. And the monkeys wailed in panic. First, they saw their kings, their lords, Ram and Lakshman falling and then this indiscriminately brutal attack on them.

They started panicking and fleeing seeing this Indira started roaring in laughter and he went away from there. And when this happened, it was devastating for the Vanara army. So, generally, in a war, if the head falls if the king falls, it’s not just that the king is a most powerful warrior but the king’s fall also affects the morale of everyone else. Thus, when Rama and Lakshmi fell, the whole army just panicked and started fleeing away. The Vanara army had their own king.

Who was that? Sugriva. Now, Sugriva was the assistant, the ally of Ram. So, Sugriva realized, what should I do now? Ram and Lakshman are wounded.

He didn’t know whether they are dead or they are wounded or what has happened. They are almost motionless. And his soldiers were fleeing. So, he roared to his warriors. He said, stop!

He says, where will you go? What face will you show to your family members even if you survive now? To stop and fight, we will counter this cowardly attack. And he with great courage and great confidence he spoke and gradually he also what happened? Soon the invisible arrows stopped coming and I told them Indrajeet has gone now and when they heard this, they calmed down because he saw no more arrows were coming and then as the monkeys came around him and they stood by Ram and Lakshman.

They were looking at them and they saw that they were nearly dead. Some breath was there in their body but apart from that, the colour was waning away and lies seemed to be just streaming out of their body. Now, Sugariva had to do some fast thinking. He could have lost hope. He said, I came here to help Ram.

If Ram himself is no longer there, what can I do?’ He could have lost hope but he didn’t do that? Many times in our lives, when we are trying to do something and everything seems to be dark, So, we never lose till we lose hope. Life can defeat us in many battles but it is we who defeat ourselves in the war That means what? Many things may go wrong but it’s when we become discouraged and we give up the fight that’s when we actually lose. So, Sugri, although it is a big big battle that was lost, he did not lose hope.

He did some fast thinking and he said this is a war field, so we can’t do anything. So Ram and Lakshmi said to his monkeys some of the there were some monkeys who were good at medicine so he said, you along with the whole team of monkeys, you pick up Ram and Lakshman and carry them to Kishkindh and there let them be treated and take all care of them after they are healed Then if the war is still going on, they can come back. And meanwhile, he turned towards Hanuman and Jambhog and he said, we will attack Lanka and we will destroy Lanka. This cowardly attack will have to be revenged. And as he was speaking like this now, some of the monkeys were thinking that if Ram and Lakshman couldn’t defeat the Rakshasas, how will we be able to defeat them?

But here Sugriva was furious at this outrageously cowardly and deceptive attack. He said we are going to head back!’ So, the point is sometimes just seeing the confidence of someone gives confidence to others. So, Srila Prabhupada, when he started to the West to share Krishna Bhakti, he had that extraordinary confidence. When Prabhupada came to Mumbai, he wanted to go to America and there was this India steamship company owner and he wanted a place on her ship. So, he asked her and her secretary had told her, No, no, don’t give up.

He is an old man. So, she told Swamiji, Swamiji, you are so old and America is so cold. He says, You will die over there. So Prabhupada said, Nothing is going to happen to me. Since my spiritual master has given the instruction and this instruction says, Please help me to fulfil it.

He says, Swamiji, you are like my father. How can I let my father go into such a risk in a distant land like America? And Prabhupada was so confident and so little. Prabhupada said, If I am like your father and you are like my daughter, will you not fulfil one desire of your father? So, Prabhupada just pressed on and Prabhupada’s mission was also you could say impossible.

One old man going to America all alone with no money, no institutional support, no contacts. In fact, he did not even know the language very well. English was very accented and before that he had not even stepped out of India. It was an impossible task But still, he had that faith. He had that confidence.

And similarly, Sugri also had that confidence. And when we do all that we can, Krishna does all that we can’t. When we do all that we can, then Krishna does all that we can’t do. But when we do not do all that we can when we think this is not possible, this is not possible, this is not possible, Krishna says, okay, this is not possible. We see this principle time and time again even when Arjuna had to go into the Kaurava army on 14th day to avenge the death of Abhimanyu.

The whole army was blocking him from reaching Jayadrath. But Arjuna fought on and on and he fought so fiercely, he came very close to Jayedrat and he had done everything. But at that time, Duryodhana used a last ditch effort. He said yesterday we had 6 warriors to overcome sorry, to overcome Banyu Arjuna is the father of Amanyu. So, today, we have 8 warriors and 8 warriors simultaneously attack Arjuna from all sides Drona and Kripa came from the front, Ashwatama and Karana came from the left, then Shalia and Krutavarman came from the right, and Duryodhana and Dushyasan came from behind.

And suddenly, all of them attacked, and Arjuna Arjuna could see Jayadrach’s chariot standard, the flag, but now it is like a cloud of arrows coming in from all sides. He could barely just keep the arrows from piercing his body just round and round and he started despairing. The sun was sinking down going towards the horizon so close and yet so far. So, as he started despairing Krishna told him that Krishna had a plan. And Arjuna could just see.

Krishna was thinking. Krishna had a plan. He kept fighting. He kept fighting. And then what did Krishna?

Krishna saw that Arjuna on his own could not reach Jayadr. So Krishna called it a Sudarshan chakra. And he called it a chakra and he dispatched that. And that chakra went and covered the sun. So according to some astrological calculations, that was the exact time also when an eclipse happened.

And then as that sun covered the sun was covered the Kaurava warriors started celebrating Oh Arjuna is dead and then Jairath he had been hiding behind till now suddenly came forward and he said Oh you are going to kill me? Now should I light your funeral pyre? They were mocking Arjuna. Now Arjuna was disheartened and perplexed and he was about to put his bow down. Krishna told him, Arjuna, there is still time.

Put the Brahmastra on your bow and point it towards Yajurath. Now the sun was not there. Arjuna knew there was a time when no question should be asked. So, Arjuna just did that. As soon as he did that, what happened?

Krishna removed the Sudarshan. And the last few rays the sun was still coming and right in front of everyone as the sun came Krishna told Arjuna there is a sun and there is Jainrat shoot And right in front of all the Corals are watching, Arjuna came and shot off the head of Jainrat. But the point I am making is when Arjun did everything that he could, then Krishna did what Arjuna couldn’t. So, same principle applies we have to do everything that we can. So, similarly, here, Sugriva was determined to do all that he could And as he was determined like this, suddenly something happened.

Suddenly, it seemed like a storm was coming across the horizon and the waves started rising in the sky. The wind started blowing, and from the trees, the branches started falling down, and a huge creature started coming down straight. And as they started looking, what who or what is this creature? Is this Indrajitu has come back again? But this creature was so powerful that nobody could fight against them.

And as they were observing observing, the creatures came straight down, swooping down and came right next to Ram and Lakshmi. Who was this? Garuda. Garuda. Wonderful.

So as they’re watching, they realized, oh, this is some celestial looking being. This is Garuda. And then Garuda came right and as Garuda came over there what happened? Now Garuda is the natural enemy of the snakes. So, all the snake arrows which had entered and pierced not only pierced Ram and Lakshman’s body that is actually killing them continuously by injecting poison.

All those snakes just came out and they fled away and then Garuda just by the presence of Garuda away the snake arrows went away, and then Garuda offered his respects with his front talents. And then he came forward, and he just touched Ram on his face. And as soon as he touched Ram, immediately Ram got up. And then, he touched Lakshman. He touched Lakshman immediately.

Lakshman also got up. And here, Ram is playing Naralila. So, Ram looked around and he said, Oh celestial bird, thank you for saving us. Pray tell me who are you? Now Garuda said, My dear lord, you surely know me.

I am Garuda. I am your eternal carrier. He said, consider me like your own breath, but this breath flows outside your body. And Rama smiled. In the Ramayana, what happens is Ram is primarily as an ideal human being.

So, that is why his divinity is not always stressed because if he is God, then he can do everything. Then, what does the ideal human being means? The human being faces challenges and then how does that human being amidst challenges still stay firm in the path of duty, still acts according to principles. So, Ram’s divinity is not always emphasized it is his apparent humanity and how in spite of various adversities he keeps acting. So, then, here that is why Ram according to the Nilayhi says that okay He acts as if he is a human being and then when Garuda says, Please bless me so that I can go and chase these snakes and finish them off.

They are my natural enemies and I want to finish them. And then Ram gives his permission and as Narula starts flying into the sky, Narula tells him that, ‘Because I came here, Indrajeet will not be able to use those snake weapons again. And as they hear this, all the others observing Ram and Lakshman are not only alive and active but they are fully recovered. That is the mystical power of Garuda. And Indrajeet both Indrajeet in this case and the Kauravas in that earlier case both of them made the same mistake.

What was that? I made the mistake of being over confident. See the war is never won till it is actually won. So, Hindari thought they are already dead and the war is won. And the corals also thought yes, Arjuna is killed now.

So, as soon as they laid their guard down Rama and Lakshman sprang up and they said that let us attack Lanka now itself. And Rawa and had been told by Indrajeet that Oh, Rama and Lakshman are dead and they were all celebrating over there and the Vanaras roared and charged and what happened he said what happened Ravana said. Ravana was enjoying a party. He said what is this noise? Noise Ram and Lakshman are alive when they are coming back and now the kind of panic that was there earlier in the monkeys camp that was the Raksha’s camp how did they come back from the death?

But that is how the odds were reversed. So, although Indrajit used terrible weapons, but in this war which we face, whatever faces us stronger than whatever faces us is what graces us what blesses us. So, for all of us in this just as I talk about the inner war in the beginning so I will conclude with that point of the inner war that Indrajit became invisible and invisibly he attacked Ram and Lakshman. So, similarly, for all of us, we are fighting against various temptations, various distractions and some temptations are outside us and those temptations they allure us. Say, for an alcoholic, a bottle of alcohol may be a temptation for a drug addict, some drug dose might be a temptation for somebody who is hooked on to the internet, yes, the internet might be a temptation.

We all can have different kinds of temptations. So, when the tempting objects are there outside, then we at least are aware at least if we understand that I do not want to succumb. So, then we know that temptation is out there. I think it was the first Nirjale Ka Dashi It was the 1st Janmashti, actually, I mean, in 20, 25 years ago. 20 so at that time, we were fasting till midnight.

And because it was a lot of crowd, I was in Pune at that time. So one devotee came we were sitting in a stall. I was in the question answer booth. So one devotee came at around 10 o’clock and he brought one full bottle of ginger water to break the fast. And then he asked me, so he came and answered the question.

He said, Where should I keep this bottle? So I told him, out of sight. So What happens whenever there are temptations? If the temptations are in sight, then the allurement increases. 2 months ago, I was in Silicon Valley, so I spoke at Google, And interestingly, in Google, they had done an experiment.

Because most of the work is software coding, so it is very sedentary work. And, they found that the health insurance cost for the Google was increasing a lot. So, they called some experts and when they called those experts, they said what to do? In your cafeteria, whatever desserts are there chocolates, toffees, sweets, he said just put them in non transparent containers or cover them with non transparent people and just by doing that, they found almost 30 to 35 percent of the desert consumption decreased and by that what happened? Their health insurance cost also went down.

So, this is actually a principle called proppingquity. Proppingquity means what? The effect of space and time on behaviour. Now, that is just a complicated definition, but what it simply means is say, you are driving along the road and there is a hotel where there is some favorite food of yours which is available now, if you are driving along the road and then you see that hotel, you get the desire, But then if there is a long crowd over there and you think, oh, I will have to wait for 1 hour for the food to be served to me just forget it some other time. But if you are going along that road and you say the hotel is empty, I can just go in and within 2 minutes, I will have that full then, okay, let me have it.

So, what happens? We all have certain desires that are casual desires. Casual desires mean that desire just comes up because of the situation. And if that desire is very easy to fulfill, then we fulfill it. If there is trouble involved in it, just forget it it is not worth it.

So, propinquity means the effect of time and space on our behavior. So, if a particular desire, it requires time and effort to fulfill it, it is far away, then forget it. So, some people, what happens is when they are sleeping at night, they feel a lot of compassion suddenly. Compassion for what? Compassion for all the food that is feeling lonely inside their fridge.

So, now, if that food is very easily available, we just grab it and eat it but if it is not so easily available, if I have to go out and if I feel hungry in midnight and if I have to go out and buy something or cook something, then forget it. So, the point is that if something is very easily available, then we indulge in it. If it is not so easily available, then say if you are fasting many of you may be fasting today. So, if somebody tells you to fast, okay, it is difficult, but if somebody tells you say, If today is a class, keep a nice plate of prasad in front of you and fast, it will be much, much more difficult. So, if the temptation is right in front of us and we are told to fast, it becomes very difficult.

So, the point I am making is when there is external temptation, we are at least aware that this temptation is there and we need to keep a distance from it. So, they said the best way to deal with temptation is to not deal with temptation. If something is not to be done, then do not just keep it accessible to you. But more damaging or more dangerous than these visible temptations or we could say the visible objects that from outside they attack us is something invisible. Just like when Indrajit was attacking visibly, the danger was not that much, but we started attacking invisibly the danger became much more.

So, what is invisible in the war against temptation? See the objects outside are visible, but the desires inside are invisible. And, if we fall, we succumb not just because the objects outside are very tempting it is because the desires inside become very overwhelming. So, the invisible enemy is much more dangerous than the visible enemy. And because they are inside us, we can’t see them we can’t identify them very easily.

And we don’t know how to fight against them also. I was talking with a devotee whose brother he told me his brother was an alcoholic and they worked very hard to try to get him off of alcoholism and he also wanted to give it up. But somehow, the desire comes up very strongly. So, now because they were from a very wealthy family, what happened was that he could go to a nearby bar and even if he had no money, still people knew that he is from this wealthy family, people would give him a call. So, eventually, what they decided?

All the nearby wards, they told him, this person has alcohol, his wishes, please do not serve him alcohol. So, then he had his own car. One day he called and he said that, my car has broken down. Can you please send somebody to tow the car? They got somebody and they towed the car and they came home.

And then when he came home, that night he was sleeping. Suddenly, this devotee was sleeping next to his brother’s room only. And he heard the door opening and he went out. And he saw this person, his brother went to the car. And I said, what is he doing with the car?

Are you going to drive somewhere? No. But what they did was, they kept the keys also safe, so they didn’t drive away at night. Then, he went to the gas tank of the car and he had got a straw He put a series of straws and he put that in the gas tank and he was drinking from there. Shai, what are you doing?

So, what he had done was that he had gone to a bar far away and he had bought a lot of alcohol, and he had drained all the gas from the gas tank and filled it with alcohol. And now at night, he was drinking. So, he said, when I saw him doing this, at one moment I felt great anger, but then at the next moment I felt pity at that time. Why pity? Because he said that.

See, when we see somebody doing something wrong, something terribly wrong, we feel, you know, how can this person do something like this? How can somebody be so foolish? How can somebody be so unprincipled? How can somebody be so terrible? But we need to see the addicted not just as demented, not just as mad but also as tormented.

Tormented means what? That, actually, the desire from inside is goading them, do this, do this, do this, do this, do this!’ And they are defenceless! What can they do? If somebody is going through such extremes to try to drink something then their desire must be tormenting them so much. So, actually now what applies to others also applies to us that actually the inner enemy hurts us much much more than the outer enemy from inside when the desires start tormenting us do this, do this, do this, do this and it’s very difficult to resist it and what happens is that the more we have indulged in a particular desire that much the desire becomes stronger and stronger and stronger and the desire torments us more.

For example, our mind is like a software it is like a program software. If somebody has visited a particular website many times, they have visited bollywood.com many times, and then they come to a spiritual program like this, and then they hear about Bhagavad Gita, and they say, I want to find out what is Bhagavad Gita. And they go to their browser and type b, and what happens? Bollywood comes immediately, why? Because that is what they had selected earlier.

Now, in our browser, might be Bollywood might not come at all because we are not selected yet. So, the point I am making is that just as if somebody has selected something repeatedly, then it comes just as a default response sometimes it might come as a home page only. So, for somebody who is an addict, you see, why do you do this? But if somebody is an addict, that object of addiction has become their home page. They just can’t think of anything else.

So, this inner war is going on and our desires attack us from within. Now, if some temptation is coming at us from within, we can move away from the temptation we can push that temptation away but if a desire torments us from within, what do you do? He says, Rama and Lakshman were defenseless. Where do you fight? So their desires torment us from within.

And sometimes what happens is we think, I’m just weak willed or we blame somebody else. Why do you have why don’t you have any will power? See, it’s not just a matter of will power. If the desires are tormenting us so strongly, what can you do? That is why at that time we need to be understanding that what happened when these Inaravars were attacking, these snake weapons were attacking and Indrajit was attacking, an appropriate defence was required.

Even Ram and Lakshmi couldn’t defend. But then Garuda came. Garuda is the carrier of Vishnu. Garuda is like the guru. And as soon as Garuda came, what happened?

The snakes went away. And then Garuda touched and Ram was revived. So what happens is when the garuda represents the guru or the devotees of the Lord, when the devotees come, what do they give us? The gift of association is that the devotees their association gives us spiritual desires and spiritual desires drive away material desires. Desire is such a thing that you cannot fight against desire.

It is like suppose if I tell you for the next 30 seconds, please don’t think of a pink monkey. In your whole life, you may never have thought of a pink monkey but now you start thinking of a pink monkey. How does a monkey become pink? Is it wearing a pink dress or is it a genetic mutation or what? We start thinking.

So, as soon as we tell us do not think of something, do not desire something, do not do something, it becomes very difficult we start doing that itself. So, the point is that you cannot fight against desires it is very very difficult. We cannot drive desires away but we can crowd desires away That means if we fill our consciousness with positive desires, negative desires will go away if we fill our consciousness with spiritual desires, material desires will go away. Just as when Garuda came in, the snakes went away. So, for example, when we come in the association of devotees, the gift of the association of devotees is that they give us spiritual desires and the desire to love Krishna, the desire to chant Krishna’s name, the desire to hear about Krishna, the desire to do service to Krishna and as we take up those desires, as those desires start filling our consciousness, then the unwanted desires start going away.

So, for fighting with an invisible enemy, we also need an invisible resource. We may come in the association of devotees, but if we don’t get the desire that the devotees have, then we are not associating with devotees actually. The essence of association is the transfer of desires. At the end of the Bhagavad Gita, after Krishna spoke the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna finished it and Arjuna did not say at that time, Oh, Krishna! Great lecture!

What did Arjuna say? Karise vachanamtava I will do your will. That means that Krishna’s desire becomes Arjuna’s desire. So, there is a transfer of desires. So, when we associate with the spiritual master, when we associate with senior devotees, we need to get their spiritual desires.

So, bhakti is not about giving up desires it is about taking up desires. When we take up a spiritual desire, our worldly desire will go away automatically. Just like say if you are fasting and we have nothing to do if all day we are thinking I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast, I am going to fast becomes more bearable at least. So, for all of us, when we get those spiritual desires, there is a beautiful prayer by Shankaracharya which I will conclude this which describes very similar to this past time. So, he says samsara sarpa.

This material exists like a deadly snake and it is a 1,000 fag snake. Very sharp and very lethal. This poison is biting us. So, desires are being injected in our consciousness from all directions. And then what happens because of that?

Vinastha Murte we forget our spirituality. We forget who we are. We forget what we are meant to do. Because of this, then what do we do? On Garuda, the Wahan of Garuda, Lord Vishnu comes and he resides in the ocean of nectar.

So, that Lord when he comes on Garuda, the snakes go away and then he gives the nectar which is the antidote for the poison. And oh that Lord, Lakshmi Narasim Mama dehikaravalambam. Please, oh Lord, give me the shelter of your lotus plants. Hands. Bless me with your lotus hands.

Similarly, for us, when we practice bhakti, if you just focus instead of thinking what desires I have to give up, think of what do I want to do for Krishna? What do I want to do for Krishna? What desire do I have for Krishna? And if you take up a desire and try to nourish that desire, then that desire will fill our consciousness. When that desire fills our consciousness, then other desires will fall by the wayside.

Now, Prabhupada’s greatest strength was not just his renunciation. You could say that many of his god brothers were sanyasi, lifelong Prabhupada was grhastha before but Prabhupada’s greatest strength was his strength of his spiritual desire. He had a desire in order to share Krishna’s message all over the world. God was also great souls but the spiritual desire within him was the strongest and it was that desire that took him all over the world. On 14 world tours at the age of 70, he wrote nearly 70 books, built 108 temples all that was in the power of spiritual desire.

So, we all on this occasion of Pandana Angelika, that she can pray to the Pandavas and pray to Krishna, pray to Lord Rama that whatever little spiritual desire we have within us, may he bless us with stronger and more spiritual desire and as that spiritual desire fills our consciousness and all the impure desires will flee from there. And that is how in this war, invisible war against invisible enemies, with the invisible resource of spiritual desires, we all can attain victory. So, I will summarise. I spoke today on this theme of the inner war. So, I started by talking about how the epics can be understood at 3 levels literal, ethical, and metaphorical.

So, the metaphorical should not replace the literal, it should expand the literal it can at least expand the literal. And in these wars, Ram is the apparent aggressor, but Ravan is the actual aggressor. So, Ram shot the arrow that began the war, but Ravan was the person who provoked. And then we discussed about how in this war, what did Indrajit do? Ravan was so over confident that he never brought his full army, 1 by 1 he brought and everyone who he sent out was defeated.

Indrajit came, Indrajit used invisible weapons. So, we talked about how Kshatriya warfare was very different from terrorist warfare. Now, Kshatriyas never attack civilians terrorists attack only civilians. Kshatriyas attack only when there is enemies equal, who is equipped, and who is alert. If you see terrorists, they fight in the name of religion, but what do they do?

They attack people who are not equal, who are not equipped, who are not alert. So, it is complete perversion. So, it is not a geographical war, it is not a political war, it is an ethical war. So, Ram was virtuous, Ravan was vicious and that similar ethical war happens within us. We start sensing the presence of that war when we try to do something with determination.

People who say I do not need to control my mind they feel like that because they are controlled by their mind. So, it is only when we try to fight against the control of the mind, it is only when we try to fight against an invader who has conquered us, then we realize that actually I am controlled. So, especially when we start practicing spiritual life, we have to fight against the inner enemy. So, I talked about how when we do all that we can, Krishna does all that we can’t. I talked about both examples.

Although Arjuna tried everything, but when too many Koro warriors came in between, then Krishna intervened and helped Arjuna reach Jayadrath. Similarly, when Ram and Lakshman fell because of Indrajit Saros, Sugriva still kept fighting. We never lose till we lose hope. The world can make us defeat in many wars, many battles, but it is we who give ourselves defeat in the ultimate war when we give up the weapons. And Sugriva kept fighting, kept making plans what he could do.

And when he did his best, then help came from a higher source. Prabhupada kept trying his best. Krishna arranged for everything to work out. So, we talked about how Garuda came over there and us. And in general, if you can keep those visible objects away from us then the war becomes lesser.

The best way to deal with temptation is to not deal with temptation. Talk about propinquity, the greater the distance and effort required to fulfill a desire, the less we will be inclined to fulfill it. But we can understand that the object is visible and temptation is visible, but there is an invisible also. That is the desires inside us attack us. It’s like I talked about that alcoholic who had put alcohol in the gas tank of a car to drink it.

So what does that mean? The desires goad us from inside, hurt us. Do this, do this, do this. And how do we fight against an enemy who is invisible and inside us? We feel tormented and defenseless.

So, rather than thinking that we lack will power, we need to understand that we lack resources to defend and fight against this inner enemy and that resource is spiritual desire. Desires cannot be driven away, but they can be crowded away. So, instead of focusing on saying, no, I will not do this, I will not do this, I will not do this, we focus on what do I want to do. The real gift of association is the transfer of spiritual desires. So, by associating with devotees who are inspired, who are energetic, if we can get some spiritual desire in our consciousness, then as that desire fills our consciousness, then the lower desires go away.

Prabhupada’s greatest strength was not his renunciation but the strength of his spiritual desire to share Krishna’s message and that’s how Krishna consciousness spread all over the world. So, for all of us, in the association of devotees, by the blessings of the Lord, we can look at not what I have to give up but what I want to take up. What do I want to do for Krishna? Take that and let that nourish that desire. Let that desire grow.

We can pray to Krishna for that desire to grow. We can have association that helps it to grow. We can use our imagination to help it to grow. And as the desire grows, then we’ll become free from our lower desires. Thank you very much.

Hre Krishna. Hre Krishna. So is there any one question? I think the main question is when is it going to be tomorrow 7:30, isn’t it? 31.

Okay. Every minute counts. Okay. So, thank you very much.

The post How temptation attacks visibly and invisibly – Lessons from Indrajita’s attack on Rama-Lakshmana appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Hanuman in the cave Persevering in bhakti through pleasure and trouble
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna!
Am I audible to all of you?
Okay, thank you.

So, today I will speak on the topic, “From Darkness to Light.”
Is it better now? Still not clear?
You can come a little forward, if you’d like.
Yeah, maybe a little ahead. If you can.
Okay.
Last time, I was sitting there, wasn’t I? You changed it?
No, but how does that make a difference?
No, no, but why should that lead to a change in the seating arrangement?
Okay, from an acoustic point of view, that might be better.
Because if I’m there, both sides can hear me.
Is it okay, or is it too much echo?
No, no, don’t say “okay” just for the sake of saying it.
Should we do that?
Yeah, then I think everybody can hear properly.
No, no, stop. Here.
Hare Krishna! Hare Krishna!
Is it better now?
Okay, thank you.

So, you know, when we are not able to hear a class clearly, three things happen.
One is that we lose interest.
The other is that the mind starts filling up the gaps.
What happens is, researchers have found that even if people are very attentive, they only get about 20% of what the speaker says.
And if they hear 20%, they only get 20% of that.

I was in one place near New York, where I gave a class, and after that, there were so many questions about things I had not even spoken about in the class.
I was wondering, it’s good to have questions, but why so many?
Everyone had misunderstood and thought they heard something I hadn’t said.

Is it better now?
Thank you. So, I’ll speak today on the topic, “From Darkness to Light.”
We’ll talk about a story from the Ramayana on this topic.

When I was studying in college, about 25 years ago (more than that), I found that most students were confused.
What should I do with my life? How should I move forward?
This confusion is still common today.

Just recently, I gave a talk in Stanford, and after the talk, a mother, a Western lady, came to me. She told me her daughter had been at Stanford for 12 years. It’s not that her daughter couldn’t clear exams—she just kept thinking, “What is my calling in life?”
For 12 years, she had changed her major 12 times just to find what really felt right for her.

I told her, “Old age is calling you now.”
So, what happens is that many people, especially teenagers and youth, are confused about what they are meant to do with their life.
In fact, most people are confused.
But there are some special people who are confidently confused. They don’t know what to do, but they’re confident this is what they will do.

Broadly speaking, we talk about “darkness.”
There is physical darkness and metaphysical darkness.

Physical darkness blinds us. We can’t see. If the power goes out, we touch the wall or move carefully, thinking, “How can I move ahead?”
But metaphysical darkness is different.
Here, we are not just in darkness, but we are unaware that we are in darkness.
This can be particularly disorienting.

The Isha Upanishad has one of its bewildering verses, which hints at this:
Andham tamaha pravishanti ye vidyam upasate tato bhuyayivate tamo yau vidyayam rataha.
It says, “Those who are in ignorance will enter into darkness. But those who are in so-called knowledge will enter into greater darkness.”

You might wonder, “What’s going on here? How can knowledge lead to greater darkness?”
If we look at the overall flow of the Isha Upanishad, it is saying that not those who are in genuine knowledge, but those who are in so-called knowledge—those who think they are in knowledge but are still in darkness—will enter into deeper darkness.

What does this mean?
When we are born and live our lives, all of us are given some purpose.
We are told to grow up, build a career, have a family, get financially secure, and gain a good position in society. This is our goal, and we move forward accordingly.

This purpose is important for our life.
But what about after that?
What happens when we achieve all of this? There’s old age, there’s death. What comes after that?

We have a purpose for this life, but what about beyond it?

Those who are in rajas (the mode of passion) become completely consumed by their purpose in this life.
But those in sattva (the mode of goodness) think, “This is important, but is there something more to life?”
This leads them to seek knowledge.

On the other hand, those in tamas (ignorance) are so lethargic, so lazy, that they don’t even pursue a purpose in life.
Many children, especially those born in privileged families, spend their childhood and youth just playing video games, watching movies, and surfing social media without doing anything constructive in life.

Especially in welfare states, where the government supports people who can’t earn, many people become apathetic and don’t do anything.
Having a material purpose is better than having no purpose at all. At least you’re moving forward.

To achieve something materially respectable in life, one has to work hard, discipline oneself, and restrain the mind and senses.

We could say that tamas (ignorance) is a form of darkness.
At one level, the whole material world is a place of darkness.
But within this darkness, we can be in even deeper darkness.
That means, without any material purpose, we live without any spiritual purpose either.

But some people, even with a material purpose, become so obsessed with it that they don’t think of anything beyond that.
This, too, is a kind of blindness.

Beyond this is sattva, when we start thinking, “This is important, but is there something more to life?”
How can I pursue that?

So, broadly speaking, the scriptures guide us to rise from rajas to sattva.
The mode of goodness and the mode of ignorance can look similar externally.
Some people may not work hard because they are detached, while others may not work hard because they are lazy. Externally, these two can look the same.

I was in the temple in Pune once, and a boy came up to me and asked, “How do you become a brahmachari in this temple?”
I said, “Okay.”
Now, he hardly ever came to the temple, never participated in programs, and seemed not to have the dedication required to devote one’s life. This is a serious question. I asked, “How did you get interested?”
He replied, “Actually, I am going to decide by Sunday whether I am going to become a brahmachari or not.”
I was curious and asked, “Oh, really? What is happening on Sunday?”
He said, “I have proposed to a girl. If she says no, I will become a brahmachari then.”

Now, frustration is no qualification for renunciation. Frustration may direct us toward renunciation, but unless one has a positive purpose, one will not be able to continue. So, this boy’s situation was driven by wanting to form a relationship, which is the mode of passion (rajas). If that doesn’t work out, then he would shift to tamas, the mode of ignorance.

But we want to move towards the mode of goodness and transcendence. That’s why there must be knowledge and a sense of purpose. If I want to renounce the world, why do I want to renounce it? What do I want to do after renouncing the world? There must be a positive purpose. Otherwise, externally, ignorance and goodness can look very similar. Many people who are in ignorance often use spirituality to be irresponsible. When that happens, they create trouble for themselves in the long run and alienate others as well.

Bhakti Siddhartha Thakur, when he encountered such people, spoke about the importance of purpose. He was the first Acharya in our tradition to establish a monastery where many people would live as renunciates. Prabhupada followed this to some extent. Bhakti Siddhartha Thakur once said something astonishing: “I am simply trying to create some mode of passion in our devotees. I am simply trying to elevate devotees to the mode of passion.”

We think we want to elevate people to goodness and transcendence, but often, people settle into lethargy, apathy, and laziness, thinking everything is fine. So, there are different kinds of darkness. There is the darkness of ignorance, where one doesn’t care for anything—material or spiritual—and the darkness of passion, where one becomes so obsessed with material things that spiritual matters are ignored entirely.

A devotee from Russia once told me that he gave a class in which he spoke about how “You are not the body, you are the soul.” After the class, one person asked, “If I am not my body, then whose body am I?” They were convinced they are the body, and this was hard for them to understand.

It’s difficult for people to rise to the level of spiritual knowledge. What will raise us is not just frustration; it is a sense of purpose and strength. A sense of purpose means asking ourselves, “What do I want to do with my life?” We can have a sense of purpose in the mode of passion, or we can have a sense of purpose in the mode of goodness. But the sense of purpose is very important.

All of us are at different levels of darkness, and we are all trying to come to light—trying to understand what is truly valuable. When there is darkness, we can’t see things properly. Imagine a room that suddenly becomes dark, and there is a jewel somewhere on the floor. We try to catch the jewel, but in the darkness, we might pick up a stone and think it’s the jewel.

Similarly, when we are in spiritual darkness, we can’t understand what is truly of value. We might give up things that are very valuable for things that are trivial or less important. Often, when we have a close encounter with death, like when someone near us passes away or we go through a near-accident, we suddenly realize how misguided our priorities were.

I remember a devotee telling me about a time when a Mataji (a lady) was very cleanliness-conscious. Cleanliness is important, but she was driving to work one day and was late, so she rushed out of her house. Suddenly, a truck hit her car, and it spun around. The first thought that came to her mind was, “Oh, if I die and people go to my home, they will see that my house is so unclean!”

Cleanliness is important, no doubt, but in that moment, it wasn’t the right thing to focus on. That’s the time to think about Krishna. So, if we are not in proper knowledge, we can’t see the actual value of things. We might cling to things that seem important to us at the moment, but in reality, they are not the most important.

The mind latches on to something and holds on to it, and it doesn’t have a sense of perspective. What is more valuable? What is less valuable? What is more important? What is less important? If the mind just holds on to one thing and says, “This is all that matters,” we are in a state of darkness.

We might obsess over getting a particular raise in salary, getting a promotion, buying a house, or buying a car. These are not bad things; if we can get them, that’s fine. But if we become so obsessed with them that we can’t think about anything else, it becomes unhealthy.

So, when I speak of metaphysical darkness, it means that in that darkness, we can’t understand what is truly of value.

So, those things that are of little value, we hold onto them so much that we lose sight of what is of ultimate value. Our connection with Krishna, our devotion to Krishna (Krishna Bhakti), is of ultimate importance. That is what will endure forever, and that is what will give us strength, even in this life.

Now, whatever is valuable in this world is still important to us, but it may be lost. And even if it remains in times of distress, it may not necessarily offer us the same shelter that Krishna can. There are two extremes to be avoided: one is where we believe everything in this world has value and Krishna holds no significance, and the other where we think Krishna is the only value, and everything in this world is meaningless. While we live in this world, the things of this world do hold some value, but they should never overshadow Krishna or our service to Him.

With this background, let’s look at the story from the Ramayana, which speaks about moving from darkness to light.

When Lord Ram sent the Vanaras to search for Sita, they were given a time frame by Sugriva to find her. They were instructed to search in all four directions and return within a month. The Vanaras were particularly hopeful about the southern direction because they had seen Ravana heading that way. This was why, when Hanuman was sent, Lord Ram had given him a signet ring to give to Sita, should he find her.

Searching for someone is never easy. I was at a farm community once, where one of the family members’ children went missing. The child had been supposed to get into the car, but when the father went inside and returned, the child had disappeared. They launched a search team, and the community members immediately joined in, offering support. Despite initial reluctance, even the government and police teams eventually allowed the community volunteers to join in. This resulted in a massive effort where almost a hundred people helped in the search. It was a rare example of people coming together to help in times of trouble.

Searching for someone who is lost requires great effort, and knowing where to look is crucial. Similarly, in the Ramayana, the Vanaras searched tirelessly, going through dense forests, caves, and remote mountains, but they couldn’t find any trace of Sita. After a month of searching, they arrived in a place where there was no water or food, and they were exhausted. But then, they saw birds flying out of a cavern with wet wings, which gave them hope that there was something ahead. They decided to go forward and, linking together, entered a dark cave.

Though nervous, they proceeded slowly. Their perseverance led them deeper into the cave, and soon, they saw a light. It wasn’t just any light; it was a bright, shining light that illuminated a grand mansion. They were amazed to see this mansion inside the cave, with luxurious seats, beautiful trees, and a lake. They wondered if they had entered the domain of a demon.

As they explored further, they saw a woman meditating in yogic posture. When they approached, Hanuman, known for his soft-spoken nature, spoke to her gently. “Oh, lady, we are lost and we are hungry and thirsty. What is this place? It is astonishing, and we feared it might be a demon’s lair. But seeing you in deep meditation, so serene, we believe this must not be a place of a demon. Please, tell us where we are.”

Hanuman spoke with great respect and humility, acknowledging her presence and the beauty of the place, and inquiring in a way that was gentle yet direct. His words were not accusatory, but expressed genuine curiosity and respect.

We thought it was like this, but it didn’t seem that way.
So, who are you?

You know, when we meet people, our words can either open windows or build walls. And if we build walls, we then have to work to break them down later. Otherwise, it becomes very difficult to connect.

At that point, Swayamprabha was pleased. She had mystic power, and with it, she understood that these were Ram’s servants. She knew who Ram was.

She said, “This is actually a mansion built by Mayadana.”
Maya is the illusory energy. Maya is the architect of the asuras, while Vishwakarma is the architect of the devatas. Maya is the architect of the demons.

The demons had once tried to conquer heaven, but when they failed, they decided to create a replica of heaven on Earth. Maya created this mansion. Initially, he lived here, and the demons would come and stay occasionally.

When Indra heard about this, he realized that having a heaven on Earth would disrupt the cosmic order, so he decided to attack Maya. But Maya was very powerful, having received blessings from Brahma.

Indra, concerned, consulted Brahma, and they decided to send an Apsara named Hema to elude Maya. Intoxicated by her, Maya lost his senses, and Indra attacked, forcing Maya to flee. Some versions of the Ramayana say that Maya was killed and reborn, but most simply state that he fled.

Afterward, Indra, in gratitude to Hema, told her that she could live in the mansion.

Swayamprabha then spoke, “I am Swayamprabha. I was an assistant and friend of Hema. She lived here for a while, but then Indra asked her to return to heaven. As she left, she asked me to care for this place. I was alone, and I didn’t know how I could protect it.”

She continued, “Hema was an Apsara of Indra, so if anyone harmed her, Indra would intervene. But I will give you mystic powers. Perform this yogic tapasya, and you will gain mystic abilities to protect yourself and this place.”

Since then, I have been performing austerities here. I see that you are hungry and thirsty, so please have as much food and water as you like.”

At this, Hanuman and the Vanaras, who had been looking on from behind, eagerly rushed forward and ate as much food as they could. Their hunger was satisfied, and they felt relieved.

Afterward, Swayamprabha asked, “Now that your fatigue and hunger are gone, can you tell me who you are and why you’re here?”

Hanuman told her the story of how Sita had been abducted and how they were searching for Ram. She listened intently.

Swayamprabha then said, “The Vanaras have traveled a long distance into this cave. Now that you’ve satisfied your hunger, you must take your leave. However, Maya arranged this mansion in such a way that once you enter, you cannot leave. This is the path of no return.”

“But we saw birds leaving the cave,” they said. “Why can they go out?”

“Birds can leave because they won’t cause harm. Humans, on the other hand, cannot leave. You may be called monkeys, but you are not just monkeys. As seen in the Ramayana, the Vanaras speak and possess human intelligence, not just speech. They also have spiritual inclination. The Vanaras are devotees of Ram, and the capacity for spirituality is a human attribute. The word ‘Vanara’ means ‘forest humans,’ signifying that they are more than just monkeys. They are special beings who were highly evolved, some even more powerful than humans.”

“Because you have human consciousness, you cannot leave,” she said.

Upon hearing this, the Vanaras began to panic. “We can’t leave!”

But Hanuman, looking at Swayamprabha, said, “I am sure you know how to help us leave. Please, help us.”

Swayamprabha responded, “The purpose of this arrangement is to keep the mansion hidden. If anyone leaves and tells others, it will be plundered. The rule is that once someone enters, they cannot leave.”

“Please,” Hanuman pleaded. “We are on a mission to serve Ram and find Sita. We need your help.”

Swayamprabha paused and then said, “Okay, there is one way. The purpose of keeping you trapped here is to prevent others from discovering this place. I will use my mystic powers to take you out. But you must close your eyes.”

The Vanaras agreed and closed their eyes.

Within moments, Swayamprabha spoke, “Open your eyes.”

When they opened their eyes, they saw that they were outside. Swayamprabha explained, “Here you see the Vindhya mountain range. And in front of you is the southern ocean. I have brought you out and now I must return to my cave to continue my austerities.”

Hanuman thanked her, and she disappeared.

The Vanaras now realized that the place they had emerged from was not the same as where they had entered. She had taken them into the cave from one side and brought them out on the other, placing them right next to the southern ocean.

Feeling relieved, rejuvenated, and with the grace of Swayamprabha, they were now ready to continue their journey and search for Sita. They were filled with joy. “Yes, now we will find Sita!”

They started charging ahead.

The story in the Ramayana illustrates the principle of obstacles on the path of service. When we live in this world, we all face difficulties. Even when we are trying to serve the Lord and fulfill our dharmic duties, we still encounter challenges. Just like the Vanaras, who, in the midst of their difficulties, entered a cave, hoping to find some relief, we often face problems and look for solutions. But sometimes, as we dive deeper into those solutions, we can end up feeling more lost.

Broadly speaking, there are two types of obstacles in our life journey: trouble and pleasure.

Trouble means you’re walking along a path and suddenly feel overwhelmed by how difficult it is. You want to give up because the way ahead seems too hard.

Pleasure, on the other hand, means you’re walking the same path, but instead of feeling troubled, you start enjoying the journey so much that you wonder if there’s any need to keep going.

Both types of obstacles can deter us. Trouble makes us want to stop because we feel it’s too difficult, while pleasure tempts us to stop because we feel content with where we are.

In this cave, the Vanaras faced both obstacles. As they ventured deeper, it was dark and uncharted. Sometimes in life, we encounter such darkness, not knowing what to do. We may feel lost, unsure of what lies ahead. But, just like the Vanaras, we must keep walking—one step at a time.

In life, we might go through hellish phases. “Hell” doesn’t only refer to a place after death, as many believe. Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die. The truth is, we often experience our own hell on Earth, facing extreme difficulties. But if we keep walking through it, just as the Vanaras did, we can find a way out.

If we find ourselves in a tough phase, we must remember that nothing in this world, including troubles, lasts forever. Both troubles and pleasures are temporary. The key is to keep moving forward, step by step.

Despite the Vanaras facing challenges, they didn’t give up. They could have complained, questioning why they were enduring such difficulty when they were serving Ram, not even for their own sake. But instead, they kept walking.

In our own struggles, it’s best to keep moving on, no matter how dark or tough it gets. Faith means taking one step at a time, even when we can’t see the entire path. That’s what the Vanaras did—they kept walking, step by step, even when they couldn’t see what was ahead.

The other obstacle is pleasure. When the Vanaras finally reached the mansion inside the cave, they found comfort—food, rest, and relief from their hunger and exhaustion. They could have stayed there, enjoying these comforts, but none of them chose to.

Swayamprabha offered them what they needed, but the Vanaras remained focused on their mission. Even when pleasure or comfort tempts us to settle, we must remember our higher purpose and keep moving forward.

Sometimes, pleasure can become an obstacle because it leads us into complacency. We might feel content with where we are and forget about the bigger goal. I remember one relative of mine who, when I tried to talk to him about Krishna Consciousness, said, “I believe in God. He’s happy there, I’m happy here.” The problem with this mindset is that comfort doesn’t last forever. Life may seem good, but nothing is permanent. Just like the frog in a drying puddle, even comfort can fade.

Thus, when we find comfort or pleasure, we must continue onward, remembering that no comfortable situation will last forever.

Swayamprabha’s name means “self-effulgent”—she didn’t need external light to find her way. Similarly, our spiritual guide, much like Swayamprabha, helps us navigate through darkness.

Swayamprabha first provided comforts to the Vanaras, much like how a spiritual guide provides relief to a soul that is in darkness. But she also showed them the bigger picture. She did not settle for comfort. Instead, she was engaged in yogic austerities, indicating there’s something beyond temporary comforts.

All of us have basic necessities in life—things like wealth, health, and relationships. Studies show that wealth and happiness are connected, but only to a certain extent. Initially, when people lack basic needs, wealth reduces distress. However, once these needs are met, more wealth does not necessarily bring more happiness.

The Vanaras could have chosen to settle in the mansion, but they didn’t. They remembered their purpose and kept moving forward, just as we must do when faced with comfort or distractions in life.

The correlation between material possessions and happiness becomes hazy.

While making money is important, what we do with it is even more significant. It’s not just about having money; it’s about what we make of it. Imagine someone rushing out of their house to fill fuel in their car. If we ask them, “Where are you going?” they might say, “I’m going to the gas station.” We ask, “And then?” “I’ll go to the next gas station.” “And after that?” “I’ll go to the next one.” Clearly, while you need fuel to run the car, you don’t drive just to fuel up; you drive for a purpose.

Similarly, in life, the material needs—food, clothing, shelter, wealth—are things we live with. These are necessary, but they are not the ultimate purpose of life. Unfortunately, society often glamorizes these material needs, elevating them to the point where we lose sight of their true role. Imagine, if we were to obsess over getting the “best” fuel, the “prestigious” gas station. Fuel is fuel, and focusing too much on it would distract us from the actual purpose of driving.

This is the issue we face when material pleasure and possessions become the goal. Sure, it’s necessary to have some material comforts, but they should not be our purpose. For example, hunger causes distress, and lack of money can be stressful too. But once those needs are fulfilled, how much more do we really need? Just as eating too much food can harm our health, excessive material possession can also bring its own set of problems.

The Vanaras kept moving forward, even after their basic needs were met. Similarly, while we don’t want material deprivation, we must understand that material wealth is not the end goal. The Vanaras did not settle for comfort; they had a purpose, and so should we. Whether facing trouble or pleasure, they continued to move towards their ultimate goal.

When Swayam Prabha helped them out of the cave, they didn’t return the same way they came. Instead, they were closer to their goal. In life, whether we face difficulty or ease, if we remain focused on our purpose, we will continue evolving and moving toward the Lord.

Let’s conclude with an important teaching from Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita (5.20):

“Don’t be elated when joy comes.
Don’t become dejected by sorrow.
Keep your intelligence fixed on the spiritual goal.
Understand that you are spirit and pursue the spiritual path.”

This verse is significant because Krishna doesn’t say we should ignore joy or sorrow—they will come. Sometimes, life gives us joy, sometimes sorrow. Krishna is advising us not to get overly attached to either. When we experience something pleasant, we shouldn’t get carried away by it. When we face challenges, we shouldn’t become disheartened. Both will come and go. The key is to keep our focus on the spiritual goal.

As Prahlad Maharaj says, life can’t always be about avoiding the undesirable and seeking the desirable. If we seek only material pleasure, we end up caught in the cycle of desire and dissatisfaction. We should learn to serve Krishna, regardless of whether our circumstances are pleasant or unpleasant. That’s the path of true spiritual growth.

The example of chasing the five dollars illustrates this principle. Imagine you’re heading to an inheritance worth five million dollars, but along the way, a thief steals your five dollars. You could chase that thief, but in doing so, you waste precious time that could’ve been used to reach your destination. Similarly, in life, material pleasures may seem enticing, but they’re just distractions from our ultimate goal—Krishna Bhakti, or love for God.

Similarly, if we find a five-dollar bill, chasing after it might lead us further away from the real goal. The five million dollars represent our spiritual treasure. As we practice Bhakti—chanting, associating with devotees, studying scripture, doing puja—we move closer to that ultimate treasure.

This treasure is not just a distant goal; it is something we begin to experience incrementally every day. The more we connect with Krishna, the more we are enriched spiritually. So when problems come—when we face challenges or losses, like the theft of our five dollars—we must keep perspective. In the grand scheme of things, they are minor setbacks. Losing five dollars is not the end of the world, just as temporary setbacks in life are not the end of our spiritual journey.

Sometimes people overreact to problems, thinking their lives are over because of a small issue. This is what we call “hyperventilation”—overreacting to a situation. We must keep calm and maintain focus on the bigger picture, remembering that the goal is spiritual progress, not material possessions.

Everything is finished. And what happens is, don’t hyperventilate. There are problems, but look at your own life. If you look at your life five years ago, you would have faced some big problem. At that time, it probably seemed like it was going to end your life. But now, looking back, you might wonder why you got so worked up about it.

Of course, you have to deal with the problem—I’m not saying neglect it—but there’s no need to hyperventilate. There’s no need to think that a small issue, like a five-dollar loss, is so big that you must sacrifice something as valuable as five million dollars.

Don’t get overwhelmed by trouble. It will come, just like a five-dollar loss. Pleasure is also like a five-dollar gain. If you get it while moving forward, fine. If not, that’s okay too. The key is not to get stuck in either extreme. If you experience pleasure, don’t get so delighted by it that you stay stuck. If you face unpleasantness, don’t get so dejected that you remain trapped in it. Stay purposeful.

If you keep doing this, step by step, you are moving toward Krishna, the supreme enrichment. And if we develop our love for Krishna, by the end of our lives, if we love Krishna more than the world, the Lord will take us out of the world, and we will attain His abode. There, beyond all the darkness of the world, is the supreme light. That is the ultimate perfection in life.

Let me summarize. I spoke today on the topic of moving from darkness to light. First, I talked about physical darkness and metaphysical darkness. Physical darkness, like blindness, stops us from moving forward. But metaphysical darkness means not understanding what is truly valuable. People in ignorance are confused, and people in passion are confidently confused. In some ways, having a material purpose is better than having no purpose at all because it at least gives us direction and discipline. But to rise from rajas (passion) to sattva (goodness), we need to start thinking about a spiritual purpose.

Sometimes, people mistake frustration for renunciation. They move toward ignorance thinking it is spirituality or transcendence, but that’s not true. We need a purpose in life.

I also talked about how, due to metaphysical darkness, our minds don’t have a proper sense of perspective, and because of that, we misestimate the value of things. Material things are valuable, but spiritual things are even more valuable. We want to come out of that darkness through spiritual knowledge.

Then, I shared the story of the Vanaras (monkey warriors) who went into the dark cave. Though they were distressed, they kept walking through the dark, and eventually, they found relief and comfort. But they didn’t stay there. Even when they were told there was no way out, they found a way and were mystically transported to a place closer to their destination.

Similarly, in our life journey, we all face two kinds of obstacles: trouble and pleasure. Both of these are like a five-dollar loss or a five-dollar gain compared to the five million dollars that represent our love for Krishna. We must stay purposeful. Even if we go through hellish difficulties, we just keep walking. Everything is temporary. Even the most difficult phases in our life will pass, and even the pleasures we experience will not last forever.

If we keep moving forward, step by step, we are growing toward Krishna. The pleasure won’t last, the trouble won’t last, but Krishna will remain with us forever.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Any questions or comments?

We were talking about how we have these desires, and when we are spiritually advancing, the way we react to them changes. But sometimes, even though we know we should react differently, or we would have reacted differently in the past, we still fall back into reacting the same way.

That’s okay. Sometimes, despite knowing we shouldn’t react in a particular way, we still do. It’s like when people say, “I’ve made a resolution not to get angry,” and then they get angry. Someone points it out, and they might say, “I’m not angry!” but then they become even angrier because they don’t want to be reminded of it.

I once did a retreat in Brisbane on “Burn Anger Before Anger Burns You.” The point is that if we consider the graph of our consciousness over time, our urges tend to surge. It’s not that anger or greed is always at a high level. It may stay at a normal level most of the time, but sometimes it surges up. When that surge happens, we might just get overwhelmed. It’s good if we can resist it, but we shouldn’t define our spiritual advancement only by what happens during those surges.

So, what are we doing in between the surges? Even if we can’t resist our urges in the moment, we can persist between them. If a surge happens and we react in a way we didn’t want to, what do we do afterward? If in between surges we are practicing bhakti, connecting with Krishna, purifying ourselves, and strengthening our intelligence, then gradually, we will become strong enough to resist the urges when they come.

In spiritual life, we may fall down, but we don’t have to fall away. Falling down means we’re knocked down by the forces, but falling away means we give up the path entirely. Sometimes our urges may come, and we may feel helpless because they’re just too strong in that moment. But what we do in between is crucial. We can either become disheartened and think, “I’m never going to change,” or we can persist and keep trying.

If we think, “I’m never going to change,” and start justifying that this is who we are, that’s dangerous. It leads to the loss of faith in our potential to improve, and that’s the worst loss we can have. Losing faith in our ability to improve is cowardice, as we’re not having the courage to fight. It can also lead to malice, because our conditioning, if we give in to it, won’t keep us at the same level—it will drag us further down.

That’s why, in between urges, we need to keep building ourselves up. Don’t define yourself solely by what happens during the urges. Keep connecting with Krishna, building your strength, and equipping yourself.

There’s also an important insight regarding the urges. When the urge starts coming and we say, “No, I’m not going to do this, I’m not going to get angry,” sometimes it feels like the urge is getting stronger and stronger. We think, “How long can I resist this?” and then, “Maybe I should just give up.”

But the urge is not like an endlessly rising line; it’s like a wave. It builds up and then subsides. Imagine you’re in an arm wrestling match. The opponent is stronger, and they’re pushing your hand down, down, almost to the table. You might think, “I can’t hold on, I’m losing,” but if you know it’s a timed match, you realize that if you just hold on for a little longer, you’ll get a break. When the next round starts, it’ll be from neutral ground again.

Similarly, when urges rise, we may feel like they’re overwhelming us, but we have to remember that they won’t last forever. They will subside. If we understand that the urge is not going to stay at this level forever, we might find it easier to resist. And even if we do succumb to it, we won’t give in completely. It’s like the mind trying to trick us into thinking the urge will last forever. If we just hold on a little longer, we’ll get through it.

Sometimes, when we fall, the mind tells us, “Now that you’ve fallen, just fall completely.” But we don’t have to do that. Even if we fall, we don’t need to go deeper into it. We may be pushed down, but if we don’t let go, we won’t stay down for long.

So, these are two important points: we persist between the urges, and when the urges rise, we understand that they are temporary. Just hold on, and they will subside.

Forgiving ourselves:
Yes, definitely. Forgiving ourselves means understanding that we have certain conditionings and we can’t change overnight. In spiritual life, self-control is important, but even more important is humility. Sometimes, when we fail to resist our urges, it may make us feel more humble, which can actually be a bigger spiritual advancement than simply succeeding in self-control.

Forgiving ourselves doesn’t mean we just accept that “this is how I am” and remain the same. It means recognizing that we couldn’t resist in that moment, but still, we remain connected to Krishna and keep trying. We may have failed, but we can move forward, leaving that chapter behind.

Spiritual life is subtle. What we see as success or failure may not be as clear as we think. For example, sometimes people may fast strictly on Ekadashi, avoiding even water, but it’s not just about physical control. Spiritual success is more than just overcoming urges; it’s about developing a deeper connection with Krishna, even in the moments of failure.

And then everyone who is not fasting starts saying, “This is nirlaj, so attached, so hopeless, glutton.” Now, when someone is fasting but their mind is filled with judgment and condemnation towards others, what’s happening? Their body may be fasting, but their ego is feasting. Such fasting doesn’t lead to spiritual advancement.

On the other hand, someone who tries to fast but feels weakness, maybe even fainting or acidity, and decides to eat something to continue their service — they might succeed spiritually. Why? Because they have grown in humility. We don’t have to judge ourselves solely by how much we resist our urges. What matters more is how much we strive to connect with Krishna.

Question:
Earlier, you mentioned that someone said they would become a Brahmachari only if a certain person refused them. Is that wrong? We’ve seen many examples of people who’ve faced rejection and then decided that the true path in life is spiritual life. So, is it wrong for frustration to be the driving force for spiritual practice?

Answer:
Frustration can definitely be a reason why some people turn to something higher in life. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna mentions four kinds of people who turn to Him: those in distress, those seeking knowledge, those wanting wealth, and those who are inquisitive. But, actually, distress is the common denominator here. In today’s world, if someone is inquisitive, there are millions of things they could be curious about. Why choose spirituality? It’s often because something has gone wrong in their lives. Similarly, when people need money, they might go to a bank for a loan rather than pray to God.

There has to be some dissatisfaction with life as it is, which pushes people to seek something higher. So, distress can be the starting point for spiritual life, but it cannot sustain spiritual life. To stay on the path, we need to develop a positive attraction to Krishna.

I would say that if someone starts or intensifies their spiritual life because of frustration, that’s fine. But if someone thinks they can make spiritual life a lifelong practice just based on frustration, that’s unlikely to work. This world is a place of distress, and no matter what ashram you’re in, you’ll still face challenges. If you go from one ashram to another due to frustration, eventually you’ll face difficulties there too. So, while distress can start spiritual life, to sustain it, we need a positive attraction or conviction about the value of spiritual life in its own right, not just because we are running from life’s problems.

Question:
Does that mean one is going from idealism to cynicism?

Answer:
Not exactly cynicism. This morning, we were talking about how we might either be naive, believing anyone, or cynical, believing no one. You can become cynical about people and the world, thinking there’s no happiness here, so let me seek something higher. But even on the spiritual path, there are difficulties.

If the purpose of practicing spiritual life is just to escape life’s problems, then we won’t be able to sustain it. There will always be challenges on the spiritual path. So, we need to have a higher purpose: the evolution of our consciousness, the growth in wisdom, and the development of our devotion.

Cynicism may help us see what’s wrong, but it cannot guide us toward what’s right. If someone is extremely cynical, they might even deny the existence of God. They may say, “This material world is an illusion,” but then dismiss the idea of God as an illusion as well. The problem with cynicism is that it’s very unhealthy overall.

Being cynical is like trying to drive a car with the brakes fully pressed. All it does is make a lot of noise and waste fuel without moving forward.

Question:
Any last questions?
Yes.
Thank you so much for the wonderful class. You compared $5 million to Krishna Consciousness, saying that it is the ultimate goal. But for many of us, understanding that Krishna Consciousness is like $5 million is sometimes difficult. How do we get convinced of this?

Answer:
That’s a great question. So, how do we get convinced that Krishna Consciousness is like $5 million? Right now, many of us may feel that Krishna is important, but so is Maya. That’s our state at the moment.

There are broadly two ways to get convinced. One is by associating with those who deeply value Krishna Consciousness, especially those who have already achieved what we are striving for. When we see that they don’t value material things as much, but they value Krishna Consciousness more, it can give us great conviction.

When I was introduced to Krishna Consciousness, I wanted to be a top student from a prestigious university and be an academic achiever. I met many devotees who were also academic achievers, and yet they practiced bhakti. This attracted me.

We all have our own definition of success, and we push hard for it. If we meet someone who has already achieved that definition of success and is still pursuing Krishna, it shows us that Krishna Consciousness is of greater value. That’s why they are pursuing it. This can help us understand the true value of Krishna Consciousness.

As Bhaktivinoda Thakur says, associating with like-minded devotees is very important. “Like-minded” doesn’t just mean we agree with each other. It means our minds work in similar ways. If we value something deeply, and the other person doesn’t value it at all, they can help us see that it’s actually not as important as we think. They understand our desires, dreams, and aspirations, and can present the spiritual message in a way that resonates with us.

That’s why some devotees’ words may enter our hearts more easily than others. We might hear the same message from different devotees, but some will speak in a way that connects with us immediately, while others may not have the same impact.

Being “like-minded” means that someone’s mind works in a similar way to ours, but they are more advanced on the spiritual path. Through their association, we can begin to appreciate Krishna Consciousness as more valuable than what we currently value.

Another way to get convinced is through personal experience. If we value something right now, but it lets us down, we may start to realize its true worth. For example, I once met a devotee from Zimbabwe, where the economy had gone through significant ups and downs. He shared a story of how, at one point, the currency had depreciated so much that he had to bring a bucket full of Zimbabwean currency notes to buy bread. The shopkeeper threw away the notes and took the bucket in exchange for the bread.

What was once considered valuable became worthless due to depreciation. Sometimes, we find that something we valued highly isn’t as important as we thought. This realization can help us understand that material things are temporary, and Krishna Consciousness is more valuable.

Organic renunciation is also an important concept. The way we think at the age of 15 or 20 is different from how we think at 40, 45, or 60. Many of us may need to go through certain life experiences before we fully appreciate the value of spirituality. As we progress through life’s various stages and ashrams, we may begin to understand the value of Krishna Consciousness more deeply.

At the very least, even if we don’t feel that Krishna Consciousness is “5 million dollars” right now, we can at least recognize that it is valuable. We may not fully grasp its worth at first, but with practice, our understanding will deepen. Advancing in Krishna Consciousness essentially means increasing our appreciation of Krishna Consciousness.

As we continue to practice, our understanding and appreciation will grow. Even if we can’t digest everything right away, by associating with devotees and hearing the philosophy, the value of Krishna Consciousness will become more apparent over time.

I once gave a class at the Bhakti Center in New York on centering our life on Krishna. People come to Krishna for various reasons — social, psychological, cultural, or intellectual needs. Some seek community and belonging, some want to pass on their culture, some come for peace of mind, and others for answers to their questions. Regardless of why we come, sooner or later, that reason will be challenged.

For example, if we come to Krishna because the devotee community is caring, but later experience unkindness, we may start questioning the value of the community. One devotee once said, “When I first came, devotees fed me five pakoras, but now they are frying me like a pakora!” The point is that the very thing that brought us to Krishna may become our challenge. But if we hold on to Krishna despite this, we strengthen our connection.

Even Draupadi, in her distress, turned to Krishna when no one else could help her. She didn’t reject her husbands, but she sought Krishna’s shelter when she needed it most. Sometimes, we must let go of the things that initially drew us to Krishna in order to hold on to Krishna Himself.

As we go through these experiences, we may find that we value different aspects of Krishna bhakti or eventually appreciate the core of it. It’s an incremental process. We may come for one reason, but as we progress, we come to value the essence of Krishna Consciousness itself.

I hope that answers your question. Thank you very much.

The post Hanuman in the cave Persevering in bhakti through pleasure and trouble appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Report of Book Distribution Festival on the New Year Eve in ISKCON MAYAPUR
→ Dandavats

By Aseem Kṛṣṇa Das As 2024 drew to a close, the anticipation of New Year’s Eve 2025 brought waves of visitors from across the globe, including many from nearby cities and villages, to ISKCON Mayapur. Pilgrims eagerly planned their trips to this sacred spiritual haven, yearning to immerse themselves in its serene atmosphere, begin their
Read More...

A Farm in France
→ Dandavats

by Dharmadhyaksa dasa If air and noise pollution, commuting, traffic jams, inflation, crime, overcrowding, and speed mania make you hunger for a saner lifestyle, then you’re not alone. Already, a growing number of concerned citizens (including intellectuals and scientists) are asking serious questions about where modern society is going. In the thought-provoking book Small Is
Read More...

Travel Journal#20.24: New York City and Albany
→ Travel Adventures of a Krishna Monk

Diary of a Traveling Sadhaka, Vol. 20, No. 24
By Krishna Kripa Das
(December 2024, part two)
New York City and Albany
(Sent from Islip Airport, Long Island, New York, on January 4, 2024)

Where I Went and What I Did

The second half of December, I was happy to remain in the ashram of ISKCON NYC and serve NYC Harinam.

I would chant with Rama Raya Prabhu’s NYC Harinam party from Monday through Saturday for three or four hours in the afternoons.


I would lead the chanting for half an hour and distribute the invitations and free literature the rest of the time, occasionally also selling a book.


On Sundays I would chant with the Gita Life devotees in Downtown Brooklyn for an hour or so in the morning, and then either in a subway station alone or on the Brooklyn Bridge with several devotees for two hours or so in the afternoon.

In addition to chanting with NYC Harinam I would do additional hours of harinama for the Prabhupada Marathon, chanting for two hours in another subway station in the morning or at noontime several days a week, and I made my quota of thirty hours for the month of December. I report my scores in this journal after the harinama videos.

Sometimes I would give the Srimad-Bhagavatam class in the temple, which is recorded on the ISKCON NYC YouTube channel.

At ISKCON NYC the last Ekadasi in December I made walnut burfi for Radha Govinda.

On Tuesday, December 24, I went upstate to participate in my family’s Christmas celebration in Albany, New York, coming back in time to catch the last three hours of harinama on Christmas Day. We went to the Christmas narration and song program for the appearance of Lord Jesus Christ in this world at the Quaker meeting, and I brought khicri and a coconut sweet for the dinner after. I brought doughnuts from the Doughnut Plant and other prasadam for my relatives for Christmas.

I share many quotes from the books, lectures, conversations, and letters of Srila Prabhupada, most of which I read in Bhakti Vikasa Swami’s soon-to-be-published book on the mood and mission of Srila Prabhupada. I also share quotes from The Delaware Diaries, soon-to-be-published book by Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami. I also share notes on classes in New York City by Jayadvaita Swami and Rama Raya, Sri Prahlada, Param Brahma, and Arjunananda Prabhus.

Thanks to Jayadvaita Swami for the neck warmer for use on my extra subway station harinamas for the Prabhupada Marathon. Thanks to Ahaituki Prema Prabhu for the videos and photos of NYC Harinam with me in them. Thanks to Fern, Oliver, and Victor for the socks for Christmas. Thanks to Karen for the figs and ginger for Christmas.

Itinerary

October 5, 2024–January 3, 2025: NYC Harinam
January 4: Miami maha-harinama
January 5: Miami Ratha-yatra
January 6–17: Tallahassee harinama and college outreach
January 17–20: Gainesville BIHS Evolution conference
January 21–23: Tallahassee harinama and college outreach
January 23–24: Gainesville
January 25: Tampa harinama and Gasparilla Ratha-yatra
January 26–29: USF harinama and programs
January 30–April: Tallahassee harinama and college outreach

Chanting Hare Krishna in New York


While I was chanting at Fulton Street subway station two hours one morning for the marathon, this man greeted me with “Hare Krishna” and played shakers for a few mantras with me. He said he played in reggae band in Peru called Jagannatha. I found them online . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJcZBeUE-ws


Premamani Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/cebNZgJeIEk):


Sukanti Gaurangi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center in Brooklyn (
https://youtu.be/pax-W1K0RxE):


Krishna Rai chants Hare Krishna at Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center subway station in Brooklyn (
https://youtu.be/_HH9rejeMfc):


Jaya Goracand Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center in Brooklyn (
https://youtube.com/shorts/b4oKlPM7pCE?feature=share):



December 18 was the disappearance anniversary of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. I shared with my Facebook friends this amazing quote by him:

Srinama-sankirtana is the best sadhana. If other sadhanas help us in Krishna-sankirtana, then they deserve to be called sadhana; otherwise they are simply impediments to sadhana. Sri-Krishna-nama-sankirtana is the emperor of sadhanas. It is the only infallible sadhana capable of bringing us to siddhi.


An Indian man gave a dollar or two so I gave him “Easy Journey to Other Planets.” He opened it up to the page with the Prabhupada photo, and smiled, saying, “I haven't seen Bhaktivedanta in a while.”


When I returned on the C train, I noticed the new C trains do not have doors between the carriages, facilitating my chanting of Hare Krishna being heard by more people.



Acarya-nistha Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue subway station (https://youtu.be/8UZeOWpzJ_s):


Here he chants another Hare Krishna melody there (
https://youtu.be/A4KM1GlpQnE):


Maya Cabrinha chants Hare Krishna at the Wednesday evening kirtan at ISKCON NYC (
https://youtu.be/Wi2cEHoko6w):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street subway station (
https://youtu.be/j_zMYtDPhf0):


Ranchor chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/juDO3MKKY8U):


Param Brahma Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (https://youtu.be/ABZ3dHgrMGw):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station, and several play shakers and dance (
https://youtu.be/1IHovsARCY0):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station, and a family plays shakers and dances (
https://youtu.be/ba7JxgLF7b8):


Sri Prahlada Prabhu chants the first Hare Krishna kirtan at the 26 Second Avenue Saturday program (
https://youtu.be/EBqC196TDLQ):


Sri Prahlada Prabhu chants Hare Krishna to a Polish festival tune at 26 Second Avenue (
https://youtu.be/GwwuktmeQP0):


After Sri Prahlada’s lecture, it was past the time that the final kirtan usually starts. There was some talk about skipping the kirtan, and continuing on to
prasadam. 


Meru, who has been attending devotional programs for a year or two said to Sri Prahlada, “Your kirtan is like
prasadam itself.”

Sri Prahlada Prabhu chants the final Hare Krishna kirtan at the 26 Second Avenue Saturday program (https://youtu.be/gsBMlHweZlk):



On both December 24 and December 25, Radha Govinda were dressed at
mangala-arati in such colors as you could not help but remember Christmas!


I chanted Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station on Christmas Day, and I felt happy to see all the passersby dance joyfully with a devotee woman visiting from Australia (
https://youtube.com/shorts/ODB8EywDrpk?feature=share):


Jayananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station on Christmas Day, and young Indians dance with Divyangi Devi Dasi (
https://youtube.com/shorts/UDvDEt3e_Uw?feature=share):


Tom chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/zyc8Zx6uU8k):


Divyangi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station, and passersby interact (
https://youtube.com/shorts/grjN-55SnYM?feature=share):


Premamani Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (https://youtu.be/OKUYJ_bwlaI):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times SquarePremamani Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station subway station, and many dance with devotees (
https://youtu.be/HdVGlGGLzQE):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square, and Premamani Devi Dasi dances with passersby (https://youtube.com/shorts/5aJPjaXDVAs):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna to “Jingle Bells” tune in Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/_iEAk75QRGU):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna to “Auld Lang Syne” tune at Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/YEfLGQFh6QM):



Often Radha Govinda looked especially beautiful.

Godruma Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (https://youtu.be/EFefyHrgu2s):


Param Brahma Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in ISKCON NYC Guru Puja kirtan (
https://youtu.be/9rEgLV7BcN8):


Nitish chants Hare Krishna with Gita Life devotees on Union Street in Brooklyn (
https://youtu.be/oOxeNrocV5w):


The last Sunday in December was warm enough to chant on Brooklyn Bridge, and although I have chanted there several times, I never saw it so crowded. There was a line of twenty people waiting to cross the bridge. We chanted for five minutes waiting for the line to go down, but it never did, so we had to join the line and wait our turn.

Here Matanga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge (https://youtube.com/shorts/kq1PCqbzhQs?feature=share):


Matanga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge, and Indian families play shakers and dance (
https://youtu.be/7JEPMfhA0Wg):


Matanga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge, and devotees dance in a circle (
https://youtu.be/DpJDfnOtbL8):



When we were two-thirds of the way across the bridge, we encountered a pedestrian traffic jam. Literally we were at a standstill for at least half an hour and probably more, since the whole
harinama took an hour longer than usual.


Here Matanga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge during the pedestrian traffic jam (
https://youtube.com/shorts/v-3o59Z3tvE?feature=share):



During the traffic jam, I talked to this woman from California because she seemed attracted by the chanting. She now lives with her Swiss husband in Zurich. Her husband asked very nice questions about our philosophy and accepted “On Chanting Hare Krishna” and the address of our Zurich temple.

Matanga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in the ISKCON NYC temple lobby after the Brooklyn Bridge harinama (https://youtube.com/shorts/6vA_FcJu8zs):


Here I chant Hare Krishna at Times Square (
https://youtube.com/shorts/ToL48oG_xkU).


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna to the tune of the New Years song, “Auld Lang Syne,”at Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/pNww4SNZdP4).


Narada Muni Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station, and a Seattle woman, who knows about our temple there, sits and listens (
https://youtu.be/cIiVbfVA0TQ).


Bali Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station, and a woman plays shakers and dances (
https://youtube.com/shorts/PyXqIAhDnWE?feature=share).


Jaya Goracand Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station, and two women play shakers and dance (https://youtube.com/shorts/g_tJgHLrZag?feature=share),


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square, and Premamani Devi Dasi dances with passersby (
https://youtube.com/shorts/5aJPjaXDVAs?feature=share),


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station, and devotees and passersby play shakers and dance (
https://youtu.be/GH9jsCbDgos).


At one point, devotees and various passersby danced together in a circle (
https://youtu.be/nYrThgr4RkY).


One woman was especially enthusiastic to dance (
https://youtube.com/shorts/RCNW2Mw-xEc?feature=share).


Although Times Square is the busiest subway station, the police restrict activities there on New Year’s Eve, and thus we chanted Hare Krishna in the Fulton Street subway station in Manhattan, which is closer, warmer, and quieter.

Here I chant Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve (https://youtube.com/shorts/kZLOhytvilg?feature=share).


Jagaddhatri Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve (
https://youtu.be/4eS3j_M02go).


Sevaka Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve (
https://youtu.be/AvYwI2iUugQ).


Madhav Charan Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve (
https://youtu.be/pskbz7ZH2HI).


While Madhav Charan Prabhu was chanting Hare Krishna, a guy and a woman danced (
https://youtube.com/shorts/ntp0lHoNmPU?feature=share).


Another guy danced as well (https://youtube.com/shorts/fhWW9Gr7JPM?feature=share).


Braja Sakhi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve (
https://youtu.be/LaApDTN-afE).


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna to “Auld Lang Syne” tune at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve (
https://youtu.be/3-v43zsiXDM).


Here is a video of that in portrait orientation (
https://youtube.com/shorts/ATvlgPXlRLo).


At one point while Rama Raya Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna, several devotees danced (
https://youtu.be/P-CIXGAZmM0).


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Year’s Eve and two girls and a woman dance (
https://youtube.com/shorts/XD-30g0cGLE?feature=share).


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street on New Years Eve, and passersby and devotees dance (
https://youtu.be/MSFFd4r1L2g).


Prabhupada Marathon 2024 Scores

My personal contribution to the Prabhupada Marathon is very small. I go out on my own extra hours and chant Hare Krishna in public. If people give me money, I offer them a book. 


This year I went out just over 30 hours, people gave me $184.60 and accepted 29 books and 22 “On Chanting Hare Krishna” pamphlets. One reason I go out is to set an example that we should try to increase our book distribution in some way during the Prabhupada Marathon. I hope to increase next year, as I have in previous years.

Income and Expenses for 2024


Comments: My travel expenses were greater than usual as I went to Europe twice instead of once, I went to India, and I went to New York City during spring break because all the colleges in Florida I sing at had spring break the same week. My gifts were greater than usual because I donated three years of tax refunds to my guru, which amounted to almost $500. My electronics expenses were greater than usual as I purchased a computer for the first time in five years for almost $1000. I also decided to invest in two external hard drives, totaling 22 GB and costing $600, to keep up backup copies of the many videos I take of
harinama. I still have some money left from the money I got by filing for unemployment during COVID, and that is why I was able to spend so much while receiving so little and not be completely broke. I hope to spend more conservatively in 2025.

Insights

Srila Prabhupada:

From Bhagavad-gita 12.11, purport:

If one decides to sacrifice for the supreme cause, even if he does not know that the supreme cause is Krishna, he will come gradually to understand that Krishna is the supreme cause by the sacrificial method.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.2.36, purport:

The Lord’s holy name must be heard, glorified and remembered everywhere in the world.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.7.13, purport:

Artificially stopping a mischievous child is not the real remedy. The child must be given some better engagement so that he will automatically stop causing mischief. In the same way, the mischievous activities of the senses can be stopped only by better engagement in relation with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When the eyes are engaged in seeing the beautiful form of the Lord, the tongue is engaged in tasting prasadam, or remnants of foodstuff offered to the Lord, the ears are engaged in hearing His glories, the hands are engaged in cleaning the temple of the Lord, the legs are engaged in visiting His temples—or in other words when all the senses are engaged in transcendental variegatedness—then only can the transcendental senses become fully satisfied and eternally free from material engagement. The Lord, as the Supersoul residing in everyone's heart and as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the transcendental world far beyond the material creation, is the seer of all our activities. Our activities must be so transcendentally saturated that the Lord will be kind enough to look upon us favorably and engage us in His transcendental service; then only can the senses be satisfied completely and be no longer troubled by material attraction.”

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 3.8.27, purport:

Devotees do not ask anything from the Lord in exchange for their service. Even the most desirable liberation is refused by devotees, although offered by the Lord. Thus the Lord becomes a kind of debtor to the devotees, and He can only try to repay the devotees' service with His ever-enchanting smile. The devotees are ever satisfied by the smiling face of the Lord, and they become enlivened. And by seeing the devotees so enlivened, the Lord Himself is further satisfied. So there is continuous transcendental competition between the Lord and His devotees by such reciprocation of service and acknowledgement.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.26.5, purport:

Men do not understand that because they unrestrictedly kill so many animals, they also must be slaughtered like animals in big wars. This is very much evident in the Western countries. In the West, slaughterhouses are maintained without restriction, and therefore every fifth or tenth year there is a big war in which countless people are slaughtered even more cruelly than the animals. Sometimes during war, soldiers keep their enemies in concentration camps and kill them in very cruel ways. These are reactions brought about by unrestricted animal-killing in the slaughterhouse and by hunters in the forest.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.11.27, purport:

We should not be disturbed by so-called disturbances. There have been so many disturbances to our Krishna consciousness movement, but we cannot give up our forward march. On the contrary, people are receiving this movement very enthusiastically all over the world, and they are purchasing literature about Krishna consciousness with redoubled energy. Thus there are both encouragements and disturbances. This was so even in Krishna's time.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.11.58, purport:

Even at the present moment, everyone everywhere can be happy and free from material tribulations by following Srimad-Bhagavatam. There is no need of austerities and penances, which in this age are very difficult to perform. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has therefore declared, sarvatma-snapanam param vijayate sri-krishna-sankirtanam. By our Krishna consciousness movement, we are trying to distribute Śrimad-Bhagavatam so that anyone in any part of the world can be absorbed in the Krishna consciousness movement by chanting and hearing about the activities of Krishna and be free from all material tribulations.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Adi, Introduction:

We have often heard the phrase ‘love of Godhead.’ How far this love of Godhead can actually be developed can be learned from the Vaiṣhṇava philosophy. Theoretical knowledge of love of God can be found in many places and in many scriptures, but what that love of Godhead actually is and how it is developed can be found in the Vaishnava literatures. It is the unique and highest development of love of God that is given by Caitanya Mahaprabhu.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Adi 9.39, purport:

With the good will of the Supreme Personality of Godhead there can be enough fruits, grain and other foodstuffs produced so that all the people in the world could not finish them, even if they ate ten times their capacity. In this material world there is actually no scarcity of anything but Krishna consciousness. If people become Krishna conscious, by the transcendental will of the Supreme Personality of Godhead there will be enough foodstuffs produced so that people will have no economic problems at all. One can very easily understand this fact. The production of fruits and flowers depends not upon our will but upon the supreme will of the Personality of Godhead. If He is pleased, He can supply enough fruits, flowers, etc., but if people are atheistic and godless, then nature, by His will, restricts the supply of food. . . . Therefore, to solve all problems, one must seek the good will of the Supreme Personality of Godhead by becoming Krishna conscious and worshiping Him regularly in devotional service.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila 13.160 (quoted from Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.82.44):

Lord Sri Krishna said: ‘Devotional service unto Me is the only way to attain Me. My dear gopis, whatever love and affection you have attained for Me by good fortune is the only reason for My returning to you.’”

From a letter to Makhanlal on June 22, 1973:

We can preach all over the world that the only way to be saved from collective and individual devastation is to take to the chanting of Hare Krishna. In short, this material world is a very precarious place therefore we should always chant Hare Krishna and seek Krishna's protection.”

From a letter to Susan Beckman in August 1973:

The conclusion is that one should learn the art of chanting the Holy name of Krishna 24 hours a day and that alone is the remedy for all problems of material existence.”

From a letter to Karandhara on June 18, 1975:

We require money. Lakshmi is the immediate assistant of Narayana. Narayana is always preceded by the word Lakshmi. The Mayavadi philosophers do not touch Lakshmi, but we accept for the service of Krishna. We are not of the mentality of Ravana who took Lakshmi from Narayana and became ruined. Keep Lakshmi and Narayana always together and you will become as powerful as Hanuman. He is always worshiped along with Lord Rama and Lakshmi, Sita.”

From a letter to Amarendra on June 12, 1972:

More and more I am urging my students to recognize the grave responsibility which is theirs for saving this fallen human society from gliding down into hell.”

From a letter to Makanlala on January 10, 1972:

Our routine work – rising early, cleansing, chanting, temple worship, sankirtana, study – these things must go on very nicely, and if they become improved more and more, and are not neglected or in any way decreased, then all our other activities will be successful.”

From a class on Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.13.15 in Geneva on June 4, 1974:

We have created these GBCs. So they should be very responsible men; otherwise, they will be punished. They will be punished to become a sudra. Although Yamaraja is a GBC, but he made a little mistake, he was punished to become a sudra. So those who are GBC, they should be very, very careful to administer the business of ISKCON. Otherwise they will be punished. As the post is very great, similarly, the punishment is also very great.”

Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami:

“They were singing ‘Jagannatha Swami’
which I don’t like as much
as the Hare Krishna mantra.

“The devotees are my people, and Krishna is our God. Prabhupada is our spiritual father, and he saved us from material life and nominal religion. I may not be an intense mixer with the larger society of devotees, but I respect them. I should not commit offenses to them, even in my mind.”

“Srila Prabhupada. I remember him
especially from the early days
when he saved me from my fate
on the Lower East Side.

“He was just starting his American
campaign. And I was declining
fast when I met him.

“He lifted me out of my history,
my identification with marijuana
and madness, LSD.

“I became his good son
and disciple, clean cut
and responsible. He made
me secretary of ISKCON.

“I will remember those months
to my last hour and
hope for the best.”

“The devotee who has stopped his chanting because of the ghosts in his temple must be listening to ‘ghosts’ within his own mind, because Krishna in His holy name is more powerful than any material illusory energy.”

“As Krishna turned the two Arjuna trees into beautiful demigods by tearing them down, so the holy names can tear down the ignorance that frightens one and dissuades one from chanting.”

In the Beth Israel Hospital, Swamiji woke from sleep, sat up and said, ‘I do not know Krishna. I only know my Guru Maharaja.’”

As one enters old age, more bodily troubles pop up. It’s no fun. Disease is one of the four basic miseries of conditioned life: birth, death, disease and old age. They bar the attempt for uninterrupted happiness in this world. Happiness is temporarily staving off one of the natural miseries. My body is a temple of disease. Chronic daily headaches, urinary tract infection, enlarged prostate, frequent urination, kidney stones, crippled ankle causing difficulty in walking, and who knows what other diseases that haven’t been detected yet or are just around the corner.”

I have much to be grateful for. Prabhupada wrote me a note in 1974: ‘You are pure. May Krishna protect you from calamities.’ I have proven myself impure and have not avoided some serious calamities. But I believe I still have Prabhupada’s blessings because he is the embodiment of compassion and forgiveness. ‘I am never displeased with any member.’ He intercedes for us. Knowing this, I maintain equilibrium.”

Wash out the infections in your mind and heart. It can be done by the chanting charms.”

The chanting charms are felt by those who know the art of chanting to please Krishna. It becomes a thrilling exercise for them. The bland chanter counts his quota, devoid of bliss. He hits a home run into the upper deck rarely. He has to improve his swing by hard work.”

The son may say the father is distant from him, but it is not a fact. Their natural intimacy has been disturbed by alienation. I have cast Krishna out by my rebellion and indifference, but He remains in my heart, looking over me. ‘No God—no peace. Know God—know peace’—sign outside a church. Introduce Krishna to your speech, to your attention. Reintroduce Him as your master, through your spiritual master.”

Krishna is the life of my life. I become covered over by the network of maya, and I forget Him. I become caught up by the worldly distractions. It is the greatest personal and worldwide tragedy when we forget Him. We try to solve our problem with non-Krishna solutions. Krishna is the savior; He is all we need.”

Love of God is our natural and blissful state of being. A person who has attained it is the most fortunate person in the world. A symptom of love of Krishna is wanting to tell others about Krishna.”

Those who serve Radha and Krishna with devotion in this world have an impression of the spiritual world. They love to chant Their names and serve Them and hear of Their pastimes. When devotees are intensely and exclusively engaged in Krishna consciousness, then it is very much like the spiritual world.”

One morning, he posed a question:
‘What if people knew of the spiritual world—Who wouldn’t want to go there?’
We argued back, ‘But they don’t believe there is such a place.’ 
‘Yes,’ he countered, ‘but what if there is such a place? Who wouldn’t want to go?’
We all agreed everyone would like to transfer to the world of eternity, bliss and knowledge. Hearing such things from his mouth, spontaneously spoken, was inspiring and faith-building.”

Thus he [Srila Prabhupada] remained the king on his walks, defeating all enemies and generously nourishing his followers. The walks were a high point in the day.”

Disease, old age and death are inevitable. If I am Krishna conscious, my end of life should not alarm me. I’ll go to a better, more spiritual next life. I’m just a tiny spirit soul and cannot prolong my life past its destined time of departure. I’ll ‘disappear’ when Time and Krishna determine. I can only surrender and increase my laulyam to join with Krishna and His associates in the spiritual world. I can increase my faith that He and Prabhupada will take care of me.”

I could say there is spiritual advancement that even an old man can make. He can drop his attachments to prestige, his envy, his lust, his anger and resentment. He can continue to chant the holy names with devotion until his dying day. He can go on hearing and reading about Krishna, and try to be kind to others. These will all count in his favor. Do what you can and leave the results up to the Lord, who definitely loves you and wants what is best for you.”

One thing about the Mr. Payne incident [in which a real estate man cheated the devotees] is that Śrila Prabhupada never held any grudge against Brahmananda or any of us. He was even willing to take the loss of the money if it had to be. He loved us, even as blundering children, because we were sincerely dedicated to his wishes.”

Krishna is our ishta-devata, our favorite Deity. In His Vraja cowherd boy form, He sports in the ways associated with that place. Nowadays, it is much different than it was five thousand years ago, but sincere souls still feel the presence of Krishna beneath the dirty veneer.”

You are operating under weakened conditions. The sail on your boat is ripped, you are taking in water. Or as Prabhupada said on old age and not feeling well, ‘The windows are broken, but there is still a light on inside.' He had wonderful ways of saying things, which we should keep and say ourselves. We cannot imitate him in all manners, but we can follow. Now our time gas tank says ‘empty,' so drive into the gas station and be prepared to pay up while you still have the money.”

The Vaishnava acaryas have written enough hari-katha for us to read twenty-four hours a day for our whole life. Prabhupada told me that personally in 1966. I had doubted him. I did not know the breadth of the Vaishnava literature back in 1966. Krishna’s stories and philosophy are unending. Poems, songs, dramas, and dissertations have been given to us by the best minds of the centuries.”

Thoreau said, ‘Time is a pond I go fishing in.’ Aside from the violent fishing reference, the saying captures the mood of peaceful leisure for contemplation.”

We should be forgiving as an aspect of humility. Who are we to stand in judgment of others, since we are so fallen ourselves? It is a kind of arrogance coming from one who is still in material illusion about his or her own position. I forgive because I seek Krishna’s mercy. He wants me to forgive. It is hardhearted not to forgive, and a Vaishnava is softhearted. We see our own frailty and want to be forgiven our sins. So we should extend the same to others. Do unto others as you wish them to do unto yourself. You can also try to see the good in other persons, even though they have some fault for which they need forgiveness. This is especially true in the case of devotees. Krishna says, api cet su-duracaro. One who is rightly situated, who has accepted Krishna as his protector, can never be seen as unforgivable. His or her faults are like spots on the moon. Think of all the good a devotee has done, and consider the thing that you can’t forgive as just a bump on their spiritual path. They need your forgiveness, so don’t withhold it from them. They (I) am crying out for your forgiveness. So please don’t withhold it from me. Be like a mother who forgives the child, even when wayward, again and again. Be worthy of forgiveness, not unworthy. You give great relief to the guilty person when you give them your mercy of forgiveness. And so it is a great act of large-heartedness and love when you can do it. It stems from your original love of Krishna, who, as I say, wants you to be a forgiving person. Therefore, you should work on it. When you feel faultfinding or your inability to forgive, struggle to overcome it.””

Letter writing is good too. You have to be convinced that talking about Krishna is real and the highest good. Reading the Bhagavatam inspires this. It is its own declaration.”

But we should not be of troubled spirits; Krishna has set things right for His devotees. They understand that if they are in a difficult situation, it’s for their own good and purification, and that Krishna always loves them and will save them in the end. They have similar trust in the spiritual master.”

The gopis gave and did everything for the pleasure of Krishna. They did so out of natural attraction. I cannot do so. I perform my devotional service under rules and regulations with a sense of obligation.”

I just read for an hour in chapter four of Adi-lila of Caitanya-caritamrita. This is the most wondrous achievement of Srila Krishnadasa Kaviraja and Srila Prabhupada and his Bhaktivedanta purports. By studying Śri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, we can understand Srimati Radharaṇi, and by studying Srimati Radharani, we can understand Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.”

You take life easily, as if you had all the time in the world. The fact is different. The fact is your time is very limited, and you should be immersed in bhajana, but you are not, not twenty-four hours a day. You do your minimum quotas and then float. You could be reading more and chanting more. Within your health limits, there is still time to improve and increase your contact with hari-katha and harinama. I’m preaching to myself and to anyone who reads this.”

It should be easy to think of Him. Just think of Him charging Bhisma with Arjuna’s chariot, and Bhisma ready to face death. Krishna took up the wheel of the chariot and threatened Bhisma to leave Arjuna alone or die on the spot. Think of Him standing on the chariot and instructing the bewildered, grief-stricken Arjuna in Bhagavad-gita. Think of Him playing in the Vraja forests with the cowherd boys and nonchalantly killing demons sent by Kamsa. Think of Him expanded into 16,108 forms, with the same number of queens and the same number of palaces in Dvaraka. With each queen, He was engaged in different domestic activities, and this amazed His visitor Narada. Think of Him seated at the dinner table with His father Nanda Maharaja and His mother Yashoda. Think of Him teasing the gopis with His tollgate. Think of Him wheeling the ass demon Dhenukasura and his donkey friends, killing them and throwing them in the trees, which all collapsed. Think of Him receiving diplomatic advice from Uddhava. Think of Him fleeing the battlefield as Rancor, so as to give His devotee Mucukunda the chance to annihilate the Yavana king. Think of Him beheading Sisupala. Think of Him attending Sandipani Muni’s gurukula and fetching His dead son as a guru-daksina. Think of Him saving the lizard from the well. Think of Him manifesting His universal form to Mother Yashoda and again to Arjuna. Think of Him saving Draupadi from being disrobed in the vicious assembly of the Kurus. Think of Him chastising the Kaliya snake and extinguishing the forest fire. Think of him controlling all the universes through His Vishnu expansions. Think of Him in your heart. Think of His desire to bring all living entities back to Godhead. Do not say you cannot think of Krishna.”

Be kind to all living entities, as hard as that is to achieve.”

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has come in this age to kill the demons with cultural weapons, the chanting of the holy names. A small band is carrying it out. Not just one person, but sankirtana, congregations. One by one you pick them up in the sea of chanting. It works in ways unseen.”

[On doing a question and answer booth at a Ratha-yatra:] “Relax when people come up to you and just want to pass the time. Ask them how they are doing. Show interest; be philosophical and friendly. Sit in a chair, and ask them to sit beside you. This is tolerance and patience and compassion. Pace yourself with your inner clock and pulse. It’s going to be all right. Krishna is in control.”

Śrila Prabhupada’s translation of the guru gayatri mantra is intriguing: ‘Let me try to understand my spiritual master, who is always in blissful Krishna consciousness. Let me meditate upon him being enthused, just as he enthuses us.’ He says, ‘Let me try to understand.’ He does not say, ‘Let me understand.’ This implies the understanding of the spiritual master is a very deep thing, not immediately grasped. To me, it implies knowing him in his siddha-svarupa, or eternal form in his relationship with Krishna in the spiritual world. We cannot concoct this or imagine it. But it will come to us by regular prosecution of his instructions and practice of devotional service when we are at the mature stage. ‘Let me try to understand my spiritual master’ also means understanding him in his books. That is more accessible than reaching the stage of understanding his siddha-svarupa. It means, let me study the Bhaktivedanta purports to the Srimad-Bhagavatam and all his other books. Their meanings have many levels, and only by prolonged study of the books can we come to understand him and the Krishna consciousness he presents. As Prabhupada said, ‘If you want to understand me, read my books.’ This is understanding Prabhupada as the medium to Krishna, as the instructor in his sannyasa guru form, as the one we saw and served in his presence from 1966 to 1977, and even today. Only by understanding his books and faithfully applying ourselves to them will Krishna be pleased with us and reveal to us further secrets of the identity of the spiritual master.

The second half of the mantra speaks about enthusiasm: ‘Let me meditate upon him being enthused, just as he enthused us.’ Srila Prabhupada was very enthusiastic to preach. We see this in his personal, tireless efforts to spread the Krishna consciousness movement all over the world. In the scriptures, it is said that only one who is directly empowered by Krishna can spread the holy name all over the world. Prabhupada was so empowered by the Krishna shakti that he started from a very humble beginning and personally supervised his movement until it grew to thousands of disciples and over a hundred temples. He made us enthusiastic by his example and by his personal instruction. He inspired us. He showed us that if we wanted his personal favor, we had to preach also, like him—‘just as he enthused us.’ If we are initiated by a disciple of Śrila Prabhupada, the same mood of the mantra prevails. We thank our spiritual master and meditate on how he has linked us to Śrila Prabhupada and the parampara. We try to understand the mystery of this connection, and we are faithful to it. We trust his blissful Krishna consciousness and enthusiasm, and respond with our own. We should not be morose or doubtful, but blissful in the sac-cid-ananda realization of Krishna consciousness.”

I do not fear death as much as I fear the indignity of deterioration and hopeless pain.”

The passing away of Sadaputa Prabhu, our precious scientist. He wrote so many groundbreaking books. Kept abreast of the latest in science and could defy all their atheistic arguments. A great loss to our movement.”

We speak of our lackings; we lament them, but we don’t omit them in our writing. We hold up a mirror to our own face, and when a reader looks into it (hears it), he sees his own face, his own lackings. He gains actual self-realization of where he or she is at in Krishna consciousness. At least that is the strategy I work with.”

After yesterday’s comment on my writing, I feel more confident that it is a species of Krishna consciousness. It’s a choo-choo train bearing a long trail of railroad cars pulled by a mighty engine. It’s a cornucopia pouring fruits and fresh produce out of a conch-like horn. It’s jazz improvisation by a veteran tenor sax man or the upbeat playing of a practiced quartet. It’s repeated attempts by a student of script to make a perfect calligraphy. It’s a devotee giving a Srimad-Bhagavatam lecture and moving from analogy to analogy, going on tangents and returning to the theme of the day’s sloka and purport. It’s a ‘blood, sweat and tears’ honest effort. It’s a stage magician with an unending grab bag of tricks. It’s a man in a time of drought praying for rain and then going outdoors joyously to catch the drops when the rain starts to fall. It’s a man mowing his lawn, a farmer cutting down his corn stalks. It’s children at play, or an old bhakta continuing to play his mrdanga and sing bhajanas in a cracked voice. It’s TKG giving what disciples called his ‘state of the union lectures,’ in which he departed from the strict deliverance of scripture and told them exactly what his plans were and what was on his mind. It’s a daily journal interspersed with summaries of Caitanya-caritamrita and Srimad-Bhagavatam. It’s an author trying to deliver speech pleasurable to the ear, as described in the penance of speech in the Seventeenth Chapter of Bhagavad-gita. It’s my early BTG essays, which pleased Śrila Prabhupada, transformed by evolution by time and style, but still trying to please him. It’s all this and more, twenty midgets climbing out of a tiny circus automobile. It’s plain fare, kitri and rotis, being served daily. Keeping the hand moving and trying to repeat the words of the spiritual master in one’s own original voice. The things I did and the events I feared would happen but never did. Writing words until the last breath, like Madhvacarya, who died while writing a tika.

Jayadvaita Swami:

Lord Vishnu is never attached to the material energy, and Lord Shiva is married to the material energy.

We are proud of our bodies, but the Bhagavatam says the bodies are just bags, and bags of what? Bile, mucous, and air.

We have to get some taste from our speaking. The sadhus, the swanlike persons, take pleasure in discussing the glories of Krishna, but the materialistic, crowlike people, take pleasure in criticizing others.

Offenses to sadhus make our godly qualities diminish like the waning moon.

I know people who are otherwise good devotees who get on the internet and criticize those who have dedicated their lives to propagating the holy name. It is madness. Besides disturbing people’s minds, it destroys the rare opportunity they have for self-realization.

Q (by Jaya Goracand Prabhu): We see some devotees criticize Vaishnavas, but at the same time they seem to have a sincere attitude of service to guru and Krishna.
A: It could be it is just a matter of time. Here after blaspheming Shiva, Daksa went on to perform more sacrifices, but later he suffered so much.

Q: Suppose our parents blaspheme Krishna or the devotees, and we cannot walk away?
A: Try not to speak in such a way as to provoke them. Try changing the topic. Try avoiding their company.

Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhu, who was an artist, wanted to present a
murti of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura to Krishnadas Babaji Maharaja. We found him at one of the Gaudiya Maths in Vrindavan. He was sitting on a bed. When he was presented the murti, he chanted the Hare Krishna mantra loudly and clearly for twenty or thirty minutes, and then said, “Installed.”

The instruments are meant to attract attention to the holy name of Krishna, but the holy name is the main thing.

We used to do harinama on Fifth Avenue, from 42nd Street to 59th Street, and then back down again, for hours a day. It used to be that no movie about New York City was complete without the Hare Krishnas on Fifth Avenue.

I came to devotional service from a record album.

Lord Vishnu is like a parent. If you want something useful, He will give it to you, but if you want something that will be bad for you, He will not give it. Lord Shiva, however, grants any benediction. Thus intelligent people worship Vishnu for selected benedictions.

Although Lord Shiva gives benedictions to both those looking for material enjoyment and those looking for liberation, Daksa was so envious he found fault with this auspicious being.

Comments by me:

A UK devotee went to college. In a class on sales, the professor showed different examples of the different techniques. Then he showed a video of a harinama and pointed out that it included all the techniques he had mentioned and that everyone on the street was attracted by the devotees’ presentation.

In South Africa a bhakti-sastri teacher told me that in Johannesburg the devotees used to do half an hour of harinama for a block or so around the temple both after breakfast and in the afternoon. There was one man who would come out on to his veranda every day and say nasty things to the devotees. The devotee telling the story said he traveled to another region to teach bhakti-sastri for some weeks, and when he returned that man had joined the temple.

End of comments by me.

If we are grhasthas we should not pretend to be renunciates and never talk to our wives.

As an expert cook doesn’t use the cookbook required for a neophyte but cooks very nicely, an advanced devotee does not have to follow all the rules of the Vedas necessary for beginning practitioners.

If we follow, we become leaders for the whole world. If we do not follow we cause disturbance in Vaishnava society, and ultimately for the whole society.

If you can lift Govardhan Hill, you can dance with the gopis.

We need a guru to know what to do and what not to do.

Either dress as we are dressing, in the traditional dress, or as ladies and gentleman, but not like hippies. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons always dress respectably because they want people to take their message seriously. Finally the question of dress is not very important, either this way or that way. It is not worth a campaign, either this way or that way. Our campaign is “smartavyah satatam vishnur vismartavyo na jatucit – Always remember Lord Vishnu and never forget Him.”

Sati accuses her father in effect of being a person who attends a sacrifice just to take prasadam.

Those who are unfortunate cannot appreciate the holy name, prasadam, the deity of Vishnu, or the devotee of the Lord.

The opulent possessions of the materialists are like sand castles on the beach.

It is said if a vanaprastha cannot do his duties because of infirmity according to the scripture, one may give up eating and drinking and end his life. Even in America and Europe, if an old person stops eating and drinking it is not considered suicide.

Rama Raya Prabhu:

To be tricked in the material world is a bad thing, but when Krishna tricks us into engaging in devotional service that is good thing.

What is the power of the pure devotee? Now 47 years after his disappearance we are all engaged in Srila Prabhupada’s service.

The pure devotee comes to this material world to get us out of this material world.

Sri Prahlada Prabhu:

Bhagavad-gita 7.8, where Krishna describes Himself to be the taste in water and the light of the sun and the moon, sounds like pantheism, but Krishna also reveals Himself in the Gita to be the source of creation and to be existing beyond it.

All our abilities are given by Krishna and can be taken away in a second.

When Srila Prabhupada's secretary asked Srila Prabhupada why he watched the Charlie Chaplin movie, he explained that Charlie Chaplin's humor is very original, and Krishna is the original source of all humor.

Paramatma gives people their karma impartially. The devotees, however, go out and give Krishna to people, and that is not under the law of karma.

Param Brahma Prabhu:

Even if you conquer over the six enemies of the mind, you still have to worry about being attacked by hypocrisy and deceit.

It is a great fault to correct our seniors. They have their own people designated to correct them. We should not risk our spiritual life by correcting them.

Preaching to members of the opposite sex is dangerous.

If we mind our own business, we can avoid so much trouble.

Arjunananda Prabhu:

Material nature makes goats out of us.

Srimad-Bhagavatam is stories of people attaining good fortune. How? By a Vaishnava entering their lives and opening their bhakti account, and then they start investing.

Narada Muni, in a disguised form, chanted Vishnu just before Hiranyakasipu impregnated his wife, so both the husband and wife had Vishnu on their minds, and thus their child became a great devotee.

Our real good fortune begins when we actively take shelter of the practice of pure devotional service.

We advise people to leave their jobs for a year and take shelter of Krishna because the tendency is that if one has a job he does not take full shelter of Krishna.

-----

In every religion so many rules and regulations are there. This verse from Padma Purana reminds us of the ultimate goal, remembrance of the Supreme Lord. If this is lacking, we are following the rules and regulations in vain. Remembrance of the Supreme Lord is so auspicious it can completely purify us of all material contamination and situate us in love of God. May you always remember the Supreme Lord.

smartavyah satatam vishnur

vismartavyo na jatucit
sarve vidhi-nisedhah syur
etayor eva kinkarah

Lord Vishnu [Krishna is the origin of Vishnu] should always be remembered and never forgotten at any time. All the rules and prohibitions mentioned in the sastras should be the servants of these two principles.” (Padma Purana, quoted in Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya 22.113)

Srila Jiva Goswami Disappearance
→ Ramai Swami

Appearing as the nephew of Sri Rupa and Sanatana Gosvamis, Sri Jiva Gosvami displayed all the charming features of a mahapurusa (divine person). He had lotus eyes, a high nose and forehead, broad chest, long arms, and a radiant golden body. 

In his boyhood he made a Deity of Krishna-Balarama. Ex­pressing his pure devotion, he would often cry while worshiping Them. After offering clothes, candana, flowers, ornaments, and tasty sweets to Krishna-Balarama he would take some and give maha-prasadam to his playmates. 

From the beginning Jiva showed his kindness to other jivas (living entities). Jiva was so much at­tached to Krishna-Balarama that at bedtime he would embrace his Deities and fall asleep. His parents thought he was only playing. But the villagers rejoiced to see Jiva’s love for Krishna-Balarama.

 In school he quickly mastered Sanskrit grammar, poetry, logic, philosophy. Srimad Bhagavatam gave life to his life. Knshn’d-katha filled him with happiness. No one dared to speak to him about anything but Krishna. 

He toured Navadvipa-dhama with Sri Nityananda Prabhu, studied Sanskrit in Benares, and then resided in Vrndavana. After humbly serving Sri Rupa Gosvami by washing his feet, preparing his manuscripts, and editing his books he received diksa.

After the disappearance of Sri Rupa and Sri Sanatana Gosvamis, Sri Jiva Gosvami became the Gaudiya Sampradayacarya to guide all Vaisnavas in Navadvipa, Vrndavana, Jagannatha Puri. 

Although he was the undisputed leader, he always acted as a humble servant of all the jivas. Whenever Bengali Vaisnavas visited Vrndavana he would lovingly receive them, arrange for prasadam and comfortable rooms, an even guide them on Vraja mandala parikrama.

A superexcellent Sanskrit scholar, Sri Jiva Gosvami would compose Sanskrit verses in his mind and write them down without changing anything. Write them down means he used a metal stylus to permanently etch them in palm leaves. 

This inscription method left no room for erasing, editing, rewriting, or running a spell-check. Yet, each verse was a priceless gem of perfect meter, rhythm, poetry, and meaning. He was the greatest philosopher in all of Indian history. Contemporary Sankritists call him the greatest scholar who ever lived.

Sri Jiva Gosvami was the youngest but most prolific writer among the Gosvamis. He wrote an astounding half million Sanskrit verses (about 25 books). His books prove that Sri Caitanya’s philosophy gives the essence of Vedic wisdom and the perfection of religion. Gopala Campu, Sat Sandarbhas, and Had Nama-vyakarana are three of his most famous works. 

The San­darbhas firmly establish the transcendental truths of Srimad Bhagavatam. They also confirm that Lord Sri Krishna is the Supreme Absolute Truth (svayam bhagavan), the cause of every­thing and the source of all avataras. Anyone who faithfully reads these books will become a devotee of Krishna.

At the request of Acaryarani Jahnava Devi Thakurani, Sri Jiva Gosvami had Srinivasa Acarya, Narottama Dasa Thakura, Syamananda Prabhu take the Gosvami’s writings from Vrndavana to Bengal. They translated them into Bengali and distributed them throughout Bengal and Orissa. They also preached extensively and initiated hundreds of devotees. 

In 1542, Sri Jiva Gosvami established the worship Sri-Sri Radha-Damodara in Seva Kunja, Vrndavana. His samadhi stands in the temple compound. Sri Jiva Gosvami is Vilasa-manjari in Radha-Damodara’s nitya Vrndavana lila.

Деревянные падуки Господа Чайтаньи! / Lord Caitanya’s Wooden Shoes!
→ Traveling Monk

На днях посетили Патбари, что в деревне Баранаджар в 15 километрах от Калькутты. 500 лет тому назад в Патбари находился ашрам Бхагавата Ачарьи, великого преданного Господа Чайтаньи, упомянутого и в”Чайтанья Чаритамрите”, и в “Чайтанья Бхагавате”. Живущие здесь садху содержат знаменитый музей, где хранится множество предметов, связанных с Господом Чайтаньей и играми Его преданных. Наиболее примечательны деревянные падуки (сандалии) Господа Чайтаньи. Они очень старые. То, что от них осталось, заключили в деревянные колодки большего размера. Если внимательно посмотреть, на фотографиях обуви видны желтые части в центре. Это и есть то, что осталось от обуви Махапрабху спустя 500 лет.

Среди других экспонатов музея – кусочек одежд Мадхавендры Пури, кусочек чадара Нарахари Саракара, гороскоп Господа Чайтаньи, написанный от руки Ниламбхарой Чакраварти, одна бусина джапы Джаядевы Госвами, фрагмент мешочка для четок Харидаса Тхакура, фрагменты одеял Господа Чайтаньи и Господа Нитьянанды и кувшин для воды Господа Чайтаньи.

К сожалению, многое по небрежению в плохом состоянии, чуть не разваливается. Я предложил помощь по сохрану, и местные лидеры обдумывают мою просьбу. Фотографировать в самом музее запрещено, но деревянные падуки Господа Чайтаньи и территорию вокруг ашрама фотографировать разрешили. Харе Кришна!

May be an image of 1 person, flute and text

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?vanity=indradyumna&set=a.10227747448374652&cft[0]=AZWnePbz0sadxDMAbXwxdrEMFy8jv00irB9evMuERSPFksty2mjerxylfKTn0xcvgrcffEOcqZJ95hv13-TxhKiDqjRYUOAUnOE_uRAD4zNGsg&tn=-R

The other day we visited Pathbari, in the village of Baranajar, 15 kilometers from Kolkata. Pathbari was the place where Bhagavata Acarya, a great devotee of Lord Caitanya mentioned in both Caitanya Caritamrita and Caitanya Bhagavat, had his ashram 500 years ago. The sadhus who live there now maintain a famous museum with many articles associated with Lord Caitanya and His devotees’ pastimes. Most significantly there are the wooden ‘padukas’ ( shoes ) of Lord Caitanya. Because they are so old and have deteriorated, the remains are encased in a larger wooden shoe. If you look closely at the shoes in the photos you’ll notice the yellow portion in the center. That is what is left of Mahaprabhu’s shoes after 500 years. Amongst many of the other items in the museum are a small piece of Madhavendra Puri’s cloth, a small portion of a chaddar of Narahari Sarkar, the horoscope of Lord Caitanya hand-written by Nilambhara Chakravarti, a single japa bead of Jayadeva Goswami, a piece of Haridas Thakur’s bead bag, a piece each of the blankets of Lord Caitanya and Lord Nityananda and a waterpot of Lord Caitanya. Unfortunately, many of the items are in very bad shape due to neglect, even to the point of disintegrating. I offered to help preserve them and the authorities there are considering my request. Photos are not allowed inside the museum itself, but we were allowed to photo Lord Caitanya’s wooden shoes and the area around the ashram. Hare Krsna!

Bhakti Sanga Interview With HG Chaitanya Charan Prabhu Dec 2024
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Thank you so much for accepting the invitation for this interview. I feel very fortunate to have met you about 10 days ago in the UAE, where we had a wonderful class with you. I’d love to hear how you were introduced to Krishna Consciousness, Prabhuji, and how your journey has unfolded over the years.

I was introduced to Krishna Consciousness during my college days when I was studying engineering. I would say there were three main factors that led me to embrace Krishna Consciousness: intellectual, social, and relational—more spiritual in nature.

Krishna is the ultimate master in our lives, and I like to summarize it with the acronym SIR. The “S” stands for social. From childhood, I had a deep interest in the power of education to transform people. While in college, I was involved in a social welfare organization, where I volunteered to teach uneducated and poorly educated children in slums, offering free tuition in various subjects.

While doing this, I observed that many of the children came from dysfunctional families, with issues such as domestic violence and alcoholism. It made me wonder how much teaching subjects like history, math, or English would truly help them in the long term. To address this, we brought in anti-alcohol campaigners to speak to the families. We managed to encourage the fathers, who were mostly alcoholics, to give up drinking, and we considered it a great success.

However, when I returned after my semester break, I found that not only had the fathers relapsed, but their children had also started drinking. The local elections had taken place in the interim, and one of the candidates had brought in truckloads of free liquor to woo voters. That made me realize that even though we were trying to help by providing education or employment, everyone has these inner “trap doors” — self-destructive habits — and opening external doors without the ability to close those inner traps wouldn’t bring lasting change.

I saw that this wasn’t just a problem in underprivileged slum areas, but it was prevalent everywhere, even in my college. Many intelligent students were sabotaging their potential through unhealthy habits. A close friend of mine was struggling with alcoholism and couldn’t seem to give it up. I also had anger issues. That’s when I came across Bhagavad Gita, and verse 3.36 really stood out to me: What is it that impels us to self-destructive actions? This became a crucial question for me, and I started studying the Gita to understand the answer.

I applied its teachings in my life, invited speakers to my hostel to discuss the Gita, and noticed significant improvements. My anger issues subsided, my friend overcame alcoholism, and I realized that this knowledge was of real value.

After completing my engineering degree, I started working at a software company in India while also teaching Bhagavad Gita at various colleges in small study groups during the evenings. One evening, I had a study group meeting scheduled, but my boss told me I had to stay late to meet a project deadline. I explained I’d come back early the next morning, but he insisted I stay. I tried to arrange for someone else to lead the group, but no one was available, so we had to cancel the session.

That night, as I walked back to my place around midnight, it struck me that if I didn’t write the software programs, there were thousands of others who could do it—many of them probably even better than I could. But if I didn’t teach the Bhagavad Gita, how many others were there who could do that? I realized I could contribute much more to society by studying and sharing the Gita’s wisdom than by writing software programs.

This was the social aspect of why I chose to pursue Krishna Consciousness. It’s one of the main reasons my focus has always been on teaching. I never ventured into management or other areas. I was deeply moved by the power of education. If we equip people with knowledge, we give them the resources to choose to improve their lives, if they so desire.

The second factor was intellectual. I always strived to be the number one in my class, and while I was consistently among the top students, I never made it to the top of the entire university or across all divisions. This created a nagging sense of disappointment in me.

However, I had an aptitude for language from childhood, which led me to excel in English. While many Indian students typically do well in mathematics and analytical subjects but struggle with English, I did exceptionally well in it. Not only did I top my college, but I also became the top scorer in the entire Pune University, making history as the first student to do so at that time.

I was delighted when I first became aware of my achievement, but soon I realized that simply looking at the marks didn’t bring much happiness. It was when others congratulated me that I felt a sense of fulfillment. Yes, I became somewhat of a celebrity in my college, but then something strange happened: one after another, three of my friends forgot to congratulate me. They weren’t extremely close friends, but they were reasonable friends. They probably thought, “Everyone knows it. Everyone has congratulated him, so why do we need to?”

When the first friend forgot, I was annoyed. When the second friend forgot, I was irritated. By the third friend, I was enraged. I didn’t want to sound pathetic, but I found myself wondering why they hadn’t congratulated me. Suddenly, I felt as though I was observing myself from above. It dawned on me that I had thought becoming a topper would make me happy, but instead, it had made me more dependent on others for my happiness. I had gone from being content hanging out with my friends to becoming needy when I was with them.

I started reflecting on my life. I thought about my future achievements: perhaps I could get into an Ivy League university, publish papers in Nature or Science, or become a best-selling author. I had always dreamed of intellectual success, and I thought these things might bring me happiness. But I realized that even if I achieved all of that, I would still be dependent on others for my happiness. This realization led me back to the Bhagavad Gita, particularly verse 6.22, where Krishna speaks about the stage of samadhi. He describes a state of such inner enrichment that we no longer crave for anything more, nor do we lament when something bad happens.

When I read that, I realized that this is the real achievement in life. No external achievement—whether academic, professional, or material—can free us from craving or lamenting. Only this inner state of contentment can bring true fulfillment. I decided that this was what I should aspire for, and that’s what I’m still striving for.

From an intellectual perspective, I had always wanted to be at the top of my class. While I was often among the top, I was never the number one across the entire university or in all divisions. That created a nagging sense of disappointment in me. However, I had a natural aptitude for languages, and I excelled in English, which many Indian students typically struggle with. I didn’t just top my college; I became the top scorer in Pune University, making history as the first student to achieve that distinction.

From a relational perspective, my father always had a traveling job, and it was my mother who took care of me. When I was in 10th grade, just after my exams, my mother was diagnosed with terminal blood cancer and passed away within a month. This was a traumatic experience that left me feeling emotionally numb. I started questioning the purpose of relationships—what is the point of having them if they can be so fleeting?

During that time, I had read about Christian saints and some Indian swamis, and I decided then that I would never get married. I wanted to focus on my education and outreach. However, when I read the Bhagavad Gita, especially verses 10.8 and 10.9, I realized that relationships are not just about understanding with the head, but also directing our emotions toward Krishna. I understood that my own emotional withdrawal, my shutting down from relationships, was meant to be directed toward Krishna and those who are connected with Him.

That realization led me naturally to pursue Krishna Consciousness not only as a spiritual practice but also in the form of monastic life, aiming to stay within the community of devotees and direct my love toward Krishna.

Thank you for sharing such an inspiring journey, Prabhuji.

You mentioned how we often have this false ego, where we desire appreciation from others. I resonate with this, as I, too, sometimes feel the need for others’ validation. It was a valuable realization when you said that we often look to others for our happiness, and not in what we achieve ourselves. It made me realize that this could indeed be a form of false ego.

However, as you pointed out, it’s hard to categorize it as purely false ego. As humans, we have a basic need for appreciation. The difference, as you mentioned, is that false ego is about seeking glorification—public acknowledgment of our achievements—while the need for appreciation is more about receiving feedback within close relationships. For instance, after conducting this interview, I might want to know how well I asked the questions, and if you acknowledge that, it’s not about boosting my ego but about knowing whether I served the purpose well.

So, seeking appreciation is a natural human need, while glorification is driven by the ego. I now understand this distinction clearly. Thank you for helping me see the difference.

Now, about your question on how to maintain consistency in sadhana despite a busy schedule:

I often have multiple commitments every day, balancing various forums and activities. With constant travel, late-night flights, and irregular schedules, I realized that two things are crucial: we must take responsibility for our spiritual well-being, but at the same time, we cannot neglect our physical health.

There’s a letter from Srila Prabhupada where he says that if we don’t take care of our health now, even if we have the enthusiasm to serve Krishna, we won’t be able to. So, I’ve learned that we need to find a balance. When we start moving towards satvaguna, even a little, we understand the difference between what our body needs and what it craves. We need to rest when we need rest, but not sleep because we are lazy. We need to eat when we are hungry, but not give in to cravings.

It’s not always easy, but I try to avoid fighting against my body. I work with my body, understanding its needs. I make sure to get enough rest and then focus on my sadhana. I don’t follow strict rules for my schedule, but instead focus on what’s the responsible thing to do at a particular time. Sometimes, that means resting more; other times, it means pushing through to get something done. The key is to be mindful of my inner strength—whether I get irritated or upset if something goes wrong—and adjust accordingly.

It’s like a meter to gauge my spiritual strength. If I start getting too annoyed or too irritated, that’s an indication that my spiritual strength is low. Life is full of dualities, and if my reaction to these dualities is escalating, then it’s time to prioritize. For me, it’s not just about chanting; it’s more about immersing myself in scripture and spiritual wisdom. That’s what gives me strength.

If I find that I’m not being affected by the dualities too much, then I take some time off. I might disconnect from the phone, social media, and responding to messages. I can’t cancel speaking engagements, but I try to cut down on meetings. I carve out a period to immerse myself in shastra. Of course, I maintain my daily sadhana with chanting, scripture study, and writing. I also need time to contemplate the shastra and reflect on what I’ve taught in my classes.

Having some time to immerse myself in what gives me strength is essential. Once I take responsibility for myself, I ensure that I am doing what nourishes me spiritually. This helps me sustain myself in the long term.


Very beautifully explained, Prabhuji. What I understand from this is that we need to know how to sustain ourselves in bhakti. While our daily sadhana is important, we must also keep engaging in bhakti in ways that are sustainable for us.

In serious bhakti, there are two aspects: intensity and sustainability. Sometimes, in the name of intensity, we might do things that aren’t sustainable, and at other times, in the name of sustainability, we might lose intensity. Finding a balance between the two is not easy, but I think it’s something each of us needs to discover for ourselves.

For me, sustainability in chanting is an issue. I find it sustainable, but the intensity seems to be lacking. As you said, both sustainability and intensity should be there, Prabhuji. Thank you for helping me understand this better.

Prabhuji, according to your view, what is the most important quality a devotee should develop in themselves?

I think curiosity is a vital quality for a devotee. While endurance to hear is certainly important, I feel that curiosity plays a big role. A lot of problems within our devotee community and outside arise because of judgmentality. We often categorize things as “wrong,” “deviation,” or label people as “Mayavadis” or other such terms. But our philosophy teaches us to give up all labels, yet we still create labels for everything we don’t agree with.

The opposite of judgmentality is curiosity. Instead of labeling someone’s actions as wrong, we should ask, “What makes you think this is the right approach?” Everyone has a reason for what they do, even if it’s not very reasonable. Curiosity is an essential part of Brahma Jijnasa—the desire to understand the truth. It’s not just about realizing “I’m not the body; I am the soul” at the start of our spiritual journey. Curiosity should remain with us throughout our lives.

I have traveled across the world, and because of my outreach work, I meet not only the successful devotees but also those who have been alienated from the community due to harsh words or judgments. I believe very few people are inherently bad-hearted; most people don’t want to drive others away from Krishna. But judgmentality pushes people away.

In the devotee community, there’s often a tendency to categorize devotees as either “serious” or “insincere” based on whether they fit into a specific box. But Prabhupada accepted and appreciated both full-time devotees who traveled the world at his command and life members who served in various ways, even if they didn’t chant 16 rounds or get initiated.

So, I think curiosity is vital for devotees. Curiosity prevents judgmentality and the presumption of certainty that “this is right and everything else is wrong.” This kind of certainty can lead to fanaticism. Curiosity, on the other hand, is open-minded and humble.

Curiosity is not about devaluing what we know, but about valuing what we don’t know. It’s an intellectual humility, where we recognize that what we don’t know might be more important than what we do know. In this way, curiosity is non-different from humility. We may show physical humility by offering obeisances, but sometimes, we might still harbor a dehumanizing or dismissive attitude toward others.

If I know something about a person—say, they did something I don’t like—I should ask myself, “What don’t I know about this person?” If I have curiosity, it will prevent relationships from breaking down. This quality allows us to open our hearts to others and allows others to open their hearts to us. Without curiosity, we close ourselves off from others, leading to loneliness, especially for leaders. Leaders, who must set an example, often feel they can’t share their concerns or struggles with anyone, as it might reflect poorly on them.

So, curiosity helps us to avoid labels, to open our hearts, and to prevent relationship burnout in our spiritual lives.

I used to think, “You’re such an advanced devotee; how can you have worries?” But when there’s no curiosity, judgmentality takes over. Everyone starts acting based only on what other devotees might think about them. Instead of addressing our concerns, we worry about them, and that only leads to bigger problems down the line. A wound that is denied only doubles, and it becomes a much bigger issue in the long run.

Prabhuji, you mentioned that we tend to bury our concerns. Does that mean we’re not opening up to other devotees?

Yes, exactly. We feel others will judge us, and because of that, we don’t share our concerns. But this is what happens when we bottle things up. When we do speak to others, we think, “Devotees are merciful,” but often we don’t open up because we fear judgment. That’s why we need to develop curiosity as a general principle among devotees, though this takes time. On a more personal level, we can try to find like-minded devotees.

If you’re going through a situation, it helps to talk to someone in a similar situation. For example, if someone has lost their job and is feeling anxious, someone with financial security might just say, “Depend on Krishna,” or “This will pass.” While that’s true, it doesn’t always offer a practical solution. We need like-minded devotees who can give us both philosophical and practical advice. If someone only gives philosophical advice without any practical steps, it might not be as satisfying.

We need to take responsibility for finding like-minded devotees so that we can open our hearts and share with them.

Thank you, Prabhuji, that was very helpful. How were you introduced to Bhakti Sanga?

I think it was probably Shama Gauri Mataji who told me about the classes happening at Bhakti Sanga. It was after I started traveling abroad, in 2014, when I came across the online programs. I was amazed by the number of devotees who joined. I didn’t realize the scale of what was happening before that. I think I may have given one class before, but I don’t really remember. However, when I came abroad, I saw the full picture, and that was the first significant memory of Bhakti Sanga. Since then, I’ve been trying to serve in whatever way I can.

We should also thank Shama Gauri Mataji for bringing you here! We’ve been enjoying your deep perspectives in every class you give, both in Bhakti Sanga and in other places. Thank you for offering such valuable insights.

In the context of Krishna consciousness, if there’s one project you think would be beneficial, what would it be?

I believe that sharing shastric insights with the world is something we could do more of. Right now, philosophy is largely seen as a tool for converting people into bhakti, which is good. We study philosophy so we can inspire others and attract them to Krishna consciousness. However, philosophy can also help us make better sense of our own lives and the world around us. Even those who may not become devotees can benefit from the wisdom of shastra in a practical way.

I think we have insiders—teachers and students within our movement—and we also have outsiders. While insider-to-insider teachings (like Bhakti Sanga, Bhakti Shastri, or Bhakti Vaibhava) are important, there’s also the outsider-to-outsider connection we need to focus on.

For example, when we conduct Sunday programs or outreach events, those are insider-to-outsider engagements. But we’ve largely neglected the outsider-to-outsider connection, which is crucial for building our reputation. If someone doesn’t become a devotee, we might neglect them, but they can still be a well-wisher. Outsiders who are in positions of influence can help spread positive awareness about us.

Prabhupada also interacted with many prominent non-devotees. He spoke to people like Arnold Toynbee, not with the expectation that they would become devotees, but to build a meaningful relationship. If we can strengthen connections between insider teachers and outsider influencers, we can create a positive multiplier effect, spreading the wisdom of scripture even to those who may never join our movement.

Many other religions, like Islam and Buddhism, have done well in reaching out to influential outsiders. When there are extremist attacks, for instance, the first response is not to condemn the religion but to distance themselves from the extremists and prevent Islamophobia. Similarly, Buddhism is often seen as a peaceful, “cool” religion.

I think we, as a movement, should focus on engaging with outsiders in a way that doesn’t push them to convert, but allows them to be appreciative of the wisdom we offer. Our programs like Food for Life and Midday Meals are doing great humanitarian work, but I think we need more intellectual and philosophical outreach as well.

This is something that I feel is lacking, and I would love to contribute to it in any way I can.

As you said, yes, we try to make outsiders become insiders, but this perspective is really very nice. That is, um, that will be helpful also, as you said. And even in the case of, as you mentioned, one example is George Harrison. He was also not initiated, and my father just had and did become a follower. But then, he did being a follower so that people would not think that he had joined a cult. So, he was like, he used to chant, but never became initiated. So, I would say that, yeah, he was an outsider. Well, I think it was a little harsh to consider him an outsider, especially considering the amount of service that he did. So, even the categories of insider and outsider are not watertight.

You know, sometimes Ravindra Swarup was telling me that when they were doing outreach, at that time, becoming a devotee, when they were preaching, meant joining the temple and moving into the temple. That was the idea. He said that when he was president in Philadelphia, there were many Indians who started coming. They were coming every week, and when they were coming, we were really excited. We would preach to them and connect with them. But soon, they realized that these people were not going to enter the temple. The Indians had come to America for professional success and financial growth. Then he said, “These are not going to become devotees.” So, we would pay no attention to them, but they would still keep coming.

So, the situation was such that if any person on the streets had asked these people who were coming to our temples, “Which religious group do you belong to?” they would have said, “We are Hare Krishnas.” But if those same people had asked us, “Are these people Hare Krishnas?” we would have said, “No, they are not Hare Krishnas.” Because, just after some years, especially in the late 1980s, we started realizing that these people were actually committed. But their commitment was different—they were never going to become insiders in the sense of becoming residents of the temple. But that doesn’t mean they weren’t serious.

So, in that sense, sometimes the insider-outsider category is also subjective. So, I would hesitate to consider George Harrison an outsider. He called himself, uh, what were the words he used in the chant, “Hare Krishna and be happy.” We have a shorter version of that interview in the book, but there’s an unabridged interview in the VedaBase. There, I think he uses the words, “I am a plain clothes devotee,” something like that. “A plain clothes devotee” means he didn’t wear devotional attire, but he said, “I’m like… There’s another word, a closet devotee.” A closet devotee means you don’t show in public that you are a devotee. But he was very much devotionally inclined. So, if Prabhupada didn’t force him to become an insider, that is true.

So, in that sense, you could say he was not exactly an insider according to the conventional definitions of what an insider was expected to be in those times. But calling him an outsider is a bit too dismissive of the service he did. Thank you, thank you, Prabhuji.

You have been in Bhakti Sangha since around 2014, and it’s been 10 years now. You’ve seen how Bhakti Sangha is functioning. So, what do you think? Do you have any suggestions for us to improve Bhakti Sangha?

What you are doing is remarkable, and I feel that it has led to many others also being inspired and trying to do something similar at various levels. I saw that apart from the morning class, you also have other classes and multiple speakers. It’s become like a university in itself, with multiple departments and avenues of connecting with Shastra and encouraging others to connect with Shastra.

So, it’s a remarkable initiative. My only suggestion would be to spread the word around and inspire others. Not everybody may be able to join. I think you also have two or three different forums where people can join at different timings. But if people cannot join here, encourage them to create similar systems. Nowadays, there’s a lot of phenomenal outreach happening in the vernacular languages in India. I know some devotees who do regular classes in Telugu or Tamil, and they get several hundred devotees in the mornings. Some of these classes are centered around a particular person, while others are not.

I think the model you are using is excellent. Just try to expand or replicate it, perhaps in different languages for different people. Best wishes to all of you who are involved in sustaining this day after day, week after week, year after year.

The name, Bhakti Sangha, is also very nice, because we all need sangha in bhakti. I think many people took it up during the pandemic because there was no alternative. That was nice in one sense. You know, I had asked my spiritual master, Adhanatma Maharaj, that when the child is in the womb, and the child prays to Krishna, “I don’t want to come out of this womb because outside there is pleasure, but I hear there’s pain and realization; there is pain.” So, I am prayerful and devoted to you; I don’t want to come out here. But still, the child comes out. Is it that Krishna does not listen to the prayer?

Maharaj said, “No, Krishna always listens to our prayers, but Krishna does not want devotion under compulsion. If there was no alternative, that’s why you wanted to practice bhakti. Okay, it’s good that you practice bhakti then, but do you keep practicing bhakti even when those circumstances are not there?”

So, when the child is sent out of the womb, that is not Krishna rejecting the prayer of the child, but Krishna is, in one sense, testing the seriousness of the child’s devotion. Similarly, when there was no alternative, going online was something that everyone did, but you had started this long before that and continued long after that. So, it is devotion not out of compulsion but devotion out of innovation. It is devotion out of creativity—to create a forum for devotees to connect regularly.

Kudos to you! Continue it on. Thank you.

Thank you so much for your wonderful words for Bhakti Sangha. Yes, we are also trying to make it more accessible to all devotees all over the world. With your prayers and blessings, hopefully, we will make it even more accessible to all the devotees.

Thank you so much. So, with this, I think we can end the interview. We are very grateful to you for giving us your time and association once again for this interview. With your permission, we can end the interview with Vashma Pranams.

Thank you.

The post Bhakti Sanga Interview With HG Chaitanya Charan Prabhu Dec 2024 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

New Year Resolutions and Three Kinds of Determination GEV
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Today, let’s discuss determination and why it sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t. When we make resolutions, we often start with sincerity and earnestness. Yet, many times, we fail to stick to them. Why does this happen?

The Bhagavad Gita explains that one of the key steps in self-realization is understanding the forces that act within us. Often, we attempt to control the outer world, believing we can bend it to our will. However, our inner world is equally, if not more, important.

Sometimes, we feel as though something else takes over us—an inner demon that makes us act in ways we neither recognize nor approve of. In moments of anger, for instance, some people scream without substance, while others lose their ability to express themselves effectively. Both responses reflect an inner struggle.

The modes of material nature, as described in the Gita, are like invisible puppeteer strings within us. Unlike external ropes, these internal strings pull us from within, making it difficult to even realize their existence, let alone their influence.

Imagine this: the mind is like a TV, and the soul is a child watching it. The modes of material nature pull the mind in different directions, distracting and controlling us. Just like a person so absorbed in watching TV that they fail to notice a thief stealing it, we become so engrossed in our thoughts and desires that we lose control over ourselves.

The soul, however, is immovable and cannot be controlled directly. It is the mind that gets influenced. To regain control, we need to become aware of these internal forces and learn to transcend them.

In the next part, I’ll talk about practical solutions to overcome these challenges and gain mastery over the mind.

When we get distracted, deluded, or even feel destroyed, what exactly happens? There are two main points to consider:

  1. The mind gets pulled away.
  2. We, as souls, get pulled away.

We will discuss determination in two steps. First, we try to prevent the mind from getting pulled away. Second, even if the mind does get distracted, we ensure that we, as souls, don’t get pulled away. These are the two essential ways we can maintain focus.

How the Modes of Nature Affect Determination

Before exploring focus, let’s examine how the three modes of nature—sattva (goodness), rajas (passion), and tamas (ignorance)—influence our determination.

Our relationship with ourselves begins with how we view ourselves. Just as our vision of others shapes our relationship with them, our self-perception determines our internal relationship. For example, if we think of someone as proud or talented, that perception becomes the foundation of our interaction with them. Similarly, how we see ourselves impacts our actions and attitudes.

  1. Sattva (Goodness):
    • Associated with clarity and focus.
    • In this mode, we seek self-improvement and engage in activities that help us grow. For example, meditation becomes meaningful as it allows us to think clearly and introspect.
  2. Rajas (Passion):
    • Characterized by hyperactivity and ostentation.
    • In this mode, resolutions are often about showing off to others rather than genuine self-transformation. For instance, someone might make a resolution to appear busy or gain approval from others.
  3. Tamas (Ignorance):
    • Marked by lethargy and a sense of futility.
    • Here, even making resolutions can lead to shaming oneself. For example, someone might make unrealistic resolutions (e.g., “I’ll completely change my life by making 108 resolutions”) and end up failing, which results in feelings of failure and despair.

The Progression in the Mode of Ignorance

Krishna describes the progression of emotions under tamas:

  • Swapnam (Daydreaming): A person starts with unrealistic daydreams.
  • Bhayam (Fear): Unrealistic expectations lead to anxiety and existential fear.
  • Shokam (Lamentation): Failing to meet those expectations leads to complaints and whining.
  • Vishadam (Moroseness): Persistent disappointment can lead to habitual negativity, where a person remains stuck in a downward emotional spiral.

Balancing Relationships and Expectations

In relationships, trust is key. However, trustworthiness isn’t just about character; it also involves competence. For example:

  • Someone might be trustworthy in keeping secrets but unreliable in completing tasks on time.
  • Recognizing these nuances helps us adjust our expectations and interact more effectively with others.

Similarly, in our relationship with ourselves, understanding our limitations is crucial. For instance, someone recovering from alcoholism must recognize that they cannot trust themselves around alcohol. Acknowledging such weaknesses isn’t a sign of failure but a step toward progress.

To maintain focus and foster healthy relationships, we need both clarity and realistic self-assessment. Avoid making resolutions to impress others or indulging in unrealistic daydreams. Instead, focus on shaping yourself, and ensure your actions are guided by determination rooted in sattva, not rajas or tamas.

Trust and Resolutions in Tamoguna (Mode of Ignorance)

One part of trusting ourselves is knowing when we cannot trust ourselves. In Tamoguna (the mode of ignorance), this self-awareness is absent. We end up making resolutions that we subconsciously know we won’t keep. When we fail to keep these resolutions, we beat ourselves up emotionally and spiral into negativity.

A psychologist friend of mine in Colorado (not Arizona) mentioned that the number of people seeking therapy spikes about 1–2 months after the New Year. Many people make New Year’s resolutions but fail to stick to them by the end of January. This failure often leads to feelings of depression, driving them to seek help.

In Tamoguna, resolutions often become a source of self-shame rather than self-improvement. This toxic state of self-relationship perpetuates a cycle of negativity.

Resolutions in Rajoguna (Mode of Passion)

In Rajoguna, resolutions are motivated by a desire for specific outcomes or external results. Krishna describes this as:

यत् कर्मफलहेतुना दृत्या धार्यते अर्जुन।”
(Resolutions are made with an intense focus on the desired results.)

While seeking results is not inherently bad, problems arise when the process is disregarded, and the emphasis shifts solely to the product. Let’s explore this dynamic:

Meditation and the Rajoguna Approach

Meditation has gained popularity worldwide due to its scientifically proven benefits in calming the mind. Brain scans show that individuals who meditate exhibit calmer and more composed neural activity. In response, billion-dollar projects have been launched to develop “meditation helmets,” which aim to stimulate specific brain areas to mimic the effects of meditation.

The concept of a “meditation helmet” reflects a Rajasic mindset: seeking shortcuts to results without engaging in the actual process. However, this approach misses the essence of meditation. The calmness seen in brain scans is a result of meditation, not its cause or essence. It’s akin to saying, “I have a machine that will make you happy by forcing your face to smile.” While you can manipulate the external smile, it doesn’t generate true happiness.

Resolutions and Weight Loss

In Rajoguna, the focus on results sometimes leads to extreme measures. For example, bariatric surgery (stapling the stomach to reduce food intake) has become a popular weight-loss method. While it helps many lose weight, studies show that 70–90% of women who undergo bariatric surgery end up divorcing their partners. This surprising statistic has led to the inclusion of mandatory marriage counseling before surgery.

This example highlights how the Rajasic pursuit of results often disregards the broader impact of the process. Resolutions made under the influence of Rajoguna prioritize outcomes over holistic well-being, potentially causing unintended consequences.

Reflection

In both Tamoguna and Rajoguna, resolutions can lead to negative outcomes when not rooted in awareness and balance. Tamoguna fosters shame and self-doubt, while Rajoguna drives us toward unsustainable or superficial goals. True progress lies in balancing determination with mindfulness, ensuring that our actions align with our values and lead to holistic growth.

Resolutions in Rajoguna: Fixation on External Goals

In Rajoguna (the mode of passion), resolutions are often fixated on external results, leading to toxic consequences. For example, many individuals undergo bariatric surgery with the belief that being thinner and more attractive will enable them to find “better” partners. This mindset often disrupts existing relationships, as studies show that 70–90% of women who undergo bariatric surgery end up divorcing their partners.

The deeper issue lies in the Rajasic tendency to prioritize results over the process. People take shortcuts or focus on creating a facade of change rather than undergoing genuine transformation.

Superficial Change vs. Real Change

For example, there are products and methods that enable people to hide their addictions. Someone who drinks excessively might use chemicals to mask the smell of alcohol. Similarly, a smoker might use products to cover the odor of tobacco. These methods don’t address the root of the addiction; they merely help individuals pretend that they’ve changed.

This focus on appearances creates a facade that eventually collapses, leading to a return to Tamoguna (ignorance) and perpetuating a toxic cycle. Superficial change without inner transformation is unsustainable. Deep within, we know we are pretending, and this knowledge fosters inner conflict and discontent.

Sattvic Resolutions: Genuine Inner Change

In contrast, resolutions in Sattvaguna (the mode of goodness) focus on genuine transformation. They are not about showing others that we’ve changed or shaming ourselves into change; they are about shaping ourselves.

Krishna describes this in the Bhagavad Gita (14.11):
सर्वद्वारेषु देहेऽस्मिन प्रकाश उपजायते।”
(“In the mode of goodness, there is illumination in all the senses.”)

This illumination doesn’t mean physical light emanates from our body. Instead, it signifies awareness—being mindful of what enters and exits our consciousness through our senses. A sattvic person is aware of what they see, hear, eat, and speak, as well as how they act.

Sattvic change begins with this clarity and awareness, enabling us to shape ourselves through conscious actions.

Sustaining Determination: A Practical Framework

Krishna explains in the Bhagavad Gita (6.35) that determination can be sustained through abhyasa (practice) and vairagya (detachment). Let’s explore these principles through a practical framework:

1. Abhyasa: Persistence through Bonds

Persistence involves creating bonds or habits that reinforce positive behavior. For example, if someone wants to recover from alcoholism, forming bonds with supportive communities or engaging in constructive activities helps them stay on track.

2. Vairagya: Abstinence through Boundaries

Abstinence becomes easier when we establish boundaries. For instance, if someone recovering from alcoholism lives next to a bar, their proximity increases the risk of relapse. Creating physical or environmental boundaries—like avoiding bars or keeping alcohol out of the home—reduces temptation.

Krishna highlights this principle in the Bhagavad Gita (2.58):
यदा संहरते चायं कुर्वोंऽगानीव सर्वशः।”
(“Just as a tortoise withdraws its limbs, one should withdraw from harmful engagements.”)

By creating safe spaces and limiting distractions, we prevent the mind from being pulled toward temptation.

Practical Tips for Self-Discipline

  1. Set Boundaries: Reduce access to distractions or temptations. For example, if you want to study scriptures, avoid lying in bed or sitting in a dark room where sleep becomes tempting. Instead, choose a well-lit, distraction-free space like a library.
  2. Cultivate Supportive Bonds: Engage with individuals or groups who inspire and motivate you. Community support can reinforce determination and provide accountability.
  3. Adjust the Environment: Modify your surroundings to make it easier to persist with positive habits. For example, if you feel sleepy while studying, create a space where sleeping isn’t an easy option.

Sattvic resolutions focus on genuine inner transformation rather than external appearances or shortcuts. By practicing abhyasa and vairagya, we can create an environment conducive to sustained determination and self-improvement. These practices help us move beyond the superficial changes of Rajoguna and the toxic self-doubt of Tamoguna, leading to lasting, meaningful growth.

Preventing the Mind from Getting Pulled Away

The nature of the mind is to wander. It is not the act of the mind going astray that is the primary issue, but our inability to bring it back. When the mind gets pulled away, we often lack a compelling reason to return to focus. Instead of simply lamenting the deviation and beating ourselves up over it, we need to cultivate strategies to guide the mind back with intention and purpose.

Giving the Mind a Reason to Return

  1. Create Bonds of Attraction
    Just as the mind is naturally drawn to distractions, we need to give it positive anchors that pull it back toward our goals. For example, if we are trying to focus on spiritual growth, we can make our environment inspiring—listening to uplifting music, chanting, or surrounding ourselves with supportive people who encourage our aspirations.
  2. Establish Boundaries Against Temptation
    The mind is more likely to wander when distractions are easily accessible. Creating physical and mental boundaries can help. For instance, if we are trying to avoid social media while working, logging out or turning off notifications can create a barrier that makes distractions less tempting.
  3. Cultivate Awareness
    When the mind starts to wander, the first step is to notice it without judgment. By cultivating mindfulness, we can gently bring the mind back to the task at hand without berating ourselves for the deviation. As Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita (6.26):
    “Wherever the mind wanders, due to its flickering and unsteady nature, one must certainly withdraw it and bring it back under the control of the self.”
  4. Focus on Krishna’s Grace
    Ultimately, in the bhakti tradition, it is Krishna’s mercy that transforms us. However, our sincere endeavor—through abhyas (persistent practice) and vairagya (detachment)—shows Krishna that we genuinely desire His grace. Our efforts serve as the wings that carry us toward divine transformation.

Determination in the Three Modes

Resolutions and determination can manifest differently depending on the mode of nature (guna) influencing us:

1. Tamoguna (Ignorance)

  • Nature: In this mode, resolutions are weak and self-defeating. We make promises to ourselves that we know we won’t keep, leading to shame and self-loathing.
  • Example: Making unrealistic New Year’s resolutions and feeling depressed when we fail to achieve them.

2. Rajoguna (Passion)

  • Nature: In this mode, resolutions are focused on external results, often disregarding the process. There is an emphasis on showing change rather than experiencing genuine transformation.
  • Example: Seeking shortcuts like bariatric surgery for weight loss without addressing the underlying habits, or pretending to overcome addictions without true inner change.

3. Sattvaguna (Goodness)

  • Nature: In this mode, resolutions are about shaping oneself through clarity, awareness, and conscious action. There is a balance between the process and the outcome, with an emphasis on genuine growth.
  • Example: Practicing mindfulness to cultivate awareness of what enters and exits our consciousness, and aligning our actions with our long-term goals.

The Role of Endeavor and Grace

While our determination and effort are important, they are not the sole factors in transformation. In bhakti, our efforts (abhyas and vairagya) are expressions of our sincerity in seeking Krishna’s mercy. Krishna’s grace is the ultimate catalyst for change, but it is our endeavor that demonstrates our readiness and eagerness to receive it.

Summary

  1. Modes and Their Influence: The three modes of nature—ignorance, passion, and goodness—shape our resolutions and determination in distinct ways.
  2. Preventing the Mind’s Wandering: Focus on creating bonds of attraction, establishing boundaries, and cultivating mindfulness to guide the mind back when it strays.
  3. Transformation through Grace and Effort: Effort and discipline show our desire for Krishna’s grace, which ultimately brings about lasting transformation.

By understanding the interplay of modes and aligning our resolutions with sattvaguna, we can make meaningful progress and deepen our connection with Krishna.

In tamas (ignorance), we often end up shaming ourselves. Let me explain the whole sequence. It begins with unrealistic daydreaming—setting goals or resolutions that are far removed from our actual capabilities or circumstances. Instead of sticking to these resolutions, we begin to dread them. This dread leads to whining, which escalates to resentment—not just toward the resolutions, but toward our entire life.

We become morose, emotionally weighed down, and in an attempt to escape from reality, we might resort to intoxicants or distractions. Eventually, this downward spiral can lead to suicidal urges—a point where life feels unbearable, and even the self becomes unbearable. Suicide, in essence, is like breaking up with oneself.

This highlights the importance of making resolutions that are realistic and aligned with our capabilities. To be trustworthy, we need to recognize when we are not trustworthy. This self-awareness allows us to acknowledge the areas where we might falter and approach our commitments with humility and clarity.

In rajas (passion), the focus shifts outward—toward how we appear to others. When impressing others becomes the priority, we start seeking shortcuts to display results without actually achieving them. This could involve superficial solutions like meditation helmets, bariatric surgery, or technological fixes that bypass the real process of growth. Similarly, some might pretend to have overcome addictions, concealing the underlying problems with medication or substances.

Finally, in sattva (goodness), determination becomes about shaping ourselves rather than just achieving results. True transformation happens through understanding. I like to use the metaphor of us and our mind being like a TV. Sometimes the TV pulls us away, and sometimes we pull ourselves away from it. Growth requires addressing both aspects.

We shape ourselves through two key practices:

  1. Vairagya (detachment): Creating supportive external boundaries that prevent distractions or temptations from overwhelming us.
  2. Abhyasa (persistence): Developing internal strength and forming meaningful bonds.

Bonds give us reasons to stay committed, even when the mind tempts us to stray. They act as anchors, bringing us back to our purpose. Both bonds and boundaries, coupled with Krishna’s mercy, enable us to progress toward becoming transparent and aligned with our spiritual goals.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Question:

Should we avoid associations that are detrimental to our well-being?

Yes, we should. Asat-sanga—association with people whose influence can harm our consciousness—should be approached with care. The key question is: Am I at a stage where I can interact with this person without being negatively affected?

Interactions with others can lead to two outcomes:

  1. Pulling them up: If you are strong in your consciousness, your association might inspire and elevate them.
  2. Being pulled down: If your foundation is shaky, their influence might weaken or harm your progress.

To discern which outcome is likely, we need regular self-reflection and awareness of our mental and spiritual state. Recognize your limits and choose wisely. It’s not about moral superiority but about protecting and nurturing your consciousness.

Let’s consider an example: someone comes to us and gossips—this person is like this, that person is like that, and so on. Sometimes, people are simply hurt and need to vent. In such cases, listening to them with empathy can help. However, for some, gossiping is a habitual, default mode of functioning. When this happens, the gossip can become offensive and even start affecting our other relationships.

After talking with such a person, it’s important to reflect: Does what they said stay in my mind? Does it stick? Ideally, as a service, we hear them out, respond as thoughtfully as we can, and then move on. Krishna gives the example of the lotus flower—water falls on it but doesn’t cling to it. Similarly, we should aim to let such conversations flow over us without sticking. We listen, process, respond appropriately, and then move forward with our lives.

However, we also need to evaluate the overall effect of such interactions on our thoughts. While actions take time to manifest, their seeds are sown in our thoughts. If a certain conversation or association begins to dominate our thoughts, it will eventually influence our actions.

For instance, if someone suggests doing something that is a clear deviation—such as eating meat—most sincere spiritual seekers on the bhakti path would outright refuse. But the subtler, indirect influences are what we need to be cautious about. They might not provoke immediate action but could gradually affect our default thought patterns.

So, the key is to be conscious of what we are conscious of. After engaging in an activity or interaction, observe: What are the default thoughts of my mind afterward? Based on this introspection, you can decide whether continuing such interactions is beneficial for your spiritual progress.

Thank you very much.

The post New Year Resolutions and Three Kinds of Determination GEV appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 51 – Appreciating the Gita’s three conversations Gita 18.76
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Happy to be here with you today for the last session.
In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, I bow to you.
Ram Ram Hare Hare Hare Krishna.

Today, we’ll discuss a relatively lesser-known verse from Bhagavad Gita, 18.76. I chose this verse deliberately because it illustrates an important theme of the Bhagavad Gita. While we could have chosen verses like 18.73 or 18.78, which are much more well-known, 18.76 is quite significant, and we will discuss those other verses as well. But 18.76 is special.

The verse is as follows:

“Rajan samsmithya samsmithya
Samvadam imam adbhutam
Keshavarjuna yo punyam
Hrishamicha muhur muhur”

So, here, Sanjay is addressing King Dhritarashtra. He says, “Rajan” (O King), “samsmithya samsmithya” (remembering again and again), “samvadam imam adbhutam” (this wonderful, thrilling conversation), “Keshavarjuna yo punyam” (the conversation between Keshava and Arjuna, which is very purifying), and “hrishamicha muhur muhur” (again and again, I am thrilled upon hearing this conversation).

Repetition in language can sometimes be seen as a flaw. For example, if you ask someone, “How was the class?” and they reply, “It was wonderful,” then you ask about the prasad, and they say, “It was wonderful,” and then about the kirtan, and they say, “It was wonderful.” When the word “wonderful” is repeated too often, it loses its impact. To avoid this, we may use varied expressions: “The kirtan was electrifying, the prasad was delicious, and the class was illuminating.” Variety in description indicates clarity and articulateness in communication.

However, in poetry, repetition can serve to emphasize the point more powerfully than varying vocabulary. In this verse, the words samsmithya samsmithya (remembering again and again) and muhur muhur (again and again) are repeated to emphasize the significance of remembering and reflecting on the divine conversation. In the next verse (18.77), similar repetition occurs with the words punha punha and samsmithya samsmithya, further reinforcing this idea.

The repetition of samsmithya (remember) four times is significant because it echoes the central message of the Gita: to remember and enrich our remembrance of the divine. This verse poetically illustrates how the Gita itself serves to refine and enrich our inner world through remembrance.

The Gita can be viewed as a conversation at three levels:

  1. The conversation between Krishna and Arjuna: This is the core conversation of the Gita. Although Krishna speaks the majority of the verses, the entire Gita is often called a conversation between Krishna and Arjuna. In the first chapter, however, Krishna says very little. Out of 700 verses, Krishna only speaks for about one fifteenth of them, with Arjuna asking the questions. Though this is technically a conversation, it is more like a Q&A session where Krishna responds to Arjuna’s queries.
  2. The conversation between Dhritarashtra and Sanjay: This is the framing conversation that provides context to the Gita’s main conversation. Sanjay, who is narrating the events to King Dhritarashtra, is crucial because his perspective shapes how we understand Krishna and Arjuna’s conversation. Just as an introduction or conclusion to a speech frames its meaning, Sanjay’s words frame our understanding of the events in the Gita.
  3. The conversation between the soul and the super-soul: The deepest and most enduring conversation is the one between the soul and the Lord within. Krishna is the super-soul in everyone’s heart, and when we develop the right mood, we can engage in a personal conversation with Him, just as Arjuna did. The Gita is not only a historical dialogue but an eternal conversation that can happen within each of us if we connect with the Lord in our hearts.

Let’s now look at two key verses that crystallize the Gita’s conversation. In 18.72, Krishna asks Arjuna if he has understood everything and if his ignorance (Ajnana) and illusion (Samoha) have been dispelled. Ajnana is ignorance or lack of knowledge, while Samoha is illusion or false perception. Krishna is asking if both types of darkness have been removed, allowing Arjuna to see things clearly. This question reflects Krishna’s compassionate concern for Arjuna’s spiritual progress.

In 18.72, Krishna asks, “Have you heard attentively and comprehended this knowledge? Has your ignorance and illusion been destroyed?” This is Krishna’s final check, making sure that Arjuna is ready for the spiritual clarity that Krishna has imparted.

So, the question Krishna asks is not just to confirm if Arjuna has heard the teachings, but also if he has truly understood and internalized them. It is a sign of Krishna’s loving care for His devotee, wanting to ensure that Arjuna is equipped to move forward with clear understanding.

The core of Krishna’s message is to invite us into this conversation with Him—one of remembrance, understanding, and transformation of the self. By reflecting on these teachings, we enrich our inner lives and develop a deeper connection with the Lord.

Thank you. Let’s continue reflecting on these themes together.

Now attention is foundational for comprehension. Sometimes we may watch something, say a movie for entertainment. And if it’s a very high-action movie, then we also need to be attentive. How is this person fighting? How are they turning around the odds? Who is winning, and who is losing? So even for enjoyment, attention is required.

Then, what to speak of something that is not for enjoyment but for education? If we miss out on a particular point, we might miss out on the whole flow, and things may not be clear to us. So Krishna is indicating that if we want the result of agnana, samoha, pranashtaste—if we want our hearing to lead to the dissipation of ignorance and illusion—then there has to be attention.

So even in the question, there is an instruction for all of us on how we should hear. But the question itself is also expressing Krishna’s concern—his compassionate concern. For Krishna, it’s not a chore or a paid job that he’s speaking; he’s deeply concerned with whether Arjuna is understanding properly.

Attention can have many different words in Sanskrit, but Ekagrena Chetasa is used here. Chetasa refers to consciousness with one-pointed attention. Ekagra is also one of the states in the mind as described in yoga. In Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, there are various states of the mind: mudha, kshipta, vikshipta, Ekagrata, and nirodha. Nirodha is the highest stage, where the mind stops moving toward material distractions.

At one level, the Gita is saying that Arjuna should hear with attention. But at another level, the implication is that by hearing the Gita or reciting it, we can reach the stage of Ekagrata—the penultimate stage of perfection. So by studying the Gita, we are taking steps toward this higher state of consciousness.

The Gita takes us to the end, but just by studying the Gita, we can also elevate our consciousness. Now, there will be a victory for Arjuna at the end of the war. Krishna has spoken the Bhagavad Gita, and after that, the Kurukshetra war will take place, and Arjuna will win. But there is a significant victory even before the war, and that is seen by the last word that Krishna uses to refer to Arjuna: Dhananjaya.

The word Dhananjaya is important because it means “conqueror of wealth.” Krishna is referring to Arjuna as the one who has won the wealth of wisdom. This is the wealth that reveals the ultimate meaning of life. While the world often asks us to gain material wealth—money, fame, power, possessions—these are only means of living. The Gita, on the other hand, helps us find meaning in life, which is the ultimate wealth. Krishna is asking Arjuna, “Have you attained this wealth of wisdom?”

This wisdom is not just informational; it leads us to the ultimate fulfillment. It is the supreme wealth, and Krishna is guiding Arjuna to it by using the word “Dhananjaya.” The wisdom of the Gita helps us understand how to live a meaningful life, and Krishna is ensuring that Arjuna, through this wisdom, can achieve this.

In the context of the Gita, wisdom is twofold: it enriches us with love for the Lord and empowers us with wisdom for action in this world. Krishna’s purpose in speaking the Gita is to enrich Arjuna, to enrich him with wisdom. This wisdom is what also serves as the universal gift for all of us who study the Gita.

The result of hearing the Gita is twofold: we are enriched with love and empowered with wisdom. The Gita’s wisdom is about loving the Lord and understanding his love for us. Krishna’s question to Arjuna reflects his concern that Arjuna should be able to comprehend the Gita’s wisdom and use it to empower his actions.

At the start of the Gita, Arjuna is disempowered, reluctant to fight. But after hearing Krishna’s teachings, he is empowered and ready to act. This transformation is central to the Gita’s purpose.

So, Krishna’s words are ultimately aimed at elevating Arjuna’s consciousness, from confusion and illusion to clarity and wisdom. Arjuna, in turn, responds to Krishna’s question by saying that his illusion has been dispelled. His memory has been restored, and he is now firmly situated and ready to do Krishna’s will.

What does this indicate?
This indicates the culmination of devotion. Recently, we celebrated Christmas, and one of the significant examples of surrender in Jesus’ life is when he knows he will be killed the next day. He says, “Let Thy will be done.” Even when something as painful as death is impending, his willingness to surrender—his acceptance of the divine will—is an extraordinary level of devotion.

However, what the Gita says is not just “Let Thy will be done,” but “I will do Thy will.” This is a more active, dynamic form of surrender or devotion. “Let Thy will be done” is more of a contemplative form of surrender, where we say, “I’ll see your will and accept it as your will.” It is important to see God’s will, but we also have free will, which we must use properly. By doing our part in alignment with the divine will, that is also a form of devotion.

In Arjuna’s case, he was a warrior, and he had to fight in a war. He could have preferred not to fight at all, but circumstances made it inevitable. He was ready to accept that the war was going to happen, and that he had to fight against his venerable elders, like Bhishma and Drona. This is an example of “I will do Thy will.” Arjuna’s willingness to act, despite the unpalatable nature of the task, reflects his surrender.

In our lives, there are things beyond our control that we must accept, even if they are difficult. Accepting them is one form of surrender—”Let Thy will be done.” But there are also things that we need to do—things that are important, though they may not be easy. Doing them is also a form of surrender—”I will do Thy will.”

Arjuna expresses his determination: “I will become an instrument in your hands.”

How does Arjuna progress toward illumination?

Let’s examine this further.

First, Arjuna says, Nashto Moha—his illusion has been dispelled. Then, there is Smutir Labdha—the restoration of memory. This is significant because, at one level, the knowledge that he is not the body but the soul, and that Krishna is the Supreme Lord, is not new information for Arjuna. It’s something he already knew but had forgotten. His memory had faded in the confusion of the battlefield.

Often, when we listen to Krishna’s teachings, we may think that we are learning something new. While Krishna’s glories are endless, there is always something more to learn, but the process of spiritual growth often involves restoring our memory. The world is full of illusions that distract us, and we need to be reminded of what is true. So, Smutir Labdha means that we are not necessarily acquiring new information, but we are recovering our spiritual memory.

For example, illusion may manifest in various forms, but its substance remains essentially the same: lust, anger, greed, pride, and confusion. These are the core temptations we need to overcome. To remove illusion, we don’t need new knowledge, but rather the restoration of memory: This is not real. This is an illusion. I need to overcome it.

Then, there is the eradication of doubts—Gata Sandeha. Illusions are often circumstantial, but doubts are deeper. Desires affect the mind, while doubts affect the intelligence. For instance, someone might be mentally fickle, changing their views frequently depending on who they hear from. But the intelligence, though less flickering than the mind, can also be swayed by doubts. Doubts like “Is this right?” or “Is that right?” hinder spiritual progress.

Krishna assures us that once both the mind and intelligence are purified, we can offer ourselves to Him. That offering is expressed in Arjuna’s words: I will do Thy will. This is the harmonization of human will with divine will.

Surrender and Devotion at Various Levels

Surrender is not just a one-time act but can occur at various levels. Arjuna’s surrender begins at the start of the Gita when he expresses a willingness to learn from Krishna. That willingness to hear is itself a form of surrender. At first, we might feel that offering our entire being to Krishna is beyond us, but we can start by simply hearing about Krishna.

In today’s world, there are many distractions, but there are also many ways to connect with Krishna—online classes, books, and other resources. Choosing to connect with Krishna, rather than the countless illusions, is itself an act of surrender. Instead of watching a movie or reading the news, choosing to hear about Krishna is an act of devotion.

Krishna also speaks of surrender in Chapter 7, Verse 14, where he says:

“This knowledge is the most secret of all, and when one surrenders fully to me, they will understand it.”

This is another form of surrender—by offering our minds to Krishna, we align ourselves with His will.

Krishna says that if you want to resist temptation,
If you want to overcome the illusions of the world, we need to commit ourselves to bhakti. We need to surrender ourselves to Krishna. Committed practice of bhakti is also a form of surrender.

Now, committed practice of bhakti is not the same as offering our entire being to Krishna. Sometimes, we may commit ourselves to practicing bhakti, but we may not be able to offer our entire being to Krishna. For instance, we might say, “I’m going to hear this class, I’m going to read this book,” even though our mind gets distracted, but we are still committed to the practice. Commitment is not the same as surrender.

So, if you want to resist temptation, you need to commit yourself to bhakti. Commitment is not the same as attachment. Attachment usually refers to something becoming more spontaneous, while commitment involves a conscious decision and effort. Krishna says that surrender is the starter. In bhakti, surrender is the starting point. By surrendering, we begin the journey. Surrender is the sustainer as well. Yes, we commit ourselves to the practice of bhakti, but this commitment, in itself, is a form of surrender.

Krishna talks about surrender once more in Chapter 18, Verse 62, where he says:

“Tam eva saranam gaccha sarvabhavena bhārata,
takprasadāt parāṁśāntim sthānam prāpśyasi aśvatam.”

“Surrender to that Lord.”

There are times in the Bhagavad Gita when Krishna refers to Himself in the third person, and a whole class could be dedicated to this topic. The third person is when Krishna says “He” or “That Lord,” while the first person is “I” and the second person is “You.” Krishna uses the third person sometimes to refer to Himself in His functional role as the super soul.

What does this mean? When Krishna says Tam eva saranam gaccha, he is referring to surrendering to Himself, but in His role as the super soul. One can resist temptation or illusion by surrendering to the super soul, thereby transcending the influence of illusion. The focus of surrender is not on the super soul directly, but rather on overcoming illusion and temptation.

If we think of it in terms of consciousness, willingness to hear is the elevation of consciousness. At first, Arjuna was uncertain: “Should I fight? Should I not fight?” His consciousness was at a horizontal level of perception—he wanted to hear and make sense of things. Willingness to hear indicates the beginning of the elevation of consciousness. Commitment to bhakti is a further elevation of consciousness because it requires detaching ourselves from the world’s many distractions. The world pulls us with not only temptations but also obligations. But if we resist those distractions and focus on connecting with Krishna, we elevate our consciousness further.

Then, when one understands that surrendering to the Lord frees us from illusion, it becomes clear that this is what we truly want. In Karmakanda, the focus is on the instrumental use of God, where we are interested in what God can provide us materially. In Gyanakanda, there’s also an instrumental use of God—where we want liberation from material existence, so we focus on God for that purpose.

This is one level of connection: “I know I have to surrender to you.” In the Yoga Sutras, this level of surrender is described as the desire to surrender without asking for material gain. Ishvara Pranidhana means offering oneself to the Lord, but the primary purpose is not devotion to God, but rather disentangling the mind from the distractions of the world. This type of surrender seeks freedom from illusion.

But the surrender talked about at the end of the Gita, in verse 18.73, is different. This is not just surrender to escape illusion or to attain liberation. This is surrender to create a living connection with the Lord, to become an instrument of divine will. This is the highest level of surrender, where one surrenders not to gain protection but to gain a connection with the divine.

Just like someone might surrender, consider a criminal who surrenders to the police. That is one level of surrender. Similarly, a law-abiding citizen might join the police force and obey the law, which is another form of surrender, but it’s a different level. The criminal surrenders to stop doing wrong, while the law-abiding citizen surrenders to start doing right and to help enforce the law.

So when a criminal surrenders and obeys the prison or police authorities, that’s one kind of surrender. But when a person becomes a police officer, takes up weapons, and obeys commands, they are surrendering at a whole different level. This higher level of surrender is what Arjuna demonstrates when he says Kariṣye Vachanam Tava (I will do your will). This is not just about action—it’s about readiness and commitment to the cause.

In the Bhagavad Gita, we see Arjuna picking up his bow, the Gandiva, as a sign of his readiness to fight. This action signifies that Arjuna has overcome his confusion and that at one level, this removal of confusion itself is a victory. At another level, this clarity will lead to victory in battle.

In Chapter 18, Verse 78, the verse Yatra Yogeshwara Krishna, Yatra Partha Dhanurdhara confirms that where Krishna (the Yogeshwara) and Arjuna (the Dhanurdhara) are present, victory will follow. Arjuna’s readiness to fight, symbolized by his bow, signifies that he has become an instrument in Krishna’s hands. Sanjay, echoing Krishna’s earlier assurance in 11.33, foresees Arjuna’s victory: Tatra Sri Vijaya Bhutir—there will be victory and success.

The point here is that the highest level of surrender is becoming an instrument in the Lord’s hands. This level of surrender leads to victory. Arjuna’s surrender, as expressed in Kariṣye Vachanam Tava, is a complete surrender to the divine will, and this will lead to his triumph in the battle.

Now, while the Gita is contextually about a specific war, it should be understood that the Gita’s core message is not a call for violence. The Gita’s main teaching is about transcendence, though in the specific context of the Kurukshetra war, Arjuna is assured of victory in that battle. Thus, the Gita is not promoting violence but highlighting the necessity of sometimes making difficult choices for a higher cause.

To understand the Gita fully, we need both contextual and universal perspectives. If we only focus on the contextual, we reduce the Gita to a historical account of a war—something of interest only to history enthusiasts. Without the universal application, we miss its deeper, timeless teachings. If one ignores the context and only focuses on the universal, the Gita can be interpreted in many ways, often inaccurately. Some may reduce the story to mere symbolism, seeing Kurukshetra as representing the body and the Kauravas as impure desires. While metaphorical interpretations have their place, the Gita cannot be reduced entirely to a symbolic reading.

The Gita’s message is not simply metaphorical. Krishna and Arjuna are part of the Mahabharata epic, and the Gita was spoken before the war. It is showing that sometimes, duty requires difficult decisions. The idea of God asking his children to fight may seem harsh, but it’s important to remember that the body is not the true self—the soul is. Therefore, the Gita is not advocating for the killing of children but rather for guiding responsible children to restrain the irresponsible ones. The finality of death is lessened when we recognize that death is not the end. It is simply a transition.

The Gita, in its broader sense, is both contextual and universal. Contextually, it assures Arjuna victory in the war, and universally, it teaches us how to rise above material concerns and duties. The promise of victory in the Gita applies specifically to Arjuna’s situation, but this victory can be seen as a metaphor for the victory over illusion and attachment that we all strive for on the spiritual path.

But the Gita also gives a universal call for equanimity amid both defeat and victory. One of its most consistent messages is equanimity: do not be elated in pleasure or dejected in pain.

Now, if the Gita’s message is one of equanimity, why does it also give an assurance of victory? The truth is that nobody in this world is guaranteed constant victory in the external sense. Arjuna, for example, won the Kurukshetra war, but years later, he lost a war against the cowards he was protecting Krishna’s queens from. No one is guaranteed constant success.

Consider Prabhupada, who achieved spectacular success in sharing Krishna’s message, but this success was preceded by many setbacks and reversals. For the first 40 years of his efforts, there was very little noteworthy success. Even in his missionary work, not everything he did was successful. For example, Prabhupada considered his Bhagavatam to be his greatest contribution, but Krishna arranged for it to be completed not directly by Prabhupada, but by the inspiration he gave to his disciples.

So, if we simply interpret the Gita’s assurance of victory to mean that a devotee will always be victorious in every battle they fight, that’s not what the Gita teaches. The Gita teaches equanimity amid both defeat and victory. If a devotee were always victorious, why would they need equanimity? The Gita’s true message is that even those living by its teachings must maintain equanimity because victory is not guaranteed.

The nature of the world will not change simply because we understand it. Just like knowing it’s a cold place helps us prepare for the cold but doesn’t remove it, understanding the duality of the world doesn’t change the fact that life is filled with both pleasure and pain. This brings us to the second level of conversation in the Gita: the Dhritarashtra-Sanjaya dialogue.

The Dhritarashtra-Sanjaya conversation reflects not only equanimity but also reveals something more. Let’s explore how this dynamic works.

Sanjaya, in one sense, is not successful. Krishna speaks the Gita to Arjuna, and Arjuna’s heart is transformed. But Sanjaya repeats the same message to Dhritarashtra, and his heart is not transformed. In this way, Sanjaya’s efforts seem unsuccessful. However, in another sense, Sanjaya is still successful, and we’ll see how that unfolds in his words.

Sanjaya speaks five verses, from 18.74 to 18.78. In 18.74, he expresses his appreciation for the conversation. He is thrilled to have heard it. In 18.75, he expresses his gratitude to Vyasa for the opportunity to hear it. In 18.76, he is thrilled as he recalls the profound message of the Gita. In 18.77, he is thrilled to remember the speaker of the Gita, Krishna. Finally, in 18.78, he gives a prophecy that is both contextual and universal.

Sanjaya begins in 18.74 by saying that both Arjuna and Krishna are great souls, and he is thrilled to have heard their conversation. He is deeply appreciative of the privilege he has had in hearing this sacred dialogue. In 18.75, he acknowledges that it is through the mercy of Vyasa that he was able to hear it, and he feels grateful for this rare opportunity.

In 18.76, he recalls the conversation itself with deep appreciation. He is not only moved by the content of the Gita but also by the personal qualities of the speaker, Krishna. The two—content and speaker—are connected but distinct. Sometimes, we may be inspired by a class for the content, and other times, we are inspired by the speaker. When both the speaker and the message are inspiring, the impact on us is profound and transformative. In this case, Sanjaya is deeply moved both by the content of Krishna’s words and the divine person who speaks them.

Sanjaya, therefore, remembers both the form of Krishna and the message he delivered. Krishna is not just a learned person; He is the Supreme Lord, whose divine nature was revealed to Arjuna in the form of the Vishwaroopa. This form, Sanjaya recalls, is even rarer than Krishna’s two-handed form on the battlefield, which is why the conversation Sanjaya has heard is so extraordinary. The dual inspiration of Krishna’s person and His message creates a profound effect on Sanjaya.

This is in 18.77, and then comes 18.78, which is Yatra Yogeshwara Krishna — a significant verse. As mentioned earlier, each of these verses is so rich with meaning that they could each have separate talks dedicated to them. But let’s focus on some important themes.

In this verse, Sanjaya is making a prophecy that is both contextual and universal. The contextual prophecy is an implicit answer to an implicit question. At the start of the Bhagavad Gita, Dhritarashtra’s explicit question is: What happened over there? (Dharma Kshetre, Kuru Kshetre, Samaveta, Yuyutsava, Mamaka, Pandava, Shaiva, Kima Kuru, Sanjaya).

Now, what happened? Suppose a cricket match is going on, and we are very interested in the game. We might ask, What’s the score? or What happened in the match? When we ask this question, underlying it is the desire to know who is winning? or who won? So, in a similar way, the unspoken question in Dhritarashtra’s mind is: Who won the war?

Sanjaya’s answer, in this case, is both implicit and clear. He doesn’t say, Your sons are going to be defeated, but rather, he states, Whichever side has Krishna and Arjuna will be victorious. This is a specific, contextual proclamation.

However, the prophecy Sanjaya gives is also universal. Instead of simply saying, The Pandavas will win, he broadens the scope: Wherever there is Krishna and Arjuna, there will be victory.

The universal meaning here is that victory occurs wherever there is a harmonization of the human will with the divine will. This victory manifests in two forms: outer success and inner success. Outer success is seen by the world and involves a change in the external world that is desirable. Inner success, on the other hand, is more spiritual—it is the change in the inner world, the transformation of the heart.

In the world’s eyes, outer success is often all that matters, but on the spiritual path, inner success is even more important. As we discussed earlier, Sanjaya at one level was unsuccessful because he couldn’t transform Dhritarashtra’s heart. But through speaking the Gita, Sanjaya’s heart was transformed.

Sanjaya demonstrates equanimity in his detachment from the outcome of his efforts. He doesn’t obsess over Dhritarashtra’s lack of transformation. But the Gita’s message is not just about detachment; it teaches us to detach from the fruits of work because we are attached to a higher purpose: to please the Lord, to connect with the Lord, and to love the Lord.

The Gita doesn’t just teach detachment from worldly outcomes; it also teaches attachment to the Lord. This higher attachment is the key to experiencing something beyond mere equanimity—something greater: ecstasy.

By focusing on the Lord, we can transcend the dualities of the material world and enter into an experience of bliss and connection with the divine. So, when Sanjaya speaks of Krishna’s victory, he isn’t just referring to external victories. He is also demonstrating that true victory comes from connecting with Krishna, and that victory is both inner and outer.

This leads us to the third conversation of the Gita. The verse Yatra Yogeshwara Krishna, Tatra Shri Vijay Bhute—wherever there is Krishna, there will be victory, opulence, and morality—raises a question: Why is Arjuna included here?

After all, Krishna, the Supreme Lord, is the Lord of Lakshmi, the Goddess of Fortune. So, why does Arjuna’s presence seem necessary? Even without Arjuna, wherever Krishna is, there will be victory, isn’t it?

Yes, that is true, but the purpose of the Gita is not merely to proclaim God’s glories. The purpose is the transformation of human desires and will. The Gita teaches us how to align our human will with the divine will.

The Gita shows us that Krishna descends to the world not out of necessity but out of compassion, to transform our hearts. His purpose is to guide us towards surrender and devotion. While Krishna exists in His self-existential glory in the spiritual world, He comes to the material world to transform our hearts and desires. Through our surrender to Him, we can experience true victory, both internally and externally.

This transformation of the heart is the key message of the Gita. Whether external changes occur or not, if we engage in chanting, recollecting, or sharing Krishna’s message, our hearts will be transformed. The inner victory is what matters most.

The Gita’s core message is that through devotion to Krishna, we can achieve spiritual victory, inner peace, and harmony with the divine will. This leads to the experience of divine love, the defeat of our inner demons, and a deeper understanding of true morality—being willing to give up everything that stands in the way of our connection with the Lord.

This brings us to the final part of our discussion: the soul-super soul conversation. The Gita is not just a historical text. Yes, it has historical significance, but more importantly, it is a living message meant to be written in our hearts. The Gita’s wisdom lives with us—not just as a book we carry in our pocket or on our phone, but as a message that guides us when we need it most.

When we are bewildered or facing difficulties in the world, if we have cultivated the mood of surrender, Krishna’s words will rise within our hearts. The verses of the Gita will guide us and offer realizations, helping us navigate through life’s challenges and aligning us with the divine will.

This is what Krishna wants me to do in this situation. The Bhagavad Gita will not just be a philosophical book to be analyzed and understood. It will become the personal guidance of Krishna speaking to us, leading us in our life.

So how can we receive this guidance? How can the Gita become a living conversation that continues in our hearts? We need to be like Arjuna, with Krishna as the Supersoul speaking to us. To achieve this, we need three key qualities: intention, attention, and affection.

Intention is the sustained, focused desire to connect with Krishna. We must cultivate a will to engage with Him sincerely. Attention follows, as we become receptive to His presence, tuning our consciousness toward Krishna. But this attention isn’t just about gathering information; it’s about forming a loving connection with the Lord. Krishna says, I will give you the intelligence by which you can come to Me. When Krishna speaks the Bhagavad Gita, He is giving us this intelligence, showing us how to come closer to Him.

Krishna’s delivering of the Gita is a living example of the verse Dharmaputra Yogam (10.10), where He offers us the wisdom that can lead us back to Him. This guidance becomes dynamic and alive for us when we approach it with a devotional disposition—through intention, attention, and affection.

In spirituality, the journey and the destination are the same. The means and the ends converge. The Gita takes us on a journey, but living the Gita means experiencing life in its fullness and richness. We no longer struggle only with the questions of Why is this problem happening? How will I solve it? While we must handle those issues functionally, the Gita teaches us to see life beyond problems and solutions. We recognize that Krishna has given us the opportunity to serve Him and connect with Him in every situation. As we progress, Krishna guides us, and we experience life in its fullness.

The ultimate richness is spiritual—attaining eternal life with Krishna in His abode. Living the Gita is essentially living with Krishna. This living with Krishna is made possible as we internalize the Gita’s teachings and allow them to become a part of our hearts, not just our intellectual library. When we make the Gita the guiding light of our lives, it illuminates even the darkest paths, showing us the way through life’s challenges and leading us to Krishna’s unending love.

Let me summarize what we have discussed today. I spoke about the three levels of the message of the Gita, or the three conversations. The first conversation was between Krishna and Arjuna, crystallized in the last two verses (72 and 73). Krishna’s purpose in speaking the Gita is to elevate Arjuna’s consciousness and help him comprehend the higher truths. By surrendering his desires and illusions, Arjuna was able to regain clarity.

At a functional level, we don’t always need new information to deal with the world’s challenges. We need to restore our memory, to recognize and resist the same illusions that arise in different forms. The Gita teaches us to raise the bow of surrender, ready for action. The highest form of surrender is the harmonization of the human will with the divine will.

Surrender happens at different levels: First, the readiness to hear the message of the Gita; second, the commitment to the practice of bhakti; and third, the spiritual utilitarian vision of surrender, where we seek liberation. The highest level of surrender is devotional—it is a willingness to serve the Lord in all situations, without seeking anything in return. We surrender not to escape the world but to serve the Lord through the world.

We also explored the four quadrants of the Gita’s contextual and universal applications. Contextually, Arjuna is assured of victory, but this doesn’t mean that every battle in life will end with victory in the worldly sense. The Gita itself shows us that sometimes, we may not succeed in external terms—illustrated by Sanjaya’s failure to transform Dhritarashtra’s heart. However, in speaking the Gita, Sanjaya’s heart was transformed.

This highlights a critical aspect: transformation happens not just through external success, but through inner change. Sanjaya demonstrates this through his words, reflecting the Gita’s message. Even in failure, there is the potential for spiritual success—if we internalize the teachings and allow them to transform our hearts.

We discussed that the most potent inspiration comes when both the class and the speaker are inspiring. This happened to Sanjaya when he appreciated the message of the Gita in verse 76 and the speaker of the Gita in verse 77. The Gita is not merely an answer to Dhritarashtra’s question. In a larger sense, it is universally professing inner victory.

Inner victory means that we can connect with Krishna in our hearts. While desired changes may occur in the outer world, sometimes they may not. But the changes in the inner world will always happen when we align ourselves with Krishna’s guidance. Sanjaya exemplifies this as he shows how Krishna’s connection provides not only equanimity in dealing with the world but also ecstasy in being connected to the Lord.

For all of us, if we cultivate intention, attention, and affection, we too can become a part of the living conversation that is the Gita. The Supersoul in our hearts will remind us of the right verses and the right wisdom of the Gita to help us face life’s challenges and move toward the supreme light of Krishna’s love for us.

To live the Gita is to both journey and arrive at the destination. We are already experiencing Krishna’s love, and at the same time, we are moving toward the place where we can experience His love in its supreme richness and fullness.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Are there any questions or comments?

Audience Question: Can I ask?

Answer: Yes, please.

Audience Question: If we are not able to follow some instructions, is it because it’s not in line with our nature?

Answer: Yes, I discussed this elaborately last time. It’s important to be thoughtful and reflective. We don’t defy authority, but we try to explain our nature and find a way that works for both us and those guiding us. It’s about negotiating a practical path. It’s not a lack of surrender. We surrender with intelligence.

Audience Question: You mentioned three different conversations: one between Dhritarashtra and Sanjaya, one between Arjuna and Krishna, and one between the Supersoul and the soul. If we look at the conversation between Arjuna and Krishna, doesn’t it represent the soul and the Supersoul as well?

Answer: Yes, you’re right. The conversation between Arjuna and Krishna represents the dialogue between the soul and the Supersoul. The historical conversation between Krishna and Arjuna reflects the eternal conversation between the soul and the Lord. When we are deluded, we pray to Krishna, surrendering to Him, and the verses of the Gita guide us on how to deal with life’s challenges. This is the third level—the conversation in our heart.

Audience Question: How can we assimilate these teachings?

Answer: Most of what I’ve spoken in this class is available as articles on GitaDaily.com. Each article covers a major theme of the Gita. Reading these regularly (usually in 3-5 minutes) helps you internalize the teachings. Additionally, each article has a reflection section, which helps you apply the teachings to your life.

Audience Question: Didn’t Krishna teach surrender, and didn’t Chaitanya Mahaprabhu demonstrate it?

Answer: Yes, Krishna is the Lord, and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is the devotee who demonstrated the mood of surrender. Krishna taught surrender in the Gita, and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu showed us how to surrender in practice. There’s no need to compare, though—each manifestation of the Lord has its own special qualities. When we study the Bhagavad Gita, we relish Krishna’s teachings, and when we study the life of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, we relish His example of devotion.

Audience Question: What is the significance of Sarva Dharma Paritijya in the context of Ramananda Raya’s conversation with Lord Chaitanya?

Answer: The conversation between Lord Chaitanya and Ramananda Raya is a deep philosophical one. In the hierarchy of that conversation, Sarva Dharma Paritijya (renouncing all dharmas) is interpreted in a specific way. The focus in this context is on not adhering rigidly to the duties of Varanashram, as both adherence to and renunciation of it are seen as external. The deeper point is about connecting with Krishna and hearing about Him, as described in the verse Sthane sthita shruti gatham. The emphasis is on Krishna’s teachings, rather than on external practices.

Thank you for your questions and for being part of this journey.

The post Gita key verses course 51 – Appreciating the Gita’s three conversations Gita 18.76 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 50 – Love is the ultimate reality Gita 18.65
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Today, we come to the devotional conclusion of the Gita. I have titled this talk Love is the Ultimate Reality. In this session, we will discuss how Krishna’s loving heart is revealed in the final verses of the Gita.

I will base my discussion on this verse, where Krishna speaks about four key points. First, he says, “Think about me—not just in a detached way, but in a devotional sense. Worship me and offer your obeisances to me. If you do this, you will come to me. I assure you of this. I speak the truth, O Arjuna, because you are extremely dear to me.”

Today, we’ll explore three main sections:

  1. Krishna’s love revealed in the last verses.
  2. Appreciating Krishna’s love in his dispassionate analysis.
  3. Appreciating Krishna’s love in his passionate call.

The Bhagavad Gita begins with Arjuna in a state of indecision: should I fight, or should I not fight? Gradually, Krishna shifts Arjuna’s focus from the body to the soul, and from the soul to the whole. The whole is revealed more and more clearly as the all-attractive, supreme Krishna. The 18th chapter, which is often considered the summary of the Gita, is called Sannyasa Moksha Yoga (The Perfection of Renunciation and Liberation).

Krishna tells Arjuna that renunciation leads to perfection, but for that to happen, Arjuna must reconceptualize what renunciation truly means. In this chapter, Krishna explains a gradual progression, where one rises up through different stages until reaching the level of bhakti (devotion). This progression was explored earlier in the Gita: from working with detachment to work as worship, and then from the impersonal to the perfection of transcendental personalism.

In the final verses, Krishna asks Arjuna to surrender to him. In 18:63, Krishna concludes his message with a dispassionate analysis: “Now that I’ve given you this philosophy, deliberate and decide what you want to do.” This is crucial because Krishna’s love is seen in the freedom he gives Arjuna. Love is founded in freedom.

For example, if a boy loves a girl and proposes to her, but then threatens her with a gun, saying, “You must love me or I’ll kill you,” that is not love—it’s coercion. Love is always based on freedom. Krishna respects Arjuna’s freedom when he says, “Now, you decide what you want to do.”

Krishna’s approach is one of respect. He provides a worldview and philosophy but leaves the choice up to Arjuna. This is not about blindly following commands but about making a conscientious, informed decision. The Sanskrit word Vimrish means deliberation, a deep contemplation. Krishna encourages Arjuna to take as much time as needed for serious reflection, saying, “Vimrishaytadasheshena”—”Contemplate exhaustively.”

Krishna does not condemn desires but guides them. One of my friends once said he wanted to write a book on the Gita, calling it The Ten Commandments of the Gita. I told him not to write it because the Gita is not a book of commandments. The mood of the Gita is not one of a God sitting high in the sky issuing edicts. Krishna, in fact, could have finished the Gita in just six words: I am God, obey me, fight. But that’s not what Krishna wants. The Gita is about voluntary surrender, not forced obedience.

Even in ordinary relationships, we may use authority to get things done. A boss might say, “If you don’t do this, I’ll fire you,” or a similar form of coercion may apply. But such authority rarely leads to a closer relationship. True relationships grow when there is voluntary harmony, not forced subordination.

Krishna’s message is consistent with the mood of the Upanishads, which also encourage learning from the wise, but leave the final decision to the individual. The Gita, while short compared to other texts like the Puranas, is still a philosophical analysis rather than a set of instructions. Krishna’s goal is to guide Arjuna toward a voluntary, informed choice, not to demand obedience.

In this way, Krishna’s mentoring style respects Arjuna’s independence and free will. Love, as Krishna teaches, is not about imposing commands but about offering guidance and leaving the choice to the individual.

In conclusion, Krishna’s love is seen not only in the freedom he gives but also in his appeal to human intelligence, ensuring that we choose wisely and in alignment with our highest good.

Now, why is the appeal important? The appeal is important because love can be understood in different ways. Parents love their children, and one of the duties of parents is to educate their children. In the early years, parents might simply demand, “Do this, don’t do that.” However, over time, they need to gradually explain why certain actions should be taken. For example, “If you do this, this will happen. If you do that, something else will happen.” This is a form of appeal—teaching children to understand the consequences of their actions so that they can make informed decisions.

Krishna also adopts this approach. He appeals to human intelligence so that we can choose wisely. But how does he appeal to our intelligence? He provides guidance, helping us see the connection between choices and their consequences. For instance, in verses 18:58-60, Krishna tells Arjuna, “If you become conscious of me, you will pass over all obstacles by my grace. However, if you act independently out of ego, you will be lost.” This verse can be seen as a summary of the Bhagavad Gita, with Krishna presenting both the choice and the consequence.

Krishna uses this method repeatedly throughout the Gita, adopting a mentoring approach rather than a domineering one. His love is expressed not by demanding obedience but by empowering human intelligence to make the right choices. The purpose of his dispassionate analysis is not to foster helpless compliance but to enable Arjuna to make decisions using his intelligence. There is a difference between empowering intelligence and overpowering it.

Each of us is called upon to use our intelligence, and Krishna encourages Arjuna to do the same. The purpose of the Gita is not merely to tell Arjuna what to do but to provide the resources and framework for making decisions in the future. The idea is not just to provide an immediate answer but to equip Arjuna with the wisdom to navigate similar challenges later on.

A common analogy for this is the idea of helping a hungry person: while giving food addresses their immediate need, teaching them skills or responsibility to earn their own living is far more beneficial. Similarly, if Krishna had simply told Arjuna, “You must fight,” there would be no Bhagavad Gita and no lasting wisdom for us. The Gita’s purpose is to equip us for decision-making, not just to give us one-time instructions.

In the spiritual realm, we often learn to follow the instructions of our spiritual master, and this is certainly true. But one of the instructions of the spiritual master is to also become independently thoughtful. Take, for example, the instruction given to Srila Prabhupada: “Go to the Western world and share Krishna Bhakti.” There was no follow-up, no list of tasks or steps. Prabhupada, through his independent thinking, took the initiative and created a movement. In a similar way, we need to internalize the mood of Krishna’s teaching and learn to be responsible for our spiritual growth.

Being dependent on Krishna, our spiritual master, or the devotees doesn’t mean shirking responsibility. In fact, the more responsibility we take, the more we will grow in our spiritual lives. Krishna’s love is expressed in the freedom he offers, but this freedom is not without guidance. It is freedom for us to make choices, and that is where Krishna’s love is manifest.

However, love is not just about giving freedom; there is another aspect—love also includes a passionate call. Up until verse 18:63, Krishna has been explaining, analyzing, and advising. But starting from 18:64, Krishna shifts from description to invitation. The mood of the Gita changes, and Krishna’s love becomes more evident. Arjuna is lost in thought, struggling to decide what he should do, reflecting on all the teachings Krishna has given him. It is at this moment that Krishna speaks from the depths of his heart, revealing his love more fully.

While love is founded in freedom, it is also fulfilled in love. Freedom is desired not simply for the sake of independence, but so that we can love. And love, in a sense, brings certain boundaries—boundaries that are not forced but voluntarily accepted. Going back to the earlier example of a boy proposing to a girl, if he holds a gun to her head, that is not love. But when the boy proposes from the heart, expressing his love sincerely, the proposal becomes irresistible—not because of force, but because of the depth of the feeling behind it.

The concluding section of the Bhagavad Gita is like Krishna’s loving proposal, an invitation. Krishna is bearing his heart, revealing his love, and offering it to Arjuna. In verse 18:64, Krishna says, “Now I will offer you the most confidential knowledge.” He tells Arjuna, “This is the highest knowledge because you are very dear to me. I am determined to love you, and this knowledge I am sharing is for your benefit.”

Krishna had earlier told Arjuna that the devotees are determined in their devotion. In the same way, Krishna expresses his determination to love the devotees. Krishna’s love is reciprocal—just as the devotees are determined to love him, he is determined to love them.

The most confidential knowledge Krishna offers is that by offering love to him, we can achieve spiritual perfection. This is the essence of Krishna’s message from verses 18:64 to 66.

In future sessions, we will revisit the levels of knowledge in the Gita and explore how the thought flow develops across the chapters. For now, the point is that Krishna’s love is found not only in his dispassionate analysis but also in his passionate call, inviting us to enter into a relationship with him.

The first two lines are exactly the same, and even the third line is half the same. Krishna promises that if you do these four things, you will come to Him. But after this promise, something new comes in.

If you engage with your whole being, devoted to Krishna, you will certainly come to Him. Here, there’s a reciprocation – Krishna will offer His grace provided certain expectations are fulfilled. However, in 18.65, it’s not just a reciprocal promise; it’s an assurance. Krishna is saying, “I will surely do this,” and it’s not just expectation but a fervent call. If you do this, I will surely do this for you.

The emphasis here is not so much on setting out the terms of a deal but on Krishna’s eagerness. He’s almost desperate for Arjuna to make the right choice. For example, imagine a seller who desperately wants to sell their house. They could say, “If you do this, this, and this, you can have the house.” But if they’re eager to make the sale, they might say, “If you just do this, the deed will be yours in 24 hours.” In both cases, the transaction is the same, but the eagerness is different.

Similarly, Krishna’s eagerness towards Arjuna is not to infringe on his independence, but He is deeply concerned that Arjuna makes the right choice. Krishna doesn’t want Arjuna to be forced into a decision, but He is fervently encouraging Arjuna to choose wisely. It’s like a doctor recommending a course of treatment: the doctor can’t force the patient to choose, but the doctor urges them because they know it will help.

In 18.65, Krishna’s love is expressed more fervently. It’s a repetition that emphasizes the importance of the decision, but the focus has shifted. Earlier, Krishna emphasized that Arjuna should make a decision. Now, He emphasizes that if Arjuna makes the right decision, Krishna will certainly fulfill His promise.

Then, in 18.66, we come to a verse that may seem strange or even subversive: “Sarva-dharman parityajya.” This verse is well-known, and in many places where the Gita is recited, children may be encouraged to memorize and recite it. I attended a program where children recited this verse, but I was surprised to hear it recited as “Sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja” because the verse says “sarva-dharman,” not “sarva dharmaan.”

Some commentators claim that there’s an error in the text, suggesting that over time, an “n” was mistakenly added. They argue that Krishna is the prescriber and enforcer of dharma, so He couldn’t possibly ask someone to give up dharma. But this is a misunderstanding of the verse.

Krishna is indeed the teacher and enforcer of dharma. He has come to establish dharma, as He says in 4.8: “Dharma-samstapanarthaya sambhavami yuge yuge.” But here, He is calling for the abandonment of dharma in a specific context.

Krishna is the supreme in everything, and His subversiveness is not for the sake of being subversive but to establish the supremacy of love. In the Bhagavad Gita, dharma is used in different ways. At the beginning, Arjuna was torn between two types of dharma: his kshatriya dharma (the duty to fight) and his kula dharma (the duty to protect his family). Krishna tells Arjuna to set aside any dharma that comes in the way of his service to Krishna.

So, when Krishna says, “Sarva dharman parityajya,” He is not asking Arjuna to give up all dharma per se. What Krishna means is to abandon any duty (dharma) that prevents you from fulfilling your ultimate duty, which is to love and serve Krishna.

Dharma can mean different things: material dharma refers to duties based on one’s nature (Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, or Shudra), while spiritual dharma refers to duties that help us harmonize with the Supreme Lord. Krishna is teaching that while material dharma is important, the ultimate dharma is the soul’s inherent nature to serve Krishna with love.

Thus, Krishna is telling Arjuna to put aside any material duty that conflicts with his supreme duty of loving Krishna. This is not a rejection of dharma altogether, but a call to prioritize the highest dharma: the duty to love and serve the Supreme Lord.

Nowadays, many people, especially in the Western and westernized world, prefer not to identify themselves as religious. They often say, “I’m spiritual, but not religious.” The idea behind this is that they don’t want to be bound by rituals or dogmas, but they’re open to higher experiences, wisdom, and seeking meaning and purpose in life.

This verse reflects that mood precisely. The phrase sarva dharmān parityajya mām ekaṃ śaraṇam raja—“Give up all dharmas and surrender to Me”—can resonate with the ethos of those who want to be spiritual but not religious. Krishna isn’t telling Arjuna to become irreligious, but rather to give up the religiosity that is limited to mere rituals without understanding their deeper purpose.

After Krishna finishes speaking the Gita, Arjuna picks up his weapons and begins to fight. But Arjuna doesn’t fight merely as a kshatriya; he fights as a devotee. Though he’s still fulfilling his worldly duties, he’s not simply adhering to his kshatriya dharma (duty as a warrior). He is acting in alignment with his sanātana dharma, his eternal duty to serve Krishna. This eternal duty can manifest in different ways, depending on the situation. In Arjuna’s case, his eternal duty coincides with his kshatriya duty and stands in contrast to his kula dharma (dynastic duty).

Krishna isn’t asking Arjuna to abandon his dharma entirely. Rather, the essence of the Gita is about being spiritually religious. It’s not about being spiritual but not religious in the sense of rejecting all duty, but about rejecting mundane religiosity—rituals without understanding. To be spiritual, one still has duties and actions to perform, which can be considered as one’s religion.

The Gita transcends sectarianism and ritualism and focuses on the essence of love. Whatever is required to fulfill that love, Krishna says, should be done. This idea is demonstrated in the Bhāgavatam, specifically in the Rāsa-pañcādhyāya, where the gopis give up everything—family, social roles—to surrender to Krishna. This is a direct demonstration of giving up any dharma that comes in the way of bhakti (devotion). This is why the phrase sarva dharmān parityajya is important, but the more crucial part is mām ekaṃ śaraṇam raja—surrender to Me alone.

Prabhupāda sometimes said to his Western disciples that they were already practicing sarva dharmān parityajya by giving up their duties to family, society, and even their own careers. What he then taught them was mām ekaṃ śaraṇam raja, how to surrender to Krishna. Rejection is required, but the purpose of rejection is connection. It’s not about renouncing for the sake of renunciation, but to connect with Krishna.

In this context, Krishna also assures us: ahaṃ tvām sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣayiṣyāmi mā śucah. “I will free you from sin.” This idea of removal of preconditions reflects Krishna’s love. Imagine a mother teaching her child to avoid soiling their clothes, but when the child inevitably soils them, the mother doesn’t say, “Clean yourself before coming to me.” Instead, she says, “Come to me, and I will clean you.” This is Krishna’s mood: He is there to catch us when we fall, not to punish us.

In the Gita, Krishna acknowledges that people are in different modes of nature—ignorance, passion, and goodness—but even if someone is in ignorance or passion, they can still turn to Him and surrender. Krishna’s love is universal. The process for accessing Him is open to everyone, though those in higher modes of nature may require less purification. But the key point is that Krishna’s love is unconditional and accessible to everyone.

This is how Krishna’s love manifests in these verses. He is not present in our hearts to catch us when we fail like a policeman, but as a parent, ready to support us when we stumble. Krishna is there to catch us if we fall, to protect us, and to redeem us.

Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur says that if the Bhagavad Gita is considered a treasure chest, the upper lid of that chest might have jewels to inspire us to open it. He suggests that verses 1865 and 1866 are those jewels, motivating us to explore the Gita further. In verse 1865, Krishna urges us to offer love to Him and assures that He will protect us from the consequences of worldly actions. This shows Krishna’s eager call for love.

Moving to the next part of the Gita, Krishna addresses how the message should be shared. In verse 1867, He says, “Do not share this teaching with those who are envious, who lack austerity, or who have no service attitude.” This seems contradictory, but the point is similar to the Biblical statement, “Don’t cast pearls before swine.” Krishna isn’t trying to deprive anyone of the message; He’s simply making sure it is given to those who will appreciate and respect it.

The metaphor of a parent hiding wealth from irresponsible children illustrates this. A parent will reveal wealth to responsible children but will keep it hidden from those who might squander it. Krishna’s message requires discipline, austerity, and the right attitude for it to be truly beneficial.

Krishna’s teaching here is not about rejecting the world altogether, but about connecting to Him through love, devotion, and service. It is a call for responsible spiritual living, where duty is not rejected but aligned with the ultimate purpose of serving Krishna.

We are living just like animals. So when Krishna says not to give the message to those who are not austere, it means those who have not understood the opportunity that human life offers for spiritual growth. Don’t share this knowledge with them yet. Wait for them to become responsible. That’s the mood here: let them become responsible. It’s hidden not to deprive them, but to teach them responsibility.

But does this mean the Bhagavad Gita is not to be taught to people who can’t value it? No, it means we should teach the parts of the Gita that people can value. For someone who doesn’t believe in God, talking about God’s love might seem like fantasy. For someone who is utterly skeptical, we might need to start with what they can understand. We can begin by asking, “Isn’t there consciousness?” For even skepticism arises from a conscious being, and this consciousness comes from something non-material.

When Krishna talks about not sharing the most confidential knowledge, he is referring to the understanding of how much the Lord loves us. The knowledge of the soul, that we are not the body, and that life has a higher purpose—this can be shared. In fact, it needs to be shared. But Krishna gives a cautionary note not to share it with those who will not value it.

After the cautionary note, Krishna expresses his longing for the message to be shared. He desires both restraint in sharing and eagerness for it to reach others. This is seen in verses 68–71. From 68–69, Krishna talks about those who share the Gita’s message. He assures that they will attain pure devotion and will come to Him. This is like a responsible child who helps others become responsible.

In 1868, Krishna says that those who share His message will attain para bhakti (pure devotion) and will come to Him. This is a declaration more powerful than in earlier verses where Krishna spoke of the gradual path to devotion through karma, jnana, and bhakti. Now, He says that by sharing the Gita’s message, one attains pure devotion directly. Krishna assures in 1869 that no one will be as dear to Him as those who share His message with others. In the 12th chapter, Krishna described virtues that endear a devotee to Him, but here He says that those who take the responsibility of sharing His message are especially dear to Him.

Someone might think that teaching the Gita is too difficult. But Krishna assures that if one cannot teach it, at least one can study it. Studying the Gita is also a form of worshiping Him with the intelligence. Just like we use various items like lamps and fans to perform rituals, studying the Gita is another way of worshiping Krishna with our intelligence.

Krishna emphasizes that if one cannot share the message, at least try to understand it. If someone can’t study, Krishna suggests hearing the message, which is also purifying and elevating. Even hearing the message of love brings us closer to Him.

Krishna’s compassion overflows in this message. It’s like a person trapped in a well who is thrown a rope to climb out. The person may feel that climbing is too difficult, but Krishna says, “Hold on to the rope and I will pull you out.” This is like Krishna saying, “If you can’t share the message, at least study it. If you can’t study, at least hear it. I will help you climb out of the well.”

In this way, any connection with the Gita is beneficial. The message of love is not just in the Gita itself, but in Krishna’s eagerness for us to connect with it.

If you can’t hold on to the rope, then the person might send down a large tub. You just sit in that tub, and I will pull you out. That’s what Krishna is offering in this verse of the Gita when He says, “Just hear My message.” Krishna’s love is overflowing, and He urges us to connect with Him in whatever way we can. As Rupa Goswami has mentioned in the Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu, this idea is reflected here: Just connect with Me at any level, and through that connection, you will be elevated and eventually liberated.

Such is the Lord’s love, and this love is the ultimate reality. The Bhagavad Gita discusses philosophy and various yoga practices, but its ultimate purpose is to lead us to the realization of one truth: the reality of love. Krishna’s love for us is the ultimate reality. The more we offer our love to Him, the more our existence progresses toward this ultimate reality. Yes, there is a terrible war to be fought, with much killing and destruction, which is an unpleasant and unpalatable reality. But beyond all of that, Krishna’s love remains, and through His love, He elevates Arjuna, who carries out His will. Even those who defy His will are within His plan, and they too will be appropriately dealt with to eventually be elevated.

The Bhagavad Gita gives us a vision where we acknowledge and address the contextual realities of life, but remember that beyond all of them, the ultimate reality is love. Every situation in life is ultimately an expression of Krishna’s love for us, and it is an opportunity for us to offer our love to Him. This is what the Gita teaches. It is not just a book of philosophy but a loving expression of the Lord’s heart. When we understand the Gita in this way, we can fully appreciate its message.

To summarize, I spoke today on the topic of how love is the ultimate reality, and we explored Krishna’s love for us in three key aspects:

  1. Dispassionate Analysis: Krishna’s love involves providing freedom. He respects human independence, appeals to human intelligence, and provides guidance on the correlation between choices and consequences.
  2. Giving Guidance and Expressing the Heart: Love is not just about freedom but also guidance. It is not simply about giving guidance, but about expressing one’s heart. Like a boy who proposes to a girl, Krishna makes a fervent appeal. From verse 64 onwards, Krishna’s appeal becomes impassioned, and He wants us to reciprocate love with Him.
  3. Eagerness and Assurance: In 1865, Krishna’s call is filled with assurance: “If you just do this, I will surely do this.” This shows His eagerness for us to make the right choice. In verse 1866, Krishna emphasizes that any dharma that obstructs love (prema) must be abandoned. This doesn’t mean becoming adharmic, but that dharmas that hinder love should be set aside.

And what if we feel unqualified to love the Lord? Krishna reassures us: Just surrender to Him, and He will free us from all sinful reactions. The path of bhakti is accessible even to those who may seem far from spirituality.

We also saw how Krishna treasures the message of love. When He says not to share it with those who are not austere, He is not trying to deprive them but protecting the message from being squandered by those who are not ready for it. However, Krishna desires that everyone be enriched with this treasure.

In the next verses, Krishna emphasizes that those who share His message with others become immensely dear to Him. They will attain the same perfection that comes from the gradual progression through karma, jnana, and bhakti yoga. No one will be more dear to Him than those who share His message.

If someone can’t share the message, Krishna suggests studying it. If someone can’t study it, at least hear it. This is like holding onto the rope to climb out of a well, or sitting in a tub attached to the rope, and Krishna will pull us out. His mercy and love are increasing at every step.

Krishna’s love is the ultimate reality, beyond the contextual realities of life. Every situation is an expression of His love for us and an opportunity for us to offer our love to Him.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Regarding the differences between those who are dear to Krishna as discussed in the 16th, 12th, and 18th chapters of the Gita:

  • In the 16th chapter, Krishna speaks about virtues that make a person dear to Him, particularly those that align with divine qualities, like fearlessness, humility, and compassion. These virtues bring us closer to Him.
  • In the 12th chapter, Krishna emphasizes devotion and qualities that endear a devotee to Him, such as humility, patience, and unwavering faith. Here, the focus is on personal transformation through devotion.
  • In the 18th chapter, Krishna talks about how sharing His message with others is the most endearing activity. It shifts from discussing virtues to actions, specifically the act of sharing the knowledge of the Gita. While virtues are still important, the stress here is on actively spreading Krishna’s love.

In essence, the 12th chapter emphasizes virtues that make one dear to Krishna, the 16th chapter highlights divine qualities, and the 18th chapter focuses on the action of sharing the message of love, which makes one particularly dear to Him.

However, they may not be interested right now, but those who are inclined, those who are at least looking upward, those who are acting on their potential for devotion, and those who are spiritually receptive, we can share that message with them. The key idea here is that when the word “bhakteshu” is used, it refers to devotion in an inclusive sense. It doesn’t necessarily mean someone who is chanting a prescribed number of rounds but someone who is exploring life’s spiritual side or questioning whether there is a higher reality.

Unless a person is aggressively atheistic, I’ve done this exercise a few times with people who are not religiously inclined. I ask them, “Is there any time in your life when you’ve felt that there is a higher power or some intervention from a higher source?” Even people who may seem utterly materialistic have shared amazing realizations or stories, indicating that they’ve had some acknowledgment of a higher power or intervention. This very acknowledgment that there is some higher power is a sign that they are moving forward spiritually, and it shows they have some level of devotion.

So the message can be shared, but the point is that it should be shared according to receptivity. We shouldn’t speak in a way that is incomprehensible or alienating to people. One aspect of teaching the message of love is not only to tell how much God loves us but also to tell how lovable God is, and to share His glories. If someone doesn’t have at least a devotional disposition, hearing about God’s glories might trigger negative feelings, such as envy. If this happens, it won’t be conducive for their spiritual growth. Therefore, it’s better not to speak about Krishna’s glories to those who are likely to respond with alienation, anger, or envy.

The essence is to speak in a way that is appropriate for people’s spiritual elevation. The message of love, centered on God’s love for us and His lovability, should be spoken to those who are at least inclined or receptive to loving God.

Regarding the next future sessions, this is not the last one. Gorkumar, this is the 49th or 50th one. I thought this was the 50th. I saw it listed as the 49th in the series, which is why I’m a little confused. So the next session will be the last one, where we’ll try to put together the Gita and look at its concluding verses.

Okay, one last question I’ll take: What does the word “Vraja” mean in this context?

“Vraja” literally means “go.” Krishna is standing in front of Arjuna, so why does He say “go and surrender to Me” in sarva-dharma-pṛityajyā mām ekaṁ śaraṇam vraja (18.66)? There are multiple ways of understanding this. Even if you take “go” to mean physically going, it doesn’t imply surrendering to someone inside Krishna. If someone is inside Krishna, you don’t need to go far to reach Him, because Krishna has repeatedly talked about worshipping Him, remembering Him, and that He is already present in our hearts.

In the overall context of the Gita, Arjuna has to fight the war. Krishna is not asking Arjuna to physically go somewhere, but He is telling him to surrender in a way that is actionable in the current situation. So, śaraṇam vraja means to surrender by doing what Krishna has commanded. Arjuna’s surrender is not just a passive action but an active one — it means to take up the weapons and fight in the war.

It’s like a military general giving an order to a subordinate, such as a colonel or lieutenant. If the subordinate feels the order is incorrect, they may discuss it. But ultimately, surrendering means to follow through with the directive — in this case, to go and fight the war. So the word “Vraja” in this context means to act according to Krishna’s will in the world. While the Lord is in our hearts, He also exists in the world, and to surrender to Him means to act in the world according to His direction.

If we examine the overall flow of the Gita, Krishna is asking Arjuna to surrender to Him by fulfilling his duty as a warrior. He is not referring to someone other than Himself, and there is no need to take “Vraja” as referring to a distant or separate reality.

Thank you very much! I’m happy to be of service.

The post Gita key verses course 50 – Love is the ultimate reality Gita 18.65 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 49 – The Quest for Oneness – Where it is right and where it goes wrong?
→ The Spiritual Scientist

This discussion is going to be one of our concluding discussions on the Bhagavad Gita. We will have two more discussions after this. We will be discussing a topic that we have already hinted at in many ways, but we will address it directly for the first time: the search for oneness—where it is right and where it goes wrong. This will be based on Bhagavad Gita 18.55.

In Bhagavad Gita 18.55, Krishna says: “Devotees can know me as I am, actually. And having understood me in this way, they enter into that unlimited reality.” This verse, at first reading, can give a sense of oneness. It seems to say that through devotion, you can know me in truth, and after knowing me, you will enter into the one.

However, the actual word used is not “oneness,” but “anantaram,” meaning “unlimitedness” or “unlimited reality.” Now, what is that unlimited reality? That is often the subject of much philosophical debate. From today’s context, we will try to understand the sense of oneness.

Oneness is a very hotly debated subject, especially in the broad Indic philosophical context. There have been centuries of conflicts over this concept. However, I will not approach the subject from that traditional perspective. Yes, there are traditional debates by commentators from both the impersonalist and personalist traditions. In fact, both traditions have used war metaphors to describe their conflict—especially between the Madhva tradition and the Shankara tradition.

For instance, one commentator wrote a book called Advaita Kaalanala, meaning “the ultimate fire of destruction for Advaita.” On the other hand, the Advaitins (followers of Shankaracharya) wrote a book called Madhva Mukhamardana, meaning “smashing the face of Madhva.”

In Indian tradition, the confrontation between oneness (Advaita) and duality (Dvaita) has been a long-standing contest. In the past, when books were not easily accessible and printing was not available, scholars wrote books for scholars. They would often send these books to their opponents by having them carried on elephants. This back-and-forth exchange continued for generations. The debate over Advaita and Dvaita primarily revolved around the interpretation of Vedantic truths, especially statements from the Upanishads.

In contrast, today, oneness has a particular resonance and appeal. I will approach the quest for oneness from a contemporary perspective. Why is oneness so popular today? Almost any philosopher from the broad Indian background, and many spiritual teachers in general, tend to gravitate toward oneness. Most mainstream spiritual teachers advocate for oneness.

However, many of today’s spiritual teachers are not deeply learned in scripture, and their followers are often not particularly interested in scripture either. As a result, when we use scriptural arguments to refute impersonalism, they may not resonate much with people. The attraction to oneness or the orientation toward it is not necessarily rooted in scripture but in something else.

The concept of Advaita was re-envisioned in modern times—not as a merging into the absolute, but as an attempt toward harmony and unity in this world. I will explain this difference and elaborate on it further. Traditionally, Advaita Vada spoke of oneness at the transcendental level, where everything merges into the non-differentiated Brahman. In contrast, modern Advaita, sometimes called neo-Advaita, focuses on achieving oneness here and now, in the world, as a solution to disunity and disharmony.

This modern approach to oneness has great appeal today because the world is divided in many ways. Yes, the world has always been divided, with different people practicing different faiths or holding different belief systems. Historically, these people did not interact as frequently. Geographical and theological divides were often aligned. However, today, there is much more interaction due to tourism, trade, employment, and politics. As a result, differences in belief systems are more apparent, and addressing those differences has become a pressing issue. Oneness, in this context, seems to offer a logical solution.

In fact, many Indian spiritual teachers use oneness as a moral higher ground when engaging with Christianity. Christians often claim that Jesus is the only way to salvation, while proponents of Advaita claim that there is only one way—the same oneness can be found in all manifestations of the divine, whether it is Jesus, Muhammad, Krishna, or others. In this way, the Advaitins position themselves as more broad-minded and inclusive, contrasting with the exclusivity of Christian claims.

Thus, the appeal of oneness is not only in terms of the diversity we experience in the world but also in how we can avoid that diversity leading to conflict. For that, oneness is seen as a means of harmonization.

But it goes beyond harmonizing to homogenizing, trying to make everything into one in some ways. This is a bit of an elaborate contextualization for what I am speaking about. The way I’m approaching the subject is not by quoting scripture and explaining what this or that scripture says. I’ve already given a series of classes in my Upanishad course, where we talk based on scripture. But today, I am going to speak about why impersonalism appeals so much in today’s world and how we can address the longing for oneness. That’s why the title is focused on oneness, not impersonalism.

Oneness is indeed appealing, and even bhakti (devotion) and wisdom fulfill that longing for oneness. How they fulfill it is what we will discuss today. So, I will cover three points: What’s right about the longing for oneness? What’s wrong about it? And finally, how oneness can be understood holistically.

The Problem of Multiplicity

Multiplicity leads to confusion. It’s not just duality that we experience in the world. Duality is a philosophical concept where we see categories like male and female, Indian and Pakistani, American and Russian, etc. These are opposites, but we don’t only encounter duality; we encounter multiplicity. It’s not just about two-ness; it’s about the many. Multiplicity can distract us, divide us, delude us, and degrade us. Let’s look at these one by one.

How Can Multiplicity Distract Us?

There are so many things to pay attention to, and we keep looking for something new. We often hope that this new thing will bring us pleasure, but it never does. We’re left forever dissatisfied. This craving, driven by multiplicity, is a key force behind materialism and consumerism. The consumer industry constantly bombards us with new products. But this applies even in the spiritual domain, where people, instead of focusing on one spiritual path, jump from one to another. The allure of exploring multiple paths leads them to believe that all paths are one, so they no longer have to evaluate each individually. Oneness can be seen as a simplistic solution to the problem of multiplicity.

How Can Multiplicity Divide Us?

Multiplicity divides because people are not just attracted to different things, but even to opposite things. We’re not just talking about casual interests. For example, someone may prefer pizza while another prefers paratha—that’s fine. But when we talk about ultimate interests, things get more serious. For instance, if my ultimate belief is that only one God is real, and all other gods are false, I might feel compelled to destroy the beliefs of others. Multiplicity can create conflict, especially when it comes to ultimate beliefs.

How Can Multiplicity Delude Us?

Multiplicities, from both a scientific and traditional philosophical perspective, are ultimately superficial. Whether you look at it from the scientific standpoint, where everything is made up of atoms or subatomic particles, or from the traditional Sankhya perspective, where everything is made of the five elements (earth, water, fire, air, ether), everything boils down to a single source. From this view, multiplicity is an illusion. In science, the universe’s sensory properties—like beauty, taste, or color—are difficult to explain from the perspective of fundamental particles, which are insensate and colorless. Similarly, in traditional philosophy, how do attractive forms arise from basic elements? This complexity is confusing, leading to the delusion that multiplicity is real.

How Can Multiplicity Degrade Us?

In the pursuit of the new, we often become obsessed and irrational. We might become immoral or even insane. Insanity can occur when people become addicted, but even in the pursuit of sensual pleasures, we can lose our moral compass. In situations where there is a multiplicity of desires, people often act irrationally, wanting what others have—whether in relationships, politics, or consumer goods. Multiplicity breeds problems.

Is Oneness the Solution?

Yes, we hope that by seeing everything as one, the problem of multiplicity will disappear. The quest for oneness promises focus, harmony, elevation, and enlightenment. These qualities correspond to the four issues I raised about multiplicity—distraction, division, degradation, and delusion. We believe that finding one underlying reality beneath all the multiplicity will bring peace and clarity.

But is oneness truly the solution?

Oneness is often discussed today not just in terms of the ultimate reality, but also as a way to achieve harmony and unity in this world. This is a modern redefinition of Advaita (non-dualism)—not just as an abstract philosophical concept, but as a path toward unity in a divided world.

Now, let’s step back and reconsider what we are actually seeking when we pursue knowledge. Are we simply looking for information? For example, we may seek to know the capital of a country or the name of a river. That’s one kind of knowledge. But when we seek ultimate knowledge, we’re really searching for the biggest explanatory category that can account for everything. What is an explanatory category?

Consider when Newton observed an apple falling and asked, “What made the apple fall?” He wasn’t just asking about this one event; he was asking about the broader question: “What makes things fall?” This was not simply an answer to a specific event but an attempt to discover a general law—gravity, which explains many events. An explanatory category is a broader framework that helps us make sense of things.

Similarly, if you meet someone who doesn’t speak English, you might need to find out what language they speak. This becomes the explanatory category for understanding communication. In the same way, when we seek knowledge, we are seeking a bigger explanatory category, one that can help us understand the underlying unity of everything.

If our phone or laptop stops working, we don’t just ask, “Why did it stop working?” and accept, “Oh, because a particular component of the software got corrupted.” That’s not enough. There could be many different reasons why the computer got corrupted—viruses, software issues, or something else. It’s an explanatory category. We can delve deeper into the cause, but often, we don’t need to analyze everything in great detail. What we’re ultimately looking for is one explanatory category that can explain everything.

For instance, science has been seeking a “theory of everything” or a “grand unified theory.” Many different scientific theories exist, and scientists have been searching for a grand theory to unify them all. However, they are realizing that this search is elusive and that finding such a theory might be very difficult. Still, the idea of oneness is also an intellectual quest. The world is full of multiplicity, and to make sense of it, we need one explanatory category to simplify things. For example, we place people into categories based on behaviors, such as how we act in the workplace versus at home. These categories help us navigate life and make sense of the world.

The search for knowledge, then, is essentially a search for explanatory categories that help us understand the world. For many, oneness is the explanatory category that can explain everything. If we believe everything is one, we hope that conflicts will disappear. For example, in sociology, when people fight over religion, race, caste, or nationality, thoughtful individuals may stress our oneness as human beings. We are all part of the same species, and why should we fight over superficial differences? In movies about sectarian violence, characters may say, “Can you tell which blood belongs to a Hindu or a Muslim? We’re all the same.” The idea here is that oneness could dissolve our conflicts.

We might even extend this oneness beyond human beings to include animals. After all, animals also experience pain and suffering, so we should treat them with compassion too. The search for oneness seems like a natural solution to the problems caused by complexity and multiplicity. With so many conflicts in the world today—due to interactions between people from different cultures, technological advances, and increasingly complex jobs—oneness feels like an antidote to the fragmentation and division we experience.

So, there is much right with the search for oneness. However, the issue isn’t with the quest itself but with how we conceptualize oneness. When searching for oneness, we often make certain assumptions that influence our understanding of it. For example, one assumption is that for something to be truly one, it must be formless and impersonal, because form and personality tend to dilute and divide. Specifics—like gender, nationality, or personality—are seen as divisive, while universals—such as the idea that we are all human—are believed to unite.

While there’s truth in the idea that specifics can divide, we must ask: Does removing these specifics actually unite us? If we reduce everything to a single, formless entity, does that solve the problem of division? We can say, “We are all human beings,” but what does that really mean? Our shared humanity might seem like the common ground, but what exactly does it entail? We all experience pain, but we don’t always experience the same types of pain or the same responses to it. Someone who follows a vegetarian diet might feel pain when they see others eating meat, while a non-vegetarian may feel pleasure from it. So, is sentience, or our shared capacity for feeling, really the key to oneness?

This raises a deeper question: Is oneness rooted in something more profound than just emotion? Beyond our emotional aspirations, is oneness grounded in philosophical reality? If we remove all divisive factors—race, religion, and gender—what are we left with? The concept of a formless, impersonal oneness often leads to a state of being that is devoid of emotion, desire, and love. And while such a state might be peaceful, it can feel lifeless, akin to a stone.

It’s easy to claim, “I love humanity,” because it’s a concept that feels good to say. But when it comes to loving individual human beings, it’s much harder. As the comedian said, “I love humanity; it’s only human beings I have a problem with.” Why? Because relationships with real people come with their own complexities. People have personalities, desires, and habits that might clash with ours. It takes commitment, humility, tolerance, and sacrifice to truly love and care for others.

So, while it’s easy to say we love humanity as an abstract concept, truly loving human beings—flaws and all—is where the real challenge lies. And when we claim to love humanity, it’s often more about feeling superior to others. The emotional appeal of oneness is powerful, but we must consider whether oneness, when stripped of its specifics, is truly the solution we seek.

The love for humanity must be expressed through love for specific human beings. Only then can that love for individuals expand. However, oneness, when conceived in a simplistic way—”we are all one”—strips reality of everything that makes it attractive. It can reduce our existence to something lifeless and impersonal, almost like a stone.

This is where the Bhagavad Gita and the Bhakti tradition offer insight. They explain that not all things or qualities are equal. Similarly, not all specifics are the same. It’s not the specifics themselves that divide us, but the nature of those specifics. If we consider things in terms of material and spiritual specifics, we can make a distinction.

Let me come back to this idea later using a four-quadrant diagram, but for now, consider this: there is a point of origin where there are no specifics at all. Material specifics—such as differences in race, nationality, or personality—can divide us, while spiritual specifics are different. Spiritual specifics are part of the ultimate reality. Now, how these spiritual specifics can unite us is a larger discussion, but the assumption that removing all specifics will unite us is not entirely accurate. Removing specifics might remove everything that drives us to action and everything that makes life worth living.

Imagine a world without people—just an amorphous concept of humanity. Who would we love? Who would we connect with? We can’t have a deep, reciprocal relationship with an abstract idea of humanity. We need specific people to love, even though these people might have problems and we might have problems. The solution isn’t to depersonalize everyone and focus solely on a conceptual oneness.

While oneness is desirable, if we extend this idea to a psychological or spiritual level, it could lead to stripping away everything that motivates us to act. When people say we shouldn’t fight over sectarian differences, that’s true. But why shouldn’t we fight? It’s because we care about specifics. For example, we see one person wounded, and then another. We recognize the shared human suffering, but it’s through the perception of individual experiences that we understand this shared pain. Our emotions are driven by specific experiences, and emotions are essential for a life well-lived.

Can we absolutize oneness? I mentioned earlier that I would approach this from a contemporary perspective, but some philosophical considerations are relevant here. Two fundamental questions arise for those who assert that oneness is the ultimate reality: Where does multiplicity come from? And why are we attracted to it?

If there’s only one ultimate reality—Brahman, as described in the Upanishads—then where does the multiplicity of the world come from, and why are we so drawn to it? Some argue that this multiplicity is an illusion, but if that’s the case, then why do we experience it? If Brahman is the only reality, then where does the illusion of multiplicity originate? And why does our consciousness engage with it?

These questions are crucial because if there is only oneness, then the multiplicity we experience must be an illusion. But if we accept the existence of illusion, we must also accept that it has some reality within our experience. This leads us to a concept of “two-ness”—the coexistence of illusion and reality. So, where does the illusion come from? And how does it relate to our perception of reality?

One way to think about this is through the famous example of the mirage. There is no water in the mirage, but for me to mistake the mirage for water, there must have been some experience with water to trigger that illusion. Similarly, where does my perception of the illusion come from? There is reality, and there is illusion, but there is also the perceiver—me—who perceives the illusion.

So, if everything is ultimately one, we must ask: Where does the perception of the illusion come from? This is a central mystery of consciousness, and it can be explored from both a philosophical and scientific perspective. From a scientific standpoint, reality is constantly changing, and the idea of a constant, unchanging reality is often an operational fiction. For example, when we look at a burning candle, we perceive a stable flame, but in reality, the flame is constantly changing. The concept of a constant flame is useful for us, but it doesn’t fully capture the dynamic nature of reality.

To understand the mystery of consciousness or the nature of oneness, we need to understand the components involved: the reality, the illusion, and the perceiver. We might say, “Everything is just a reflection” or “All of this is an illusion.” But even when we consider this in philosophical terms, we must ask: Where does the perception of this illusion come from? The perception of illusion, the perception of being a perceiver—these are key aspects of the deeper mystery of consciousness.

There are two categories to consider here: Pratibimbhavad (the world as a reflection) and Mayavad (the world as an illusion). The world is often described as a shadow or a reflection—these are different ways of understanding reality. There are many ideas within this framework, but I will just broadly categorize them here.

Reflection is possible only when there is a reality to reflect, and when there is an observer to perceive the reflection. If oneness is the ultimate reality, then why does illusion exist? And why is there someone perceiving this illusion?

The holistic understanding is that there is a reflection and there is a reality. The material form, personality, and variety represent the reflection, while the spiritual form, personality, and variety are the reality. I will explain this in more detail later.

Now, let’s explore oneness from a more holistic perspective. When we perceive the world, there are three components involved:

  1. The subject of consciousness—which is ourselves, the perceiver.
  2. The object of consciousness—what we are perceiving.
  3. The stream of consciousness—the connection or flow between the subject and the object.

For example, if an alcoholic sees a bottle of alcohol, they are the subject, the bottle is the object, and the stream of consciousness flows from the object (the bottle) to the subject (the alcoholic).

On a psychological level, the concept of “we are all one” might make sense, but when we examine oneness philosophically, we reach this conclusion: oneness would imply that the stream of consciousness is the only reality. The distinction between the subject and the object would vanish, leaving only consciousness. In this view, both the object and the perceiver are illusions. Only the stream of consciousness remains.

However, this raises a significant question: If there is nothing to perceive and no one to perceive it, can we truly say that perception exists? If there is no object to be conscious of and no subject to be conscious, what does consciousness even mean? Consciousness without a subject and an object seems paradoxical. What would this kind of consciousness experience? If there’s nothing to experience, can it really be considered consciousness?

At the intellectual and emotional levels, this form of oneness may feel incomplete. If everything is an illusion, then where does that leave us emotionally or philosophically?

This is a point often raised by animal rights activists when they argue that oneness should extend beyond humans to other species. They call the human-centered view “speciesism,” suggesting that humans should evolve to respect and care for all living beings, not just their own species.

Yes, it’s important to move beyond speciesism, but we do this because we have observed that animals, too, experience emotions and suffer like humans. Our attraction to animals and the recognition of their sentience expands the circle of compassion. The key idea here is that we extend our love to all living beings because we recognize shared characteristics with them.

However, the challenge with the simplistic idea of oneness is that it removes the very basis of affection. If there is no subject and no object, then where does affection or compassion come from? The basis of compassion is recognizing another as a subject with similar traits or experiences. If both subject and object disappear in the notion of oneness, then there is nothing left to experience or connect with.

This is why simplistic ideas of oneness—whether emotional or philosophical—are incomplete.

The Bhakti tradition offers a more nuanced perspective: Unity in diversity. The Bhagavad Gita teaches that there is not just unity in diversity, but also diversity in unity. What does this mean? It means that the subject of consciousness, the object of consciousness, and the stream of consciousness all exist within one ultimate reality. Oneness does not require the dissolution of subject and object; it means understanding that both are part of one reality.

What is this ultimate reality? According to the Bhakti tradition, it is a personal absolute.

To understand this, consider the relationship between the devotee and God. Often, when we approach God—such as Krishna—we think of ourselves as distinct from Krishna. We are here, and Krishna is there, and we are worshipping Krishna. But the deeper understanding is that we are already part of Krishna. It is not that we are here and Krishna is there; Krishna is here with us.

This realization occurs as we worship and connect with Krishna, not just externally, but internally as well. As our devotion deepens, we come to realize that Krishna resides in our hearts, and we are not separate from Him.

In Bhakti philosophy, Krishna is both the object of consciousness (the deity we worship), the subject of consciousness (He is within us, and we are His consciousness), and the stream of consciousness (the connection that flows between us and Him). Krishna embodies all of these aspects.

When we understand oneness in this way, we don’t see Krishna solely as an image on the altar. Krishna, in his inclusive reality, includes all of us. In the Nectar of Devotion, Srila Prabhupada explains that Krishna means both Himself and His energies. We may differentiate between Krishna and His energies for the sake of worship, but philosophically, Krishna encompasses all His energies, including us.

So, when we speak of oneness in the Bhakti tradition, we see it as a dynamic reality. Krishna is the subject of consciousness, the object of consciousness, and the stream of consciousness—all in one. This vision allows for a deep, enriching understanding of both individuality and unity.

From a mundane perspective, the subject of consciousness is a biological being—a human, an animal, or a plant. But from the spiritual perspective, the subject of consciousness is an embodied soul. The soul is pure, and the physical body is just a temporary vessel. The soul experiences the world through this body, but its true nature transcends material limitations.

The soul’s consciousness is filtered through its embodiment. So, what is the object of consciousness? From a material perspective, it is the various worldly objects we perceive. However, from a spiritual perspective, the object of consciousness is the all-inclusive ultimate reality with its various energies.

Take the example of being attracted to someone’s beauty. At one level, because this beauty is temporary, it could be considered an illusion. Yes, that is one way of looking at it. But another way to view it is to understand that this beauty is a spark—just a manifestation of Krishna’s ultimate beauty. It’s only when we see this beauty as separate from Krishna’s beauty that we fall into illusion.

In essence, the object of consciousness is not merely specific worldly objects. It is those worldly objects in connection with Krishna. For example, when we see the beauty of nature, if we understand that this beauty ultimately comes from Krishna, we gain a holistic vision. Thus, we don’t need to dismiss the objects of perception as illusion. The objects of perception are real; it’s just that we often perceive them as disconnected from the ultimate reality.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna repeatedly says, “Among mountains, I am the Himalayas. Among rivers, I am the Ganga. Among water bodies, I am the ocean.” He provides specific examples of objects that represent His essence. By saying, “I am these,” Krishna is not dismissing these objects as illusions. Rather, He is pointing out that these are manifestations of Krishna, and we can perceive them from a holistic perspective as part of His divine reality.

What about the stream of consciousness? The stream of consciousness is often seen as the product of the materially agitated mind or the activated brain. There are brain signals, emotions, and mental processes. While this is part of it, the stream of consciousness is ultimately the innate energy of spiritual personality. There is the supreme spiritual personality—Krishna—and smaller individual personalities, like ours. Our consciousness is a part of the cosmic consciousness, which is Krishna. Krishna is the supreme person, and we are finite persons.

So, for attaining oneness, we don’t need to remove the subject and the object of consciousness, leaving only the stream. Instead, we must recognize that the subject, object, and stream are all part of one reality, and that reality is Krishna.

For the purpose of reciprocation with Krishna, Krishna may appear as the object of perception and we as the subject. That’s fine. But even when we worship Krishna on the altar, we understand that Krishna is not only on the altar. He is also in the heart of the person standing next to us. While we may not perceive Krishna in the other person right now, we intellectually accept this understanding and gradually move toward that realization.

Moving forward, if we consider this from a broader perspective, there is the reflection and the source of the reflection. Both are real. The reflection can be seen as the material form, personality, and material specifics, while the source of the reflection is spiritual.

For example, we might think a mirage is real because we have experienced water elsewhere. Similarly, we are attracted to forms in this world because there is an attractive form elsewhere. The teachings of the Gita are clear: both the reflection and the source of the reflection are real. Materialism, however, holds that the reflection is real, but there is no world beyond this—everything beyond is just a fantasy created by religious teachings. On the other hand, impersonalism argues that the source of the reflection is real, but the reflection itself is false. Nihilism holds that nothing is real—this world and everything else are false.

The teachings of the Gita go beyond just personalism; they are transpersonal. To understand personalism, we must consider the limitations of material personality, which can lead to frustration. People let us down, disappoint us, or betray us, which might lead us to seek impersonalism—escaping from the limitations of interpersonal relationships. However, even those who seek solitude eventually yearn for connection, because we all desire reciprocation.

Impersonalism lacks reciprocation, which leads to emptiness and frustration. Transpersonalism offers a solution. It posits the existence of an all-attractive personality with whom we can have unending reciprocation, leading to ultimate fulfillment. That personality is Krishna. To attain oneness, we don’t have to remove subordinate explanatory categories.

When it comes to form, we must recognize that material form is not eternal. That’s why we are attracted to forms, but eventually, they decay. On the other hand, formlessness is difficult to conceive and relate to. How do we develop any kind of relationship with formlessness? It’s not very attractive. The answer is transcendental form, which is eternal and eternally attractive. Krishna’s form is transcendental and includes us all as part of His ultimate reality.

The ultimate oneness is not achieved by dissolving individuality, but by harmonizing our intentions. This means recognizing that serving Krishna is in our ultimate interest. We may serve Krishna in different ways, but our shared goal is to serve Krishna.

Oneness is not about eliminating the subject and the object. Rather, it is about understanding that both the subject and the object are within one reality. It’s similar to how we view a family or a nation: we may have distinct roles, but we share common interests. Similarly, when we talk about not fighting over differences, such as religion or race, we are advocating for the harmonization of intentions, not the denial of differences.

Harmonization of intention happens when we have an inclusive vision of the ultimate reality. The oneness of love—if that is what we want to experience—is what we all long for. The oneness of love requires the two-ness of lover and beloved, and then it unifies them through their shared love. This is the oneness of Bhakti. It is a harmonization of intention, not a dissolution of individuality.

The Bhagavad Gita urges us to go beyond the urge to merge and to embrace the longing for loving. The urge to merge may lead to some peace, but it is an unsatisfying, unfulfilling peace. On the other hand, the longing for loving leads to enduring fulfillment, which is what the Bhagavad Gita guides us toward.

When Krishna speaks, He is not merely referring to entering into an impersonal void or a stream of consciousness. He is talking about entering into the ultimate reality, where everything is seen as part of one ultimate reality. That is the call of the Bhagavad Gita: a call to enduring spiritual love, not a call for oneness that denies the reality of love. It is a oneness that celebrates the eternal, supreme reality of love.

To summarize what we’ve discussed today: we began by discussing why oneness has become so appealing in today’s world. The world is so divided and fragmented that we long for oneness. Then, I talked about what’s right about the quest for oneness. Multiplicity divides, deludes, distracts, and degrades us, leading to conflicts in society. When there are conflicts, people often say, “Don’t focus on your sectarian differences—see the oneness of humanity.” That’s one reason we long for oneness. In philosophy and science, too, we seek explanations—not just specific explanations, but broader explanatory categories, ultimately searching for the grand unified theory.

Then, we discussed what’s wrong with the quest for oneness. Yes, specifics divide us, but the removal of specifics doesn’t necessarily unite us, because what drives us is the experience arising from the specifics. A formless, emotionless, loveless reality is not what we aspire to.

We also briefly discussed the philosophical problem with oneness: if we talk about oneness, where does our perception of something other than oneness come from? That perception requires both the pursuit of things wrongly and the existence of perceivers who wrongly pursue them. If there is a reality and a reflection, then for the reflection to exist, there must be a reality that reflects it falsely, a medium to reflect it, and a perceiver who sees it differently.

In reality, there are three components: the object of consciousness, the subject of consciousness, and the stream of consciousness. If we take simplistic ideas of oneness to their ultimate conclusion, they require the dissolution of both the subject and the object. What remains is just a stream of consciousness—and even that may not be conscious without a perceiver.

The Bhakti tradition explains oneness differently. It doesn’t require dissolving individuality, but rather shows that everything belongs to one reality as its diverse energies. The object of consciousness, the subject of consciousness, and the stream of consciousness are all parts of Krishna. Krishna is not just one reality among many, but the one reality that unifies all realities, manifesting as the various realities we perceive. The worldly objects that attract and delude us are not illusions. Our perception of them may be an illusion, but they themselves are real. The journey toward reality is about seeing them properly.

We discussed the concept of four quadrants, where material specifics and spiritual specifics differ—one below the zero point on the negative axis, the other on the positive axis. When considering reflection and reality, the Gita teaches that both the reflection and the source of reflection are real. Materialism holds that only the reflection is real, while monism or impersonalism argues that only the source of the reflection is real, and nihilism claims that nothing is real. The Gita’s teachings guide us beyond the urge to merge and toward the longing for loving, leading to ultimate fulfillment.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.


Now, we have a few questions. Let’s see how many we can address:

  1. Entering the Kingdom of God: Krishna is not just explaining everything at once. He points us toward the spiritual world, which is ultimately a realm of loving reciprocation. The “kingdom of God” is a place of loving relationships between Krishna and His devotees. It’s not about entering an impersonal void but entering into a realm where the subject (the devotees) and the object (Krishna) of love coexist and reciprocate.
  2. Is the reality we experience an illusion of the ultimate reality?: The concept of “illusion” here can be compared to an exam created by a teacher for a student. The world we experience is like that exam—created by the ultimate reality (Krishna) for the soul to experiment with different alternatives. After this experimentation, the soul eventually turns toward Krishna.
  3. If souls are discrete, how are they parts of Krishna?: Souls are discrete parts of Krishna in the sense that they maintain individuality while being connected to Him. Think of it like being part of a nation or family: we are discrete individuals with unique identities, but we are also part of a larger whole. Similarly, souls are individuals with free will, but they are also part of Krishna, the Supreme Being. The soul’s individuality does not contradict its connectedness to Krishna.

So, this way we can understand.

Now, is seeing the objects as disconnected from Krishna an illusion in my mind when I perceive the objects as real and not from Krishna?

Well, perceiving the objects as real is not the problem. The problem is perceiving them as separate from Krishna. Beauty is real, taste is real, fragrance is real. So, what’s the issue? The issue is that we think these objects can satisfy our longing for happiness. We constantly long for happiness, but permanent happiness can’t be found in separate objects.

Now, is oneness to be understood in qualitative or quantitative terms?

When discussing oneness, it’s a bit complicated. What do we mean by oneness? Generally, Prabhupada uses the terms “qualitative” and “quantitative” to explain that we are like a drop and Krishna is like the ocean. So, is the drop the same as the ocean or different from it? Well, quantitatively, it’s different. Qualitatively, it’s one. That is one way to understand it.

At the same time, the drop and the ocean analogy is not a complete example, because no analogy is perfect. When the drop enters the ocean, does it still exist? Generally, to our observation, it does not. But if you consider the drop made of fundamental water molecules, then the molecules continue to exist. So, at a quantitative level, there is difference, and at a qualitative level, there is oneness. This analogy holds true in that context.

How did the living entity fall down and get separated from Brahman, according to Mayavad?

Generally, the question of origins has no good answer. No philosophy that I have encountered provides a satisfying answer. There are bad answers, worse answers, and worst answers. For example, materialism says that consciousness came spontaneously from matter, which is the worst answer. Mayavad, on the other hand, suggests that everything is illusion, which is a worse answer. The idea that the soul fell from the spiritual world due to envy of Krishna is a bad answer. So, there are no good answers, in my understanding.

What exactly is sayujya, and what happens when the soul attains sayujya liberation?

Sayujya liberation refers to merging with the impersonal effulgence of Brahman. When the soul enters that effulgence, it stays there but doesn’t lose its individuality—rather, it conceives that it has lost its individuality. It’s a matter of perception. If a soul strongly desires oneness in the sense of dissolving the subject and object, it may experience the blinding effulgence of Brahman, where there is no distinct object (like Krishna) to perceive. That’s why we have prayers like “hirandamayana, patreana, sattvayana,” asking for the removal of that blinding brightness so we can see Krishna. The soul may stay in the effulgence of Brahman for varying lengths of time, depending on the nature of the soul.

Are we calling monists Mayavadis?

Today, when I refer to Brahma, Madhvaites, Gaudiya Vaishnavism, Advaitins, and Dvaitins, our tradition hasn’t actively engaged in debates with Advaitins, although there have been some discussions. Our focus has generally been on establishing the supremacy of Krishna’s sweetness, rather than directly refuting impersonalism.

Mayavadis don’t use the term “Mayavadi” to label themselves. The term was coined by a prominent Advaitin scholar in the 13th or 14th century. Mayavadis assert that everything we experience is Maya (illusion), and the ultimate reality is beyond our direct experience. They do not claim that the ultimate reality is Maya, but that everything we currently experience is an illusion.

Do Mayavadis use God to explain Mithya (illusion)?

Yes, there are different levels at which explanations are given. For example, Advaitins assert that the Paramarthic reality is Brahman, and the other realities are Vyavaharic, or operational. Brahman comes into contact with the material world in different ways, manifesting as matter (Tamas), the soul (Jiva), or the supreme Lord (Ishvara) depending on the mode of nature it interacts with.

In this framework, worshipping God can be seen as a means to transcend illusion. The idea is that through worship, one progresses toward the ultimate realization of Brahman, beyond the material and personal distinctions.

So thank you very much!
Hare Krishna.

The post Gita key verses course 49 – The Quest for Oneness – Where it is right and where it goes wrong? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 48 – Can I be spiritual and still be ambitious? Can my work be my worship?
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Today, we will discuss an important concept from the Bhagavad Gita: Work as Worship—or as it is commonly expressed in Hindi, Karmahi Puja Hai. However, the Gita does not teach that “work is worship” in the literal sense but rather emphasizes work in the mood of worship. Let’s explore this idea in three parts, with a focus on Chapter 18, Verse 46, of the Bhagavad Gita.

In this verse, Krishna says:
“By whom this entire material existence is pervaded, and from whom it has emanated—worship that Supreme Lord through your work. By such worship, a human being can attain perfection.”

The key phrase in Sanskrit here is svakarmana tam abhyarcha, which translates to “By your work, worship Him.” This is often oversimplified as “work is worship,” but the Gita’s teaching goes deeper: worship Him through your work.

Let us now examine this concept in three parts:

1. The Appeal and Validity of “Work is Worship”

The phrase “work is worship” resonates universally because societies, both ancient and modern, often assign value—or lack thereof—to different types of work. In hierarchical societies, certain professions are revered as sacred, while others are considered menial or profane. For example, temple priests might be seen as performing “sacred” work, while scavengers might be viewed as engaging in “lowly” tasks.

Even in today’s largely secular world, this discrimination persists in different forms. For instance, someone working in a politically incorrect field might face social disapproval, or rural professionals might be looked down upon by those from urban, elite backgrounds. Human society has a tendency toward prejudice, leading to the undervaluation of some work and the workers performing it.

However, the Gita’s perspective helps challenge this bias. While all work has value, it also acknowledges that not all work holds the same degree of importance or requires the same level of competence. For instance, the role of an army commander differs in value and complexity from that of a foot soldier. Both are important, but their responsibilities and contributions are distinct.

2. The Problems with Equating Work with Worship

Equating “work” with “worship” can be problematic because not all work is inherently virtuous or aligned with higher principles. Work driven by selfish motives, exploitation, or unethical practices cannot be equated with worship. The Gita emphasizes that what entangles us is not work itself but the mindset and motivation behind it.

The term karma (action) in the Gita refers to work performed with the right intention, aligned with dharma (righteousness), and directed toward the service of the Divine. Thus, it is not the act itself but the consciousness with which the act is performed that elevates work to the level of worship.

3. Transforming Work into Worship

To transform work into worship, the Gita advises cultivating the right attitude. Work should be performed selflessly, with dedication, and as an offering to the Divine. This approach elevates even mundane tasks into acts of spiritual significance.

For example, in a functional hierarchy like a kitchen preparing a feast, the head chef oversees the entire operation, while others may cut vegetables or perform smaller tasks. While there is a natural hierarchy, no role should be seen as inferior. Each contribution is integral to the success of the whole.

The Gita teaches us to see all work as interconnected and essential, while simultaneously recognizing that disparity in roles does not justify discrimination. By performing our svadharma (our prescribed duties) with devotion and detachment, we can attain liberation.

The concept of work as worship urges us to transcend societal biases and perform our duties with humility and reverence. By aligning our work with divine purpose, we not only fulfill our worldly responsibilities but also progress spiritually. The Gita’s wisdom reminds us that the value of work lies not in its external form but in the spirit with which it is done.

The Transition from Functional to Moral Hierarchy

Sometimes, a functional hierarchy—the idea that certain types of work are more important than others for the sake of functioning—gets misinterpreted as a moral hierarchy. In a functional hierarchy, a leader or manager might hold more responsibility, but this doesn’t mean they are morally or spiritually superior to someone performing less prominent tasks. However, when functional hierarchies are automatically equated with moral hierarchies, it creates an unhealthy distortion.

Disparity leads to discrimination when people are judged solely by their work, and those performing what is deemed “lesser” work are derided. A functional hierarchy is essential for efficiency, but it does not—and should not—imply a moral hierarchy. For example, a worker might possess stronger moral character—being more honest or upright—than their manager. Conversely, the reverse could also be true. The point is, morality cannot be assumed based on one’s role in the functional hierarchy.

Discrimination Across Cultures and the Distortion of Work Hierarchies

In India, the caste system is often criticized for its role in perpetuating discrimination. One tragic example is the treatment of untouchables—those relegated to jobs considered “impure,” such as sanitation work. The term “untouchable” literally meant that physical contact with these individuals was seen as polluting.

This practice, however, is a distortion of Vedic principles. Foundational texts like the Bhagavad Gita and the Bhagavatam do not mention untouchability. Instead, the concept of hierarchy in work stems from functional necessities. For example, those engaged in sanitation work might need to take extra precautions for cleanliness to avoid the spread of germs. This functional precaution was misinterpreted over time as moral condemnation, leading to demeaning and discriminatory practices.

This issue is not unique to India. In medieval Europe and even in the 17th-19th centuries in the UK and America, rigid social hierarchies devalued common laborers while glorifying the aristocracy. In the Arab world, similar biases were evident, with birthright often determining perceived superiority. These examples reflect a universal human flaw: the tendency to let disparity devolve into discrimination.

The Need for Dignity of Labor

To counteract these distortions, there must be a recognition of the dignity of labor. All work has value, though not all work holds equal importance in every context. A hierarchical view of work, based on its contribution to society, is natural. However, the intrinsic value of individuals is independent of the work they perform.

The Bhagavad Gita underscores this point by teaching that every living being is a part of God. This intrinsic spiritual connection provides a foundation for respecting all individuals, regardless of their profession. The idea of work as worship aligns with this truth: it highlights that both work and workers are valuable and deserve respect.

The Ethical and Philosophical Dimensions of “Work as Worship”

The phrase “work is worship” holds great value as an ethical principle for social reform. It promotes respect for all professions and reduces discrimination in society. However, as a philosophical principle for spiritual elevation, it requires deeper scrutiny. Is all work intrinsically worship?

Consider examples of harmful or unethical professions:

  • A robber who spends their day planning thefts.
  • A professional assassin or mercenary who kills for money.
  • A beggar who views begging as a full-time job.

Clearly, not all work can be considered worship. Harmful work deserves condemnation and legal punishment, not glorification. This raises the question: who decides what work is “good,” and on what basis?

Work and the Intent Behind It

The phrase “work is worship” can be misleading if taken to mean that any work, regardless of its nature or intent, is sacred. Instead, the Gita emphasizes the consciousness and intention behind the work. Work becomes worship when performed with dedication, responsibility, and a sense of service.

For instance, years ago, I was invited to speak at a factory on the topic of “work is worship.” The organizer’s intent was pragmatic: to inspire the workers to be more diligent and responsible. However, this utilitarian approach misinterpreted the Gita’s teachings. The Gita cannot be reduced to slogans for immediate practical gains.

If hard work alone were worship, then a donkey—known for its tireless labor—would be the ultimate worshipper. Yet, donkeys are often used as symbols of pointless or directionless effort. Hard work must be purposeful and intelligent to hold value, both in ordinary life and in spiritual practice.

The Gita’s Vision of Work

The Bhagavad Gita offers a nuanced vision of work. It teaches us to act not out of compulsion or selfish gain but with a sense of purpose, dedication, and detachment. Reducing the Gita’s wisdom to simplistic slogans undermines its depth and transformational potential.

While the concept of “work as worship” can inspire diligence, it must be understood in light of the Gita’s broader teachings. Work itself is not intrinsically worship; it becomes worship when aligned with higher principles and performed with the right intention.

The phrase “work is worship” holds ethical value, promoting respect and dignity for all professions. However, as a philosophical principle, it requires qualification. Not all work is worship; it is the attitude and intention behind the work that elevate it to an act of worship. By understanding and applying the Gita’s teachings, we can transform our work into a meaningful and spiritual offering, transcending both functional and moral hierarchies.

Why Do We Need Worship?

The idea of “work is worship” often creates the misconception that work can entirely replace worship, rendering worship unnecessary. This leads to the question: Does work itself elevate our consciousness? If the purpose of life is spiritual growth and the spiritualization of our consciousness, does work inherently help achieve that, or does it entangle us further in material concerns?

In practice, when we work, we often become passionate, calculative, and at times manipulative. Without a spiritual grounding or a spiritualized consciousness, work tends to entangle us more than it liberates us. While some individuals may maintain a good consciousness while working, this does not imply that work itself produces such consciousness.

The core issue with equating work with worship is that it often results in dismissing the need for worship altogether. Statements like “Why pray or worship when you can simply do your work?” undermine the deeper aspects of life that extend beyond work. While work is essential, it is not the sole purpose of life, and ignoring this fact leads to a limited and materialistic outlook.

The Gita’s Perspective: Work as Worship

The Bhagavad Gita introduces a more nuanced understanding: the concept of work as worship rather than “work is worship.” These ideas are fundamentally different.

  1. Work is Worship: This suggests an intrinsic equivalence between work and worship, implying that all work is worship, with no need for any distinct spiritual practice. This perspective is flawed because it assumes that every action—regardless of its morality or intent—is an act of worship.
  2. Work as Worship: This recognizes that work can become a form of worship when performed in the same prayerful and spiritual consciousness that characterizes worship. In this framework, work becomes a subset of the broader circle of worship. Worship encompasses activities like prayer, meditation, and deity worship—acts distinct from earning a living or performing professional duties.

The Gita explains this with the verse “Swakarmana tam abhyarchya siddhim vindati manava” (Bhagavad Gita 18.46), meaning “By worshiping the Lord through one’s work, a person attains perfection.” This does not imply that all work automatically leads to spiritual growth but emphasizes that work must be performed in a specific consciousness to become a means of worship.

Misinterpretations of the Gita

Sometimes, people oversimplify the Gita’s teachings to suit their convenience. For example, some mistakenly claim that the Gita says, “Whatever you do will lead to perfection.” This misinterpretation arises from the verse “Mam vartmanuvartante manushyah partha sarvashah” (Bhagavad Gita 4.11), which states that all people are on Krishna’s path. While this is true in the ultimate sense, it does not mean that every path or action leads directly to God. Actions performed without spiritual intent may take many lifetimes to result in spiritual progress.

The Gita offers specific prescriptions and proscriptions—guidelines on what actions elevate or degrade our consciousness. Krishna does not tell Arjuna that all violence is worship; instead, He teaches Arjuna the consciousness in which violence, when performed as duty, can become worship.

Moving from “Work is Worship” to “Work as Worship”

To integrate work into the realm of worship, one must approach it with spiritual intent. For instance:

  • Work done with detachment: Performing one’s duties without selfish attachment to results helps align work with spiritual principles.
  • Work offered as service to God: Seeing work as a means of serving a higher purpose transforms it into an act of worship.

This requires understanding the broader Vedic framework of Purusharthas—the four goals of human life:

  1. Dharma: Righteousness or ethics, ensuring individual and societal well-being.
  2. Artha: Resources and wealth, necessary for survival and thriving.
  3. Kama: Legitimate desires, fulfilled in harmony with Dharma.
  4. Moksha: Liberation, the ultimate spiritual goal.

Dharma forms the ethical foundation of all other pursuits. Without it, material pursuits (Artha and Kama) can lead to chaos and exploitation, hindering individual growth and societal harmony.

“Work as worship” aligns with the Gita’s teachings, emphasizing the need for a spiritually grounded consciousness in all activities. By integrating work into a broader framework of spiritual growth, we not only perform our duties responsibly but also transform work into a means of elevating our consciousness.

The Role of Artha and the Path to Moksha

How does Artha (resources) come about? It requires human effort. Grains don’t grow automatically in fields—agriculture demands labor. While some fruits may grow naturally, cultivating crops involves effort. Yet, human effort alone is insufficient; divine grace is also necessary. We may till the soil and sow seeds, but without rain, our efforts will not bear fruit.

This principle applies universally: resources are essential, and they must be generated. Often, Artha is equated with money. While this is a valid association, it is not a complete one. Money today is the primary means by which we access other resources, but Artha more broadly refers to all forms of resources necessary for survival and growth.

In this context, Dharma is said to precede Artha. This means that while everyone seeks resources, we should pursue them ethically, not unethically.

Kama as Ambition and Desire

The third Purushartha is Kama. While Kama is often narrowly understood as lust, in the context of the Purusharthas, it has a broader and more positive meaning. Kama signifies ambition—the drive to achieve, to create, and to do something meaningful.

One fundamental drive shared by all living beings is the instinct for procreation. In humans, this drive extends beyond biology. Human offspring require far more care and nurturing than most other species. This parental nurturing, rooted in Kama, is one expression of ambition and love.

However, Kama is not limited to procreation or physical desires; it includes the broader human drive for achievement and fulfillment. As Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs explains, beyond basic survival, humans seek recognition, accomplishment, and meaning. Kama refers to this ambition, the desire to strive for something greater than oneself.

Yet, just as Artha can be pursued unethically, so can Kama. Hence, both must be guided and regulated by Dharma.

Moksha as Liberation and Fulfillment

The final Purushartha is Moksha, which refers to liberation. Moksha signifies freedom from the constant craving for external achievements and recognition. It is about finding inner contentment and ultimate meaning.

Over time, thoughtful individuals naturally begin to reflect on their lives. In their youth, their primary focus may be on achievement—on “making it big.” However, as they grow older, they often start seeking something deeper and more enduring: a sense of legacy and fulfillment.

While Kama is associated with external accomplishments, Moksha is about inner peace and spiritual fulfillment. It represents a shift from the pursuit of what is externally valued to what is internally enriching.

The Interplay of the Four Purusharthas

Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha are not isolated goals; they work together to create a balanced life. Artha, for example, has two distinct meanings in Sanskrit: it can mean wealth, but it also means meaning. Thus, the pursuit of Artha should ideally result in wealth that is meaningful—not just wealth for its own sake.

To lack money is undoubtedly a problem, but having only money—and nothing else meaningful—can be a far greater issue. True contentment comes not just from making money but from using it to create a purposeful and fulfilling life.

An analogy can help illustrate this balance. Consider an airport:

  • Dharma is the flat, stable ground that forms the foundation. Without it, nothing else can function.
  • Artha and Kama are the superstructures—like the control towers and runways—that make operations possible.
  • Moksha is the airplane taking off, soaring into the open skies of liberation.

When grounded in Dharma, Artha and Kama serve as a launchpad for Moksha. But without Dharma, Artha and Kama can become insatiable. The endless craving for wealth (Artha) turns into lobha (greed), and unregulated desires (Kama) can lead to bondage.

Thus, a life balanced by Dharma ensures that our pursuit of resources (Artha) and ambitions (Kama) not only supports our material existence but also prepares us for spiritual growth, culminating in Moksha.

Artha and Human Effort
Artha, the pursuit of resources, arises from human effort. Grains don’t grow automatically in fields; agriculture requires effort. While fruits may grow on their own, cultivation demands labor. However, human effort alone is insufficient. Divine grace plays a critical role. We may till the soil and sow the seeds, but without rain, our efforts yield no result. This principle—that resources must be generated and depend on both human effort and divine grace—applies universally.

Artha is often equated with money, and while this is valid, it is not comprehensive. Artha broadly refers to resources, with money being the primary medium to access other resources in today’s society. Everyone needs resources to survive and thrive, but they must be sought ethically. Dharma precedes Artha, ensuring that resources are pursued righteously, not unethically.

Kama: Beyond Lust
The third Purushartha, Kama, is often narrowly interpreted as lust. Within the framework of Purusharthas, however, Kama has no negative connotation. It represents desire, ambition, and the drive to achieve or accomplish something meaningful. At its biological level, Kama includes the drive for procreation, essential for species propagation. In human society, this extends to nurturing progeny, which requires care and connection far greater than in most species.

Yet, Kama is not limited to procreation. It encompasses all forms of ambition—the desire for achievement, fulfillment, and creativity. While Artha focuses on resources for survival, Kama drives us to pursue aspirations beyond mere necessities. When grounded in Dharma, Kama becomes a force for personal and societal upliftment. Without Dharma, it risks devolving into insatiable desire.

Moksha: Liberation and Fulfillment
The final Purushartha, Moksha, signifies liberation—freedom from material cravings and a focus on ultimate meaning and inner contentment. While youthful ambition often dominates the early stages of life, reflective individuals eventually seek lasting contribution and fulfillment. Moksha is the culmination of this search, transcending the external achievements associated with Kama.

Integration of Purusharthas
Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha are interconnected. Dharma provides the ethical foundation. Artha and Kama build the material and aspirational superstructure, while Moksha represents the ultimate goal. Without Dharma, Artha leads to greed (Lobha), and Kama becomes insatiable desire. Grounded in Dharma, however, both can lead to personal growth and spiritual elevation.

Karma and Purusharthas
Karma, or action, encompasses all four Purusharthas. Duties related to worship reflect Dharma. Work done to earn a living generates Artha. Family responsibilities fulfill Kama, and spiritual practices guide us toward Moksha. These dimensions of karma align with the progression of human life, integrating work and worship.

Varna and Liberation
Traditional views of Varna suggest a hierarchical progression across lifetimes, where diligent performance of one’s duties in one Varna leads to rebirth in a higher Varna, ultimately culminating in Moksha. For example, a Shudra performing their Dharma, Artha, and Kama diligently may be reborn as a Vaishya, and so on.

The Bhagavad Gita, however, introduces a transformative perspective. It teaches that liberation is accessible from any position in life if one works with devotion and a worshipful consciousness. This democratization of spiritual progress emphasizes that Moksha is attainable through sincere effort, irrespective of Varna.

Work as Worship
The Gita’s teaching, “By doing one’s duties as worship, one can attain perfection,” highlights that all actions, when performed with devotion, lead to liberation. This principle transcends social roles and professions. Whether a Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya, or Shudra, one can achieve perfection through dedicated and conscious effort.

Karma and Consciousness
To transform work into worship, one must recognize the divine in every aspect of action. The body, the senses, and one’s talents are all manifestations of divine grace. For instance, the unique ability to sing beautifully is not merely biological but a gift from the divine. Krishna emphasizes this in the Gita, saying, “I am ability in human beings.”

By aligning work with this divine consciousness, one’s actions become a means of spiritual elevation. Whether pursuing Dharma, Artha, Kama, or Moksha, karma imbued with devotion leads to ultimate fulfillment.


The Purusharthas provide a holistic framework for understanding life’s purposes. Grounded in Dharma, Artha and Kama support personal and societal growth, while Moksha offers liberation and contentment. Through the Bhagavad Gita’s vision, work becomes worship, and every action, when performed with devotion, becomes a step toward perfection.

The senses enable us to manifest certain abilities, and these abilities are gifts from God. Similarly, our efforts—while essential—require more than just talent to yield greatness. Talent must be combined with commitment and discipline to achieve excellence.

Even so, hard work is not always enough. Sometimes, we feel inspired to give our best, and other times, we don’t. Inspiration is like a mysterious gift; we cannot predict when or where it will arise. This inspiration, a driving force behind our efforts, often feels like a force beyond us, animating us and pushing us forward. It is not something entirely within our control, and its unpredictable nature reminds us of the divine influence permeating our lives.

While we may attribute our successes to our hard work, it is important to reflect on what enabled us to work hard at a particular moment and not at another. This force that drives us in moments of peak performance often feels like a gift from God. Alongside inspiration, destiny—another factor beyond our control—is also governed by God. In this way, our entire journey of work and effort is deeply intertwined with the divine.

Understanding this connection helps us bridge the gap between work and worship. Worship involves consciously connecting with God, but if we recognize how our work is also rooted in divine grace, we can approach it with a worshipful mindset.

In Bhagavad Gita 18.46, Krishna explains:
“yataḥ pravṛttir bhūtānāṁ yena sarvam idaṁ tatam”
“By Him, all beings are set into motion, and by Him, the entire world is pervaded.”

This verse illustrates that the world emanates from God and is sustained by Him. Both the tools and the abilities we use for our work come from the divine. For instance, a software engineer writing code may seem far removed from the domain of worship. Yet the creativity and brilliance required for coding are manifestations of divine grace. These abilities are not merely biological—they are sacred gifts from God.

This inclusive vision expands our understanding of God’s domain, which is not limited to temples or places of worship but encompasses the entire world. When we see the divine in all aspects of life, our work transforms into worship. However, this transformation requires a conscious effort to recognize the divine influence in every sphere of our lives—not in a sentimental way but in a deeply philosophical and experiential manner.

The Gita helps us cultivate a higher motivation for our work. Our perspective on work determines how inspired and dedicated we feel toward it. For example:

  • Mode of Ignorance (Tamas): A teacher with this mindset might think, “I’m just struggling to teach these unruly students.” This problem-focused vision leads to low motivation.
  • Mode of Passion (Rajas): A teacher in this mode might think, “I’m working hard to earn a living and climb the career ladder.” While more motivating than ignorance, this vision is self-centered.
  • Mode of Goodness (Sattva): A teacher here might think, “I am training the future leaders of the world.” This purpose-centered vision transcends self-interest and inspires greater dedication.

These three modes—ignorance, passion, and goodness—represent different levels of consciousness. In ignorance, problems dominate our vision, leaving us demotivated and stuck. In passion, we focus on self-centered goals, which provide some drive but lack depth. In goodness, we align with a higher purpose, finding meaning and motivation even in the face of challenges.

For example, when someone is depressed, they often feel overwhelmed by problems, unable to see any purpose. Conversely, having a clear sense of purpose helps us overcome difficulties. While a purpose in the mode of passion is material and self-focused, a purpose in the mode of goodness is broader and more inclusive.

The Gita encourages us to see beyond immediate struggles and self-centered goals. By recognizing the divine presence in all aspects of life, we can elevate our work into an act of worship. When we approach work with this expanded vision, it not only uplifts our efforts but also brings us closer to God.

When basic survival needs or fundamental drives are met, individuals may initially operate in the mode of passion. However, when we recognize that our work contributes to something greater, our motivation becomes stronger.

Adopting the vision of “work as worship” transforms how we perceive our actions. We begin to see ourselves as part of God’s plan. What is God’s plan? It is to create a better world and a better version of ourselves. Krishna’s mission, as described in the Bhagavad Gita, is to establish Dharma in society. He tells Arjuna to fulfill his duty as a warrior and assist in this mission. By doing so, Arjuna not only helps create a better world but also purifies himself internally.

We may not always perceive our work as directly aligned with the Lord’s mission, but maintaining a functional society is a prerequisite for spiritual growth. Krishna emphasizes Lokasangraha (the maintenance of societal order) in Chapter 3 of the Bhagavad Gita. Even amidst the challenges of the modern world, such as pandemics, society continues to function at a basic level—providing necessities like water, electricity, and the internet.

While it’s valid to question the moral and spiritual direction of society, we must acknowledge its role in meeting material needs. By living in such a society, we are beneficiaries, and it becomes our responsibility to contribute to its maintenance. This contribution is also part of the divine plan. When we perform our duties with spiritual consciousness, we help create a better world and inspire others through our example.

More importantly, working in a spirit of service transforms us internally. It purifies our hearts, aligning us with God’s will and paving the way for liberation (moksha). This inner transformation creates a “better me,” making us more receptive to spiritual growth.

How to Transform Work into Worship

1. Work Doesn’t Replace Worship:
Work alone cannot spiritualize our consciousness. We need dedicated time for exclusive worship to align ourselves with the spiritual grounding of reality. Daily worship helps us internalize the vision that God permeates everything, including our work.

2. Combine Diligence and Dependence:
Krishna advises us in the Bhagavad Gita to diligently perform our duties while depending on Him for the results. This balance of effort and surrender ensures that we remain focused on the process rather than being overly attached to the outcomes. If we obsess over results, our work becomes self-centered and disconnected from the divine.

3. Cultivate Equipoise:
An essential aspect of worshipful work is maintaining equanimity in success and failure, gain and loss, joy and sorrow. Krishna repeatedly emphasizes this in the Bhagavad Gita:
“Victory and defeat, profit and loss, happiness and distress—remain equipoised.”
This equanimity reflects a God-centered consciousness. When the world dominates our consciousness, we become emotionally volatile. But when our purpose is to purify ourselves and please God, we remain steady amidst life’s ups and downs.

4. Engage in Prayerful Remembrance:
Begin and end your day with prayer. Before starting work, dedicate it to God; after completing it, offer the results to Him. Even if constant remembrance of God during work isn’t feasible, regular intervals of prayer help spiritualize our consciousness. For instance, ending the day with “Narayanayati Samarpayami” (“I offer everything to Narayana”) reinforces the idea that our work is an offering to the divine.

Integration of Work and Worship

When worship directs our work, we gain clarity on why we are working and can align our efforts with a higher purpose. Similarly, work animates our worship by showing us the importance of purifying our hearts to contribute better to society. This reciprocal relationship allows spirituality to permeate all aspects of life, removing the artificial division between “spiritual” and “mundane.”

Everything becomes part of our spiritual journey. By working with values (ethics and Dharma), we create things of value (material and social contributions) and eventually realize what holds ultimate value—our elevated consciousness.

Summary

When we work with values (Dharma), create meaningful wealth and contributions (Artha and Kama), and spiritualize our consciousness, we progress toward liberation (Moksha). Whatever our role in society—be it a Kshatriya, Brahmana, Vaishya, or Shudra—our work, when done with devotion, can lead to perfection. As Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita:
“Siddhim vindati manava” (“Through such work, one attains perfection”).

By aligning our work with God’s plan and maintaining a spirit of worship, we harmonize our external actions and internal growth, bringing spirituality into every aspect of life.

Summary of the Session

Today, I discussed the concept of “work as worship,” moving from the idea that “work is worship” to “work as worship.” Here’s a brief summary:

  1. The Appeal of “Work is Worship”:
    • Society naturally has functional hierarchies where some types of work are deemed more important than others. Unfortunately, these hierarchies can devolve into moral hierarchies, leading to the devaluation of certain work or workers.
    • In this context, the principle of “work is worship” serves as an ethical reform, emphasizing that all work and workers have inherent value.
  2. The Limitations of “Work is Worship”:
    • Equating work with worship oversimplifies the concept. For example, can immoral activities, like robbery or murder, be considered worship?
    • If work replaces worship entirely, it may not elevate consciousness but instead entangle us further in material desires.
  3. Work as Worship in the Gita:
    • The Bhagavad Gita teaches that work becomes worship when performed with the right consciousness, as an offering to the Lord. By working in this mode, one can achieve liberation.
    • Work and worship are like two distinct circles with overlapping domains. To spiritualize our actions, we must consciously position our work within the overlapping domain of worship.
  4. The Four Purusharthas (Dharma, Artha, Kama, Moksha):
    • Dharma: Spiritually grounded ethics and principles.
    • Artha: Resources needed for functioning in the world.
    • Kama: Ambitions or desires.
    • Moksha: Liberation from material entanglements.
    • These four are like the components of an airport: Dharma is the foundation, Artha and Kama form the superstructure, and Moksha represents the airplane’s takeoff.
  5. Varna and Liberation:
    • Traditionally, one’s Varna (social role) determined their duties and spiritual progress. However, the Bhagavad Gita asserts that liberation is possible from any Varna, provided one works in a mode of worship.
    • This involves seeing all components of work as connected with and sustained by God.
  6. Spiritualizing Work:
    • Our vision determines our motivation. A teacher, for instance, may see their work differently based on their mindset (ignorance, passion, goodness, or pure goodness).
    • In pure goodness, we see work as part of God’s plan to create a better world and a better self.
  7. Practical Steps to Work as Worship:
    • Set aside exclusive time for worship to internalize a spiritual vision of work, the worker, and the world.
    • Work with diligence and dependence, trusting that God will handle the results.
    • Accept results with equanimity, avoiding emotional extremes.
    • Cultivate prayerful remembrance of God before, during (if possible), and after work.

By following these steps, we integrate work and worship, ensuring that our actions align with spiritual principles.

Addressing the Question

Question:
In Bhagavad Gita 18.48, Krishna says one should not give up their natural occupation even if it has faults. However, what about professions that involve unethical activities, such as selling drugs, alcohol, or butchering animals? Should one continue in such professions while practicing Krishna consciousness, or should they change their occupation to progress spiritually?

Answer:
This is an excellent and nuanced question. Let’s break it down:

  1. Context of 18.48:
    • Krishna acknowledges that all occupations have inherent faults, like fire being accompanied by smoke. However, the emphasis is on performing one’s prescribed duties (Svadharma) with dedication and detachment.
  2. Ethically Challenging Professions:
    • Some professions, like selling alcohol, butchering, or drug dealing, conflict with the principles of Dharma because they harm society or exploit others. In such cases, continuing such work while aspiring for spiritual progress creates a conflict of values.
  3. Progressive Transition:
    • For individuals in such professions, the recommendation is not to make abrupt changes unless possible. Instead, they should gradually transition to more ethical and Dharma-aligned occupations. The key is intention and effort toward improvement.
    • While in the transition, one should practice Krishna consciousness diligently, offering prayers, and seeking guidance on how to align their livelihood with spiritual principles.
  4. Focus on Purification:
    • The ultimate purpose of any work is self-purification and contribution to society. If a profession obstructs spiritual progress or harms others, it becomes necessary to change it. Krishna consciousness provides the strength and clarity to make these shifts over time.
  5. Practical Considerations:
    • Some individuals may feel trapped due to financial or societal pressures. In such cases, they should begin by introducing spiritual practices into their lives (chanting, worship, study of scriptures) and seek guidance from spiritual mentors or communities. Over time, these practices create the internal clarity and external circumstances needed for change.

Conclusion

The principle Krishna outlines in 18.48 is about accepting the imperfections inherent in all work and focusing on spiritual growth. However, when a profession directly contradicts Dharma, a progressive shift is necessary. By working in a spirit of worship, one can elevate their consciousness and eventually align their livelihood with Krishna’s teachings.

Hare Krishna. Are there any further questions?

Prabhuji, even within the working class, such as the Vaishya community, things have changed. Nowadays, they have to sell a variety of products, which may not always align with traditional values.

There are multiple levels at which one can be connected with the Lord. In the Vedic culture, for example, in the Chaitanya Charita Amrit, there is a story of a fisherman who was fishing, and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu jumped into the ocean. The fisherman caught the Lord in his fishing net. The fisherman is described objectively, with no moral judgment or condemnation. He became ecstatic by the mercy of the Lord when he touched Him. Similarly, various professions are described in Vedic tradition. Even in the first canto, Prabhupada mentions that when Krishna came to Dwarka, prostitutes were also attracted to Him.

This raises an important question: how can someone in such a profession still be considered a devotee of Krishna? There are two distinct aspects to consider here: one’s social situation and one’s spiritual disposition. At one level, these two are related, but at another level, they should not be conflated.

For example, our social situation does affect our spiritual disposition. If someone visits a bar and says, “I will maintain spiritual consciousness in a bar,” it might be possible, but it’s challenging. From one perspective, is going to a bar a bad thing? There’s a popular series called Socrates at a Bar in philosophy. From a Western cultural viewpoint, drinking wine in a bar is just part of the culture. It’s not considered morally reproachable. However, a bar is also a place where people lower their barriers and engage in conversations they might not otherwise have.

The purpose of visiting a bar can vary. For someone who works at a bar, the purpose might be to earn a living rather than to drink. They are not immune from temptation, but their purpose is different. On the other hand, someone who goes to a bar to drown their sorrows or escape their problems is in a different situation. For someone whose culture does not include regular visits to a bar and who goes there to escape life’s problems, that is spiritually detrimental.

But for someone who frequents a bar as a regular activity, it may not have as strong of an effect, although reform is still necessary. The impact of such an activity depends on whether it is driven by a desire for gratification or simply a regular part of their social life.

Let’s take another example: Hare Krishna Kirtan. There are traditional instruments used in the Kirtan, but today, many devotees perform Kirtan with contemporary Western music, like rock or jazz. Can Hare Krishna Kirtan be done this way? Yes, Krishna can be glorified in every style. For someone raised in a traditional Indian environment, if they hear the Hare Krishna mantra in a Western style, what will resonate more strongly for them might be the music itself, not the mantra. Their remembrance may lean more towards Western music than Krishna. On the other hand, if someone familiar with Western music hears the Hare Krishna mantra in that format, it might draw their attention to Krishna in a way that feels familiar.

What strengthens or weakens one’s remembrance of Krishna will differ from person to person. This highlights the relationship between spiritual disposition and social situation. These two are connected but should not be conflated.

Let’s apply this idea to profession. For someone in a family tradition, say, a butcher, starting to practice Bhakti, the act of killing animals is clearly not morally justifiable. But, Bhakti is a new element added to their life, and that’s important. On the other hand, for someone living a life without such a profession, if they choose to engage in it, it will likely have a much stronger impact on their consciousness.

Killing animals will affect the consciousness of a butcher, but since it is habitual for them, it won’t take a dominant place in their awareness. If they start practicing Bhakti, that is a positive step. As they continue, they will progress in their spiritual journey.

The Vyadha Gita in the Bhagavatam, a section of the Mahabharata, is quite radical and subversive. It describes how a sage, who lives a very pure and uplifting life, receives wisdom from a butcher. The wisdom shared by the butcher is profound. This story does not recommend that everyone become a butcher, but it teaches us that we shouldn’t approach the world with preconceptions. We don’t know the past life of a butcher or why they are caught in that profession. One’s profession is just one part of their life.

Does it define their entire life? Not necessarily. Sometimes someone may be circumstantially caught in a particular profession, and it may not be so easy to change it. So, we shouldn’t reduce people to their profession and say, “Because you are in this profession, you are condemned.”

Not necessarily. A person can be in a profession as seemingly anti-spiritual as being a butcher and still possess spiritual wisdom. Now, one might ask, “If they have so much spiritual wisdom, why are they caught in that profession?” Well, that question should be investigated. It is not a justification for staying in an anti-spiritual profession. Rather, it demonstrates how spirituality can transcend the boundaries we might impose on it. Spiritual consciousness is not confined to particular professions.

There are professions that are detrimental to spiritual consciousness, and there are those that may be more conducive to it. As much as possible, we should choose professions that are conducive to spiritual well-being. However, we should not impose our preconceptions onto reality.

Now, regarding Krishna’s statement in the Bhagavad Gita that “all work is covered by fault, just as fire is covered by smoke,” the point is not to condemn or reject one’s work as profane. Arjuna should not think, “I have to kill, so maybe I should not perform this work.” Arjuna’s work as a Kshatriya is not killing. Yes, killing in war is part of his duty, but it is not the essence of his work. A Kshatriya has many responsibilities, and killing in battle is just one aspect of that.

Arjuna shouldn’t reject his work thinking it is profane. He should perform it with spiritual consciousness. Similarly, we shouldn’t make the blanket statement that someone who is a butcher must reject their work to become spiritual. They can start their spiritual journey from where they are. Yes, all work has faults, but that doesn’t mean all work has the same degree of fault.

For example, Brahmanas might conduct yajnas in which animals are killed, whereas butchers may slaughter animals daily. There is a significant difference between these types of work. The statement that “all work has faults” doesn’t mean that all work is equally faulty. Some work is more faulty than others. If one can move toward a profession with fewer faults, that is desirable.

As devotees, we aim to avoid professions that involve breaking the four regulative principles. While we may live in an interconnected world where we cannot control how our work may be used, we must choose professions that are as free from fault as possible. Just because a profession has faults, we don’t have to immediately reject it. We should perform our work with as much spiritual consciousness as possible.

If someone is caught in an anti-devotional profession, they may need a plan to transition out of it. However, developing and acting on that plan will take time. This doesn’t mean their spiritual life is on hold while they work on changing their profession. Bhakti spirituality is not bound by any material situation. We can progress spiritually from wherever we are.

That said, if someone is part of a spiritual institution, the institution may have certain standards. If someone is involved in a profession that violates the four regulative principles, they may not be eligible for initiation. Initiation is not only a spiritual connection but also an institutional one. However, this does not mean that one’s spiritual journey is hindered.

We must recognize that our social situation affects our spiritual disposition, which is why we should choose a situation that supports our spiritual growth. At the same time, we don’t have to wait for our social situation to change in order to cultivate a spiritual disposition.

So how that will be how the specifics will interact that will vary from context to context.

So thank you very much for your thoughtful questions and we’ll continue our exploration of the Bhagavad Gita in the last line.

The next few sessions till we complete it.

Hare Krishna Bhagavad Gita ki jaya.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

The post Gita key verses course 48 – Can I be spiritual and still be ambitious? Can my work be my worship? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Srila Jiva Gosvami’s Disappearance Day
Giriraj Swami

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila, Chapter Ten describes the branches of the tree named Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.

TEXT 1

sri-caitanya-padambhoja-
  madhupebhyo namo namah
kathancid asrayad yesam
  svapi tad-gandha-bhag bhavet

TRANSLATION

Let me repeatedly offer my respectful obeisances unto the beelike devotees who always taste the honey of the lotus feet of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. If even a doggish nondevotee somehow takes shelter of such devotees, he enjoys the aroma of the lotus flower.

PURPORT by Srila Prabhupada

The example of a dog is very significant in this connection. A dog naturally does not become a devotee at any time. But still it is sometimes found that a dog of a devotee gradually becomes a devotee also. We have actually seen that a dog has no respect even for the tulasi plant. Indeed, a dog is especially inclined to pass urine on the tulasi plant. Therefore the dog is the number one nondevotee. But Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s sankirtana movement is so strong that even a doglike nondevotee can gradually become a devotee by the association of a devotee of Lord Caitanya. Srila Sivananda Sena, a great householder devotee of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, attracted a dog on the street while going to Jagannatha Puri. The dog began to follow him and ultimately went to see Caitanya Mahaprabhu and was liberated. Similarly, cats and dogs in the household of Srivasa Thakura were also liberated. Cats and dogs and other animals are not expected to become devotees, but in the association of a pure devotee they are also delivered.

TEXTS 2–6

jaya jaya sri-krsna-caitanya-nityananda
jaya advaitacandra jaya gaura-bhakta-vrnda

All glories to Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Lord Nityananda! All glories to Advaita Prabhu, and all glories to the devotees of Lord Caitanya, headed by Srivasa!

ei malira-ei vrksera akathya kathana
ebe suna mukhya-sakhara nama-vivarana

The description of Lord Caitanya as the gardener and the tree is inconceivable. Now hear with attention about the branches of this tree.

caitanya-gosanira yata parisada-caya
guru-laghu-bhava tanra na haya niscaya

The associates of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu were many, but none of them should be considered lower or higher. This cannot be ascertained.

yata yata mahanta kaila tan-sabara ganana
keha karibare nare jyestha-laghu-krama

All the great personalities in the line of Lord Caitanya enumerated these devotees, but they could not distinguish between the greater and the lesser.

ataeva tan-sabare kari’ namaskara
nama-matra kari, dosa na labe amara

I offer my obeisances unto them as a token of respect. I request them not to consider my offenses.

TEXT 7

vande sri-krsna-caitanya-
  premamara-taroh priyan
sakha-rupan bhakta-ganan
  krsna-prema-phala-pradan

I offer my respectful obeisances to all the dear devotees of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, the eternal tree of love of Godhead. I offer my respects to all the branches of the tree, the devotees of the Lord who distribute the fruit of love of Krsna.

PURPORT

Sri Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami sets the example of offering obeisances to all the preacher devotees of Lord Caitanya, without distinction as to higher and lower. Unfortunately, at present there are many foolish so-called devotees of Lord Caitanya who make such distinctions. For example, the title “Prabhupada” is offered to a spiritual master, especially to a distinguished spiritual master such as Srila Rupa Gosvami Prabhupada, Srila Jiva Gosvami Prabhupada, or Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Prabhupada. When our disciples similarly wanted to address their spiritual master as Prabhupada, some foolish people became envious. Not considering the propaganda work of the Hare Krsna movement, simply because these disciples addressed their spiritual master as Prabhupada, they became so envious that they formed a faction with other such envious persons just to minimize the value of the Krsna consciousness movement. To chastise such fools, Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami very frankly says, keha karibare nare jyestha-laghu-krama. Anyone who is a bona fide preacher of the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu must be respectful to the real devotees of Lord Caitanya; one should not be envious, considering one preacher to be very great and another to be very lowly. This is a material distinction and has no place on the platform of spiritual activities. Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami therefore offers equal respect to all the preachers of the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who are compared to the branches of the tree. ISKCON is one of these branches, and it should therefore be respected by all sincere devotees of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

COMMENT by Giriraj Swami

Even among Gaudiya Vaishnavas, we must be careful to avoid offenses. We must respect and recognize the service of all Vaishnavas. As Srila Prabhupada once said, if we do not give credit where credit is due, we will become envious.

TEXT 85

tanra madhye rupa-sanatana-bada sakha
anupama, jiva, rajendradi upasakha

TRANSLATION

Among these branches, Rupa and Sanatana were principal. Anupama, Jiva Gosvami and others, headed by Rajendra, were their sub-branches.

PURPORT

In the Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika (195) it is said that Srila Jiva Gosvami was formerly Vilasa-manjari gopi. From his very childhood Jiva Gosvami was greatly fond of Srimad-Bhagavatam. He later came to Navadvipa to study Sanskrit, and, following in the footsteps of Sri Nityananda Prabhu, he circumambulated the entire Navadvipa-dhama.

COMMENT

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has described Jiva Gosvami’s Navadvipa parikrama, and this parikrama of Nityananda Prabhu and Jiva Gosvami forms the basis of the Navadvipa parikrama we perform now, under the guidance of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura.

PURPORT (continued)

After visiting Navadvipa-dhama he went to Benares to study Sanskrit under Madhusudana Vacaspati, and after finishing his studies in Benares he went to Vrndavana and took shelter of his uncles, Sri Rupa and Sri Sanatana. This is described in Bhakti-ratnakara. As far as our information goes, Srila Jiva Gosvami composed and edited at least twenty-five books. They are all very celebrated, and they are listed as follows: (1) Hari-namamrta-vyakarana, (2) Sutra-malika, (3) Dhatu-sangraha, (4) Krsnarca-dipika, (5) Gopala-virudavali, (6) Rasamrta-sesa, (7) Sri Madhava-mahotsava, (8) Sri Sankalpa-kalpavrksa, (9) Bhavartha-sucaka-campu, (10) Gopala-tapani-tika, (11) a commentary on the Brahma-samhita, (12) a commentary on the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, (13) a commentary on the Ujjvala-nilamani, (14) a commentary on the Yogasara-stava, (15) a commentary on the Gayatri-mantra, as described in the Agni Purana, (16) a description derived from the Padma Purana of the lotus feet of the Lord, (17) a description of the lotus feet of Srimati Radharani, (18) Gopala-campu (in two parts), and (19–25) seven sandharbhas: the Krama-, Tattva-, Bhagavat-, Paramatma-, Krsna-, Bhakti-, and Priti-sandharba. After the disappearance of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Sanatana Gosvami in Vrndavana, Srila Jiva Gosvami became the acarya of all the Vaisnavas in Bengal, Orissa, and the rest of the world, and it is he who used to guide them in devotional service. In Vrndavana he established the Radha-Damodara temple, where, after retirement, we had the opportunity to live from 1962 until 1965, when we decided to come to the United States of America. When Jiva Gosvami was still present, Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami compiled his famous Caitanya-caritamrta. Later, Srila Jiva Gosvami inspired Srinivasa Acarya, Narottama dasa Thakura, and Duhkhi Krsnadasa to preach Krsna consciousness in Bengal. Jiva Gosvami was informed that all the manuscripts that had been collected from Vrndavana and sent to Bengal for preaching purposes were plundered near Visnupura in Bengal, but later he received the information that the books had been recovered. Sri Jiva Gosvami awarded the designation Kaviraja to Ramacandra Sena, a disciple of Srinivasa Acarya’s, and to Ramacandra’s younger brother Govinda. While Jiva Gosvami was alive, Srimati Jahnava-devi, the pleasure potency of Sri Nityananda Prabhu, went to Vrndavana with a few devotees. Jiva Gosvami was very kind to the Gaudiya Vaisnavas, the Vaisnavas from Bengal. Whoever went to Vrndavana, he provided with a residence and prasada. His disciple Krsnadasa Adhikari listed all the books of the Gosvamis in his diary.

The sahajiyas level three accusations against Srila Jiva Gosvami. This is certainly not congenial for the execution of devotional service. The first accusation concerns a materialist who was very proud of his reputation as a great Sanskrit scholar and approached Sri Rupa and Sanatana to argue with them about the revealed scriptures. Srila Rupa Gosvami and Sanatana Gosvami, not wanting to waste their time, gave him a written statement that he had defeated them in a debate on the revealed scriptures. Taking this paper, the scholar approached Jiva Gosvami for a similar certificate of defeat but Jiva Gosvami did not agree to give him one. On the contrary, he argued with him regarding the scriptures and defeated him. Certainly it was right for Jiva Gosvami to stop such a dishonest scholar from advertising that he had defeated Srila Rupa Gosvami and Sanatana Gosvami, but due to their illiteracy the sahajiya class referred to this incident to accuse Srila Jiva Gosvami of deviating from the principle of humility. They do not know, however, that humility and meekness are appropriate when one’s own honor is insulted but not when Lord Visnu or the acaryas are blasphemed. In such cases one should not be humble and meek but must act. One should follow the example given by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Lord Caitanya says in His Siksastaka (3):

trnad api su-nicena
  taror iva sahisnuna
amanina mana-dena
  kirtaniyah sada hari

“One can chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking himself lower than the straw in the street. One should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly.” Nevertheless, when the Lord was informed that Nityananda Prabhu was injured by Jagai and Madhai, He immediately went to the spot, angry like fire, wanting to kill them. Thus Lord Caitanya has explained His verse by the example of His own behavior. One should tolerate insults against oneself, but when there is blasphemy committed against superiors such as other Vaisnavas, one should be neither humble nor meek: one must take proper steps to counteract such blasphemy. This is the duty of the servant of a guru and Vaisnavas. Anyone who understands the principle of eternal servitude to the guru and Vaisnavas will appreciate the action of Sri Jiva Gosvami in connection with the so-called scholar’s victory over his gurus, Srila Rupa and Srila Sanatana Gosvami.

COMMENT

In the olden days in India, Sanskrit scholars tried to show their proficiency by traveling and challenging other scholars and learned persons to debate. If one was successful, he would be champion. And if he was able to defeat all of the other scholars throughout India, he was known as digvijaya, the greatest champion in Sanskrit knowledge and scriptural argumentation. Just like today there is competition among the cricket teams: they go all over the world and face rival cricket teams, and there is fierce competition to win the match. So, in the olden days, there used to be competition to win debates about Sanskrit and shastra.

But Rupa Gosvami and Sanatana Gosvami were pure devotees of the Lord. They had no desire to waste time arguing and debating, to gain name and fame. So when the scholar came to debate, Rupa and Sanatana said, “You want to claim that you have defeated us? All right, you can tell people.” And they each gave him a certificate: “You have defeated me.” But when the same scholar came to Jiva Gosvami, Jiva Gosvami did not like the fact that the scholar was falsely advertising that he had defeated Rupa and Sanatana. Therefore, to uphold their honor, Jiva Gosvami engaged in debate with the scholar and defeated him.

Sahajiyas disrespect genuine acharyas. Generally, sahajiyas lack knowledge of scriptures. They think that study of scripture and discussion of siddhanta are for lowerclass Vaishnavas. They want to hear krsna-lila, talks of the pastimes of Radha and Krishna in Vrindavan—not philosophy. Once, when Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura visited Radha-kunda, the babajis became excited because they thought that, as an acharya, he would speak about krsna-lila. But to curb the sahajiyas’ pride, he spoke on the Isopanisad—not even the Bhagavad-gita—to establish the fact that the sahajiyas should first learn the basic knowledge of the revealed scriptures.

Some sahajiyas think that initiating disciples is another form of materialism. And they blaspheme genuine acharyas for having many disciples. They cannot understand that the discussion of shastra and the training of disciples are transcendental, and so they blaspheme bona fide spiritual masters like Srila Jiva Gosvami. When Jiva Gosvami defeated the scholar, the sahajiyas thought that he was being proud and wanted to show that he knew more than others. They could not understand his real motives—to defend the names of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Sanatana Gosvami and to curb the false prestige and false propaganda of the scholar. One of the basic principles of devotional service is that one should not tolerate blasphemy of the Lord or a devotee. Sahajiyas think that being humble means to tolerate all sorts of insults. And personally we should tolerate insult. But when there is insult to the spiritual master or the Vaishnavas or Krishna, we should not tolerate. If we are able, we should defeat the opposing party. The sahajiyas like the verse trnad api su-nicena taror iva sahisnuna / amanina mana-dena kirtaniyah sada harih. But Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the author of the verse, Himself showed the example that although for one’s own sake one can be meek and humble and tolerate all sorts of insults, in relation to the spiritual master and the devotees one should not tolerate. Therefore, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu came to the place where Jagai and Madhai had insulted Nityananda Prabhu, ready to kill Jagai and Madhai. And thus He showed the real meaning of trnad api su-nicena.

PURPORT (continued)

Another story fabricated to defame Srila Jiva Gosvami states that when Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami showed him the newly-completed manuscript of Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Jiva Gosvami thought that it would hamper his reputation as a big scholar and therefore threw it in a well. Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami was greatly shocked, according to this story, and he died immediately. Fortunately a copy of the manuscript of Sri Caitanya-caritamrta had been kept by a person named Mukunda, and therefore later it was possible to publish the book. This story is another ignominious example of blasphemy against a guru and Vaisnava. Such a story should never be accepted as authoritative.

COMMENT

Mundane people are so envious that they do not hesitate to criticize such a great personality as Srila Jiva Gosvami. They even manufacture stories. Here the story is that Jiva Gosvami was afraid that Sri Caitanya-caritamrta would diminish his reputation as a devotee and scholar and therefore out of envy he threw the manuscript in a well so that the book would be lost. Indirectly, they charge that Jiva Gosvami was responsible for the death of Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami. Such a claim is absurd—and offensive.

PURPORT (continued)

According to another accusation, Srila Jiva Gosvami did not approve of the principles of the parakiya-rasa of Vraja-dhama and therefore supported svakiya-rasa, showing that Radha and Krsna are eternally married.

COMMENT

Svakiya-rasa means relationship with one’s own wife. And parakiya-rasa means relationship with someone who is not one’s wife, who is either not married at all and thus is under the protection of her parents, or who is married to someone else and thus is under the protection of her husband.

PURPORT (continued)

Actually, when Jiva Gosvami was alive, some of his followers disliked the parakiya-rasa of the gopis. Therefore Srila Jiva Gosvami, for their spiritual benefit, supported svakiya-rasa, for he could understand that sahajiyas would otherwise exploit the parakiya-rasa, as they are actually doing at the present time. Unfortunately, in Vrndavana and Navadvipa it has become fashionable among sahajiyas, in their debauchery, to find an unmarried sexual partner to live with to execute so-called devotional service in parakiya-rasa. Foreseeing this, Srila Jiva Gosvami supported svakiya-rasa, and later all the Vaisnava acaryas also approved of it.

COMMENT

Once, a man asked Srila Prabhupada, “Krishna enjoyed with the wives of others, so did He not commit adultery?” Srila Prabhupada replied, “Everyone and everything is the property of Krishna. Your wife is also Krishna’s property. So, who is committing adultery?” Because all souls belong to Krishna, Krishna’s relationship with them is svakiya.

PURPORT (concluded)

Srila Jiva Gosvami was never opposed to the transcendental parakiya-rasa, nor has any other Vaisnava disapproved of it. Srila Jiva Gosvami strictly followed his predecessor gurus and Vaisnavas, Srila Rupa Gosvami and Sanatana Gosvami, and Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami accepted him as one of his instructor gurus.

COMMENT

If Jiva Gosvami had actually deviated from the line of Rupa and Sanatana, how could Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami, who elaborately described radha-krsna-lila in parakiya-rasa, especially in Sri Govinda-lilamrta, have accepted him as siksa-guru? All the acharyas in the line following Rupa Gosvami accept the transcendental parakiya-rasa, and they also accept Srila Jiva Gosvami as siksa-guru. When they accept Srila Jiva Gosvami as siksa-guru, there cannot be any fault or deviation in him. He argued in favor of svakiya-rasa simply to pacify some ignorant disciples who could not appreciate the transcendental parakiya-rasa, and to curb the sahajiyas, who would falsely try to imitate parakiya-rasa and thus go to hell. Jiva Gosvami is faultless, and bona fide followers of Sri Jiva, or of any acharya, will defend the acharya from false accusations. Jiva Gosvami did it for his gurus, Srila Rupa and Sanatana Gosvamis, and here Srila Prabhupada is doing it for Srila Jiva Gosvami.

We too should follow this principle. We should not tolerate blasphemy of the acharyas and pure Vaishnavas; we should defend them to the best of our ability. And if we are not able to defeat the criticism, then at least we should not hear it. We should leave the place.

Hare Krishna.

Are there any questions or comments?

Devotee: [inaudible]

Giriraj Swami: The spiritual master may not protest, because he is following the principle of humility, but the disciples can. When Sisupala blasphemed Krishna, none of the Pandavas could tolerate the insults, and they were ready to kill him. But Krishna said, “No!” He tolerated. Then finally He Himself killed Sisupala and delivered him. But the Pandavas were bound to become upset, and they were bound to take action.

Devotee: [inaudible]

Giriraj Swami: The associates of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu are in the highest grade. Among devotees in the highest grade we shouldn’t distinguish between big and small in a material way, just as we shouldn’t distinguish between the leaves of the tulasi tree—“That one is big, so it is better” or “This one is small, so it is lesser.” All are the same because they are parts of the tulasi plant. We may distinguish between a tulasi leaf and another type of leaf, which is not sacred like tulasi, but among the tulasi leaves we should not distinguish.

Srila Prabhupada ki jaya!
Gaura-premanande hari-haribol!

[ A talk by Giriraj Swami on Srila Jiva Gosvami’s disappearance day, January 14, 1994, Mauritius]

Discover ‘On the Way to Krishna’ Podcast – Dive Deep into the Ocean of Bhakti
→ Dandavats

Dear Devotees, Are you looking to go deeper in your Bhakti and enrich your spiritual journey? Check out His Holiness Devamrita Swami’s podcast ‘On the Way to Krishna’! Over the past two years this amazing podcast has been a source of spiritual nourishment for devotees worldwide. Maharaja shares profound insights from sacred texts like the
Read More...

ISKCON Kurukshetra: 100 Devotees Successfully Complete Bhakti Shastri Course, Set to Begin Bhakti Vaibhav Course.
→ Dandavats

ISKCON Kurukshetra celebrated a significant milestone as 100 devotees successfully completed the Bhakti Shastri course and are now set to embark on the transformative journey of the Bhakti Vaibhav course. The event also witnessed the enrolment of 80 new students in the latest Bhakti Shastri batch, reflecting the growing enthusiasm for studying Srila Prabhupada’s teachings
Read More...

Sydney New Year’s Eve Harinama
→ Ramai Swami

I was again present for the ecstatic New Year’s eve Harinama that went around the Circular Quay, Opera House, Rocks area of Sydney. This was organized by Pratapana prabhu and the devotees from the Govinda’s asrama in Darlinghurst.

As usual, the area was packed out with people coming from all over for the two fireworks, one at 9.00pm and the other at midnight to welcome in the new year. We usually go between 5.00pm and 7.00pm because any later would be almost impossible due to the crowd jam.

47 Why some people are knowledgeably ignorant or intelligently foolish
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So today we are discussing one of the key concepts in the Gita about the subtlety and the complexity by which the modes interact with each other. So I’ll talk about this based on 18.35 in the Bhagavad Gita, which talks about intelligence in the mode of ignorance. Krishna is speaking here that actually he is giving the characteristics of laziness, fearfulness, lamenting, illusion, and dreaminess. When one doesn’t give that up, that is intelligence in the mode of ignorance. So we’ll discuss these two concepts today: how knowledge and ignorance, we normally think of knowledge as the opposite of ignorance, but how they may not be opposite, and how intelligence and foolishness can both go together. And then lastly, we will try to discuss how knowledge and intelligence can work for us and not against us.

Now in the overall flow of the Gita, this is an analysis of how action works or how we can make action work in a way that is uplifting and not degrading for us. In the previous session, we discussed the various factors in action, and we also discussed what the concept of the doer is or what it means when it is said that we are not the doers. It primarily means we are not the sole doers. So today we’ll discuss how there are two resources which are critical for action, and how these resources relate to each other and what it means for us when we function in our lives. So for example, the way the Gita differentiates between knowledge and intelligence, let’s look at that first.

Now we can use the word knowledge in various senses. Knowledge can refer to the information content in our brain. It can refer to, “Oh, this person has a lot of knowledge.” Somebody can have a lot of political knowledge, somebody can have sports knowledge, somebody can have philosophical knowledge, so it can refer to information content in the brain. Knowledge is also used in a more nuanced sense when Krishna talks about Jnana in the 13th chapter. It talks about qualities, values, virtues. So the self and its value system can refer to knowledge, and knowledge can be referred to as vision or our map of the world. Krishna uses Jnana in that sense, how we perceive the world. So if we wanted to, if the word knowledge is a little confusing in this particular context, here what it means is perception. How are we perceiving the world?

So we could also say that this perception in the three modes, when we act, we perceive the world, then we process that information in our head, and then we pursue something—we act to achieve something. So that is, so perception is what Krishna talks about in terms of knowledge. And then what does intelligence mean? So knowing, intelligence can mean knowing how and why to keep things in perspective. Intelligence, it is, we have discussed earlier how it refers to keeping things in perspective and making sure that small things don’t overshadow big things in our life, that we keep small things small and keep big things big. So that is one way of understanding intelligence. Here, it refers basically to how we function purposefully in the world. So in that sense, if you want to use a driving metaphor, I’ll come to this metaphor toward the end again in the talk.

Say if you’re driving, somebody has a proper map. And by map, I just don’t refer to Google Maps, but also one is perceiving, “Okay, this is the right turn over here. This is a school section, so I have to drive slowly over here.” So it is taking in the information properly. So having a proper map, having a proper awareness of the territory in which we are driving, that is knowledge. And then just having that awareness is not enough for actually driving well. Driving well means knowing when to press the gas, when to press the brakes, how much distance to keep between one vehicle and the next vehicle, how to take turns properly. So there is a driving awareness, and then there is driving ability. So when Krishna uses the word knowledge, he’s referring to driving awareness. And when Krishna is referring to intelligence, he’s referring to driving ability.

So when he talks about intelligence, you’ll see he’s talking about how we navigate, how our senses and how we pursue purposeful activities in our life. That’s what he’s talking about in terms of intelligence. So why is this important? Because say in today’s world, we will be able to, we’ll see many people who are at one level very knowledgeable. And at another level, they seem to be ignorant, they seem to be foolish. So that means in terms of, say, their awareness, they might be very intelligent, they might have a lot of awareness, but in terms of their ability, they may not have much ability.

Now this kind of cognitive resonance struck me for the first time in my college days. When I studied engineering, I saw it as I was more interested in science. And I thought the study of science and overall scientific knowledge, applied scientific knowledge also, as a way to improve human society and not just improve human society by providing better facilities for living. But I thought that just the quest for knowledge would be so exciting and fulfilling that that would improve human character also. But then I noticed that there were people who were brilliant, as people were far more—the students were far more brilliant than me. And yet, behaviorally, they seemed to be deficient. They had many bad habits, and they seemed to be indulging in activities that were self-destructive. Somebody who could brilliantly process any electronics engineering problem, a person was a chain smoker, and I couldn’t understand why. So that person had the ability, a lot of ability, but in terms of activity, sorry, in terms of awareness, that person had a lot of information, but in terms of actual functioning in the world, it was not so good.

So that’s why we discussed two things as a topic today: how can somebody be knowledgeably ignorant? And how can somebody be intelligently foolish? So we see this a lot in today’s world because we have progressed a lot in various branches of knowledge. So whether it be in the—not just scientific knowledge, scientific knowledge, there’s phenomenal progress, but in various other areas also, there can be linguistic knowledge in which there can be a lot of progress. And what to speak of some people might study humanities, and they will study philosophy, and they might have a lot of philosophical awareness, we could say. But does that translate into any more uplifting or enlightened form of living? Not necessarily. So that’s what we’ll try to discuss today. And so once you get these two definitions of knowledge and intelligence clear for ourselves, let’s move forward.

So Krishna talks about knowledge in the three modes. And what does he say about this knowledge in the three modes? In knowledge and ignorance, what happens over there is this: knowledge and ignorance is when one only sees the things that confirm our existing conceptions and we reject everything else. So Krishna talks about this in 18.22, and there he says that, “When one takes one thing to be everything, that is knowledge in the mode of ignorance.” And so if you consider knowledge to be like a big circle, it’s only one small fragment of that knowledge one is taking, and one is rejecting everything else. So that is knowledge in the mode of ignorance. And knowledge in the mode of passion is “Pratakvenatuyatgyanam nanabhavan pratakvidhan vittisarveshu bhuteshu tadgyanam viddhirajasam.” So where one sees only the material side of reality and not only the material side, it’s only the sensual side.

In the context of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna uses the example that when one looks at people and sees that their bodies are who they are essentially and there’s nothing beyond that, that is knowledge in the mode of passion. So then there is knowledge in the mode of goodness where one sees matter and spirit both, where one sees that there is one indivisible reality beyond all the variable realities that are seen at the surface of the material level. That is knowledge in the mode of goodness. So we could extrapolate this: specifically it refers to how—so to put it in one way, in goodness they say matter and spirit both. So it’s more of a holistic vision. In passion, there is only material vision and material vision in pursuance of one’s desires. And in ignorance, there is not even a complete material vision. There is only that part of material reality which reinforces one’s conceptions. That is knowledge in the mode of ignorance.

So we could say that many people have prejudices. Say some people have prejudices or biases, and when they are prejudiced or biased, what happens basically? So if somebody has a prejudice that people from this community are like this, say people from this religion are like this, people from this country are like this, then whoever they see those people who behave like that, that reinforces their idea. And if anybody doesn’t behave like that, they just reject that idea. They just reject that perception. It doesn’t just enter, they don’t even process it—they neglect it completely. So that is how people live in what is often called the echo chamber.

An echo chamber occurs when we only hear those who agree with us and reject those who disagree, effectively blocking out diverse perspectives. This leads to the misconception that we are learning, while in fact, we are only reinforcing our pre-existing beliefs. At some level, a certain amount of processing of information is inevitable because the world is too complex for us to take in everything at once. To revisit the driving metaphor, imagine if we believe that a road is smooth in a certain locality. If we ignore the parts of the road that have bumps or potholes, we are missing crucial aspects of reality, which leads to an unhealthy approach. So, the challenge here is that we might have a map, but it becomes so dominant that we no longer see the actual territory; we only see the map. We need to see both—the map and the reality it represents—if we are to function holistically.

One aspect of reality cannot be taken as the entire reality. For instance, knowledge in the mode of ignorance occurs when we take only one small fragment of reality and treat it as the whole. This creates a false sense of understanding, where we gain information that only confirms our biases, further blinding us to other perspectives. This reinforces ignorance rather than removing it. A clear example of this is scientism—the belief that science is the only legitimate means of understanding reality, disregarding anything that cannot be scientifically measured. This kind of knowledge may provide information, but it doesn’t eliminate ignorance; it reinforces it by narrowing the scope of perception and rejecting broader realities.

When we talk about knowledge in the modes, knowledge in the mode of goodness helps to remove ignorance. In the mode of passion, knowledge may reduce ignorance but still lacks a holistic understanding. Knowledge in the mode of ignorance, on the other hand, just reinforces ignorance by narrowing our worldview. People often make assumptions based on limited information—this is the cognitive dualism at play. If we look at a painting, for example, we can focus either on the individual colors or the overall depiction of a face. Both are real, but they offer different perspectives. Similarly, in life, we are constantly processing both physical and non-physical realities, such as values and emotions, which cannot always be measured or seen in purely physical terms.

This duality also plays out in cognitive and substance dualism: cognitive dualism refers to our ability to perceive reality in multiple ways, and substance dualism acknowledges that there are two levels of reality—physical and spiritual. To understand the world accurately, we must process it using both perspectives, not just one. For example, if we consider a moral action like honesty, while honesty itself is not physically measurable, we perceive it through actions and make inferences about its presence. Thus, to function effectively in life, we need to move beyond empirical observations to make inferences based on values and virtues.

Krishna’s teachings in the Gita reflect this complexity. Knowledge in the mode of ignorance is fragmented, leading us to believe we know more than we do and preventing us from understanding the full picture of reality. Intelligence in ignorance justifies our wrongdoings, while intelligence in passion pursues only those things we desire, often with some level of regulation, but still limited to material goals. In contrast, intelligence in the mode of goodness helps us discern what is truly beneficial and aligns our actions with a higher, more holistic purpose. Krishna’s guidance helps us understand that the pursuit of knowledge and intelligence must go beyond narrow perspectives to lead us toward a life of meaningful purpose and liberation.

When Krishna says that when one pursues something wrong, it is taken to be the right thing, that is intelligence in the mode of ignorance. Going back to the example of driving, consider the lane you should drive in and the side of the road you should be on. This isn’t just awareness but also the ability to drive properly. This is intelligence. However, when one lacks that understanding, they drive destructively, harming themselves. This is intelligence in the mode of ignorance, where people may pursue the wrong things and convince themselves it is the right path.

In the mode of goodness, we understand what is worth pursuing in life, and we pursue it accordingly. But in ignorance, we may pursue wrong things and justify them, even persuading others that they are right. This leads to rationalization, where we tell ourselves rational lies, misleading our own perception of what is truly necessary.

For example, advertising today is a brilliant use of intelligence. The way products are marketed, the kinds of images and sounds used, and the special effects are all carefully designed to trigger specific desires. Intelligence is at work here, but it is being used to manipulate people, keeping them in ignorance. The advertising industry makes us believe that we need things that we don’t actually need, turning luxuries into perceived necessities, and driving people to obsess over acquiring them.

This is how intelligence can be misused in ignorance. We end up doing things we don’t need to do, believing that we need to do them. If we compare life to driving, knowledge is like a map, and intelligence is our driving ability. We need both—awareness of the road and the skill to drive properly.

It becomes complicated when knowledge and intelligence are influenced by the modes of nature (goodness, passion, and ignorance). A person may have knowledge in the mode of goodness but act in ignorance, or they might have knowledge in passion and intelligence in ignorance. Just because someone has good knowledge doesn’t mean their intelligence will align with it, and vice versa. For example, someone might have a great map (knowledge) but poor driving skills (intelligence), leading them to head in the right direction but causing damage along the way. Alternatively, someone with good driving skills (intelligence) but a poor map (wrong knowledge) may drive smoothly but miss their intended destination.

Thus, knowledge and intelligence are distinct faculties. A person’s knowledge might be in goodness, but their intelligence may not be. This is why the interplay between the modes is so complex. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells Arjuna, “You are speaking wise words, but your emotions and actions are unwise.” This shows a disconnect between knowledge and intelligence.

We must strive to align both knowledge and intelligence in a way that elevates us. One modern example of this complexity is the degeneration of secularism. Secularism began as a neutral stance toward religion, which was reasonable at the time, especially as the world became more connected. Before modern transportation and communication, different regions had different cultures and religions, so it made sense for the state to remain neutral. In ancient India, for instance, King Yudhishthira, though a Vaishnava, respected all religious traditions within his kingdom—Shiva worshippers, Shaktas, and impersonalists alike.

However, over time, secularism evolved, and its original neutrality became distorted, leading to complications that could not have been anticipated. Similarly, many ideologies, starting with good intentions, can become degenerated when they are no longer aligned with their original principles.

Secularism, in the sense of neutrality toward religion, aligns closely with Vedic values. In ancient times, the king’s duty was to establish dharma—a term encompassing basic moral conduct and societal order—rather than to enforce bhakti (devotional practices). The king was tasked with maintaining law and order, allowing individuals the freedom to pursue their spiritual growth in their own ways. Facilities were provided for people to practice their beliefs and pursue spiritual aspirations as per their inclinations.

However, neutrality in this context did not imply passivity. For instance, the Pandavas in the Mahabharata respected and interacted with various spiritual traditions. They worshiped the devatas (deities), and there was no taboo surrounding these practices. Though these interactions occurred within the broader Vedic tradition, they exemplify an openness and inclusivity. While other religions as we know them today did not exist during the Mahabharata’s time, the state refrained from enforcing a singular religious belief system.

This can be seen as a form of humility in governance—a recognition that the king cannot legislate matters of the heart. Governance focused on societal well-being, prohibiting harmful actions such as theft or violence, while leaving personal beliefs and meditations to the individual. Beliefs cannot be imposed; they must be inspired. This distinction between dharma (societal law) and bhakti (personal devotion) reflects a separation akin to the modern idea of separating religion from the state.

This principle of secularism resonates with the philosophy that laws should consider not only the good they can achieve when enforced by virtuous leaders but also the harm they might cause if enforced by those with malicious intent. In Vedic society, this was reflected in the delineation of roles: kshatriyas (warriors) maintained order, brahmanas (priests) provided spiritual guidance, and vaishyas (merchants) managed commerce. Each group operated within its jurisdiction, maintaining balance in society.

In the Western world, secularism emerged more prominently after prolonged conflicts over religious dominance, such as the Hundred Years’ War and the Protestant Reformation. Initially, much of Europe was under the Catholic Church’s authority, with the Pope acting as a figure above kings. However, with the Reformation, Europe saw divisions between Catholic and Protestant states, leading to wars and colonial conflicts across the globe. Over time, Western societies adopted a model where the state’s primary role was to maintain law and order, leaving matters of faith to individuals.

This neutrality toward religion was initially beneficial, as it reduced conflicts and fostered coexistence. However, over time, this neutrality evolved into apathy and eventually antipathy toward religion. In modern times, many states implement policies that inadvertently or explicitly marginalize religious practices. For example, during recent global lockdowns, many religious places were closed, while abortion clinics remained open, deemed “essential services.” This raises questions about the criteria used to determine what is essential, revealing a subtle bias against religion.

Secularism, when practiced as genuine neutrality, respects the domain of the heart and personal belief. However, when it becomes dismissive or hostile toward religion, it risks undermining the foundational values of mutual respect and freedom of conscience. True secularism upholds the balance where the state enforces basic societal morality without encroaching on individual spiritual freedoms. This nuanced approach resonates with the Vedic tradition’s emphasis on maintaining societal harmony while respecting personal spiritual growth.

Understanding the Disconnect Between Life’s Functioning and Purpose

Modern life often feels increasingly disconnected from its overall purpose or larger picture. While society’s functioning demands considerable intelligence—evident in innovations like electricity, the internet, and essential services—its underlying value system may lack soundness, leading to potential societal catastrophes.

Dharma and Bhakti: Clarifying Their Roles

In English, there is often no precise word to distinguish between dharma and bhakti. Dharma, as described in the Bhagavad Gita, is not merely religion but refers to law, order, and moral structure in society. Bhakti, on the other hand, is devotion and one aspect of religion, yet it transcends religion in its pure form.

Neutrality toward an object of devotion is acceptable. However, apathy or antipathy toward morality and societal values is harmful. When life becomes excessively compartmentalized—separating the spiritual, moral, and material dimensions—it leads to dysfunction and destruction.

Knowledge and Intelligence: Their Interplay

The Bhagavad Gita emphasizes living with both knowledge and intelligence. Knowledge refers to awareness, like having a map for direction, while intelligence involves the ability to act correctly, akin to having the skill to drive. The interplay between these two determines whether life is well-regulated and well-directed.

Knowledge and Intelligence in the Three Modes

  1. Knowledge in the Modes:
    • Ignorance: Awareness limited to fragments of reality or distorted perceptions.
    • Passion: Awareness focused only on material realities.
    • Goodness: Awareness of both material and spiritual dimensions.
  2. Intelligence in the Modes:
    • Ignorance: Rationalizes and perpetuates harmful behavior.
    • Passion: Driven by self-centered goals without higher purpose.
    • Goodness: Guides regulated living and ethical decision-making.

Complex Interactions

Knowledge and intelligence interact in nuanced ways. For example, scientism—a fixation on empirical data without spiritual context—can represent knowledge in ignorance. Similarly, secularism, while maintaining neutrality in governance, may lead to excessive compartmentalization, ignoring the interconnectedness of morality, belief, and societal values.

Maya and Ignorance

Maya, meaning illusion, plays a role in leading individuals toward ignorance by presenting misleading options. However, the responsibility lies with the individual who chooses wrongly. Maya does not cause ignorance; rather, it tests us. Just as a teacher sets an exam with incorrect answer choices, maya provides illusions, but it is up to us to discern and act wisely.

Integrating Knowledge and Intelligence

To lead a meaningful and fruitful life, one must harmonize knowledge and intelligence:

  • Knowledge helps direct our actions.
  • Intelligence helps regulate those actions.

The Bhagavad Gita inspired Arjuna to live both well-directed and well-regulated. Similarly, when we align our consciousness with spiritual wisdom—”Krishna-ize” it—knowledge and intelligence become our allies, leading us to a balanced and purposeful life.

Summary

  1. We discussed how life’s functioning can disconnect from its purpose.
  2. Clarified dharma (law and order) and bhakti (devotion).
  3. Explored knowledge and intelligence in the three modes, emphasizing their interplay.
  4. Addressed maya’s role as an external factor influencing ignorance while emphasizing personal responsibility.
  5. Highlighted the importance of integrating knowledge and intelligence for a meaningful life.

Q&A Discussion

Question: Does maya put us in ignorance, making us act blindly?
Answer: Maya, as an agency of illusion, provides options that may lead to ignorance. However, we are responsible for choosing those paths. Often, in hindsight, we realize our ignorance during past actions. This self-awareness highlights the need for cultivating knowledge and intelligence grounded in spiritual wisdom.

I think this is where I need clarity. How could we have avoided the situation? Sometimes, I feel like—yes, thank you—if ignorance is already present, how do we come out of it? What causes it? Maya (illusion) definitely plays a role. Its influences are present within our consciousness and circumstances. We need to start wherever we can.

There are things that are clearly black or white—actions we know are right or wrong. Then there’s a lot in between: the shades of gray where we’re unsure of what to do. Instead of starting with the ambiguous shades of gray, we should focus on the black and white. Let’s try to do the things we know are right and avoid what we know is wrong. Gradually, we can grow from there.

Countering ignorance isn’t easy. First, we need to recognize it. But wherever we do recognize it, we should act on it. Growth in any area is incremental. Just like in exercising, we don’t start by lifting heavy weights. Even in a gym where others lift big weights, we begin with what we can manage. Similarly, we start with the basics and build from there. Focus on what’s clearly black and white, and then address the shades of gray.

Now, about a follow-up question: I’ve had situations where I now realize I acted out of ignorance. One thought that comes to mind is—was it destined to happen due to my past karma? Could it have been unavoidable? How do we understand the balance between destiny and free will?

This is tough. When we reflect on certain decisions, we may now see them as wrong, but at the time, they might have felt inevitable. Was that destiny? Determining what’s right or wrong isn’t always straightforward. There are three factors to consider: content (what we do), intent (why we do it), and consequence (the outcome).

For example, a surgeon using a knife to operate has a good intent—to heal the patient. The content—performing surgery—is correct. However, if the consequence is a failed surgery leading to the patient’s death, things change. The surgeon might realize later that certain types of patients are more vulnerable, and adjustments are necessary.

Similarly, during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the intent was to save lives, and the content—developing the vaccine—was sound. But unforeseen consequences, like adverse reactions, required some vaccines to be paused or reevaluated. Sometimes, we learn about right and wrong through consequences, even when intent and content were appropriate.

If we try to correct someone, our intent might be good, and we may express ourselves respectfully. But if the person reacts aggressively or defensively, the consequence may teach us it’s better to avoid correcting them in the future. Consequences sometimes define the appropriateness of an action.

So, was it destiny? Or something else? Reflecting on life is like driving on a road. If we meet with an accident on what’s usually a smooth road, we might call it destiny. But if we were distracted, sleepy, or otherwise negligent, it’s on us.

The best approach is to learn from every situation and move forward. Sometimes, despite our efforts, things go wrong. At such times, we can accept it as destiny and move on.

Take the Mahabharata: both Bhishma and Duryodhana fought on the side of adharma. But were they morally equivalent? No. Bhishma was circumstantially bound by his vow, while Duryodhana acted out of malevolence. Bhishma’s actions could be seen as influenced by destiny, while Duryodhana’s stemmed from envy, anger, and obstinacy.

The Bhagavad Gita differentiates between such warriors. Some, like Bhishma, are like rivers flowing naturally toward the ocean—fulfilling their destiny. Others, like Duryodhana, are like moths drawn to fire, willfully choosing destruction.

Does this address your question?

From paramparanam, there’s a question: if we keep making wrong choices, does Maya (illusion) present us with more wrong choices, thus further conditioning us? Do we develop a taste for wrong choices?

Yes, that does happen. This isn’t just a static process—it’s a dynamic one. A static test, for example, would be a fixed set of 10, 50, or 100 predefined questions that follow a fixed sequence. A dynamic test, on the other hand, adapts based on how we perform. If we give a wrong answer, the next question may adjust accordingly, testing us at a lower level. If we answer correctly, the next question might test us at a higher level.

The tests of Maya are dynamic, much like a live interview. In a written exam, all questions are predetermined. But in an interview, the questions can shift depending on the answers given, probing deeper into areas of understanding. Similarly, Maya’s exams evolve based on our previous choices.

Even if we develop a taste for wrong choices, we still retain the ability to choose. For instance, someone addicted to alcohol may have limited freedom, but within those limits, they can still choose whether to take one drink, two drinks, or ten. While past choices can narrow the scope of our current choices, they don’t entirely take away our ability to choose.

Think of a dynamic test: after a series of wrong answers, the questions may become simpler, but the ability to answer correctly or incorrectly still remains. Similarly, wherever we are, we retain the capacity to make the right choice and either ascend or descend from that point.

The Last Question

Is the mind superior to the intelligence, or is the intelligence superior to the mind? Why is the mind said to be a product of ego in goodness, and the intelligence a product of ego in passion?

This involves multiple layers. While I could explain this through the technicalities of Sankhya philosophy, let’s approach it from a functional perspective.

The mind’s function is to maintain our material existence, while the intelligence’s function is to expand our material existence.

Mind and Intelligence in Functionality

  1. Mind’s Function: The mind operates in the realm of dualities: “Do this, don’t do this,” or “Choose this, not that.” It perpetuates material desires by presenting repetitive choices.
  2. Intelligence’s Function: Intelligence expands possibilities. It introduces newer and broader ways of engaging with the material world.

For example, technological advancements involve significant intelligence. These advancements have expanded the avenues for worldly enjoyment. In the past, watching a movie required visiting a theater. Today, we can stream endless movies online. Similarly, the accessibility of obscenity has increased exponentially—what was difficult to access in the past is now available instantly.

This illustrates how intelligence expands the scope of material engagement. Thus, from a functional perspective:

  • The mind is associated with maintenance (mode of goodness).
  • The intelligence is associated with creation/expansion (mode of passion).

Spiritual Application

While intelligence can expand material options, it can also expand spiritual options. For example, during times when physical visits to temples became challenging, intelligence enabled the use of online platforms for spiritual discussions and classes, making them more interactive and accessible.

The mind proposes desires, but the intelligence decides how to act on them. If intelligence simply serves the mind, it finds ways to fulfill every desire. However, intelligence can also regulate the mind by evaluating whether a desire is worth fulfilling.

When intelligence regulates the mind, it helps us elevate spiritually. But when it obeys the mind, it deepens our material entanglement.

The Role of Ego

From the perspective of Sankhya philosophy, the mind is a product of ego in goodness, and the intelligence is a product of ego in passion.

  • Ego in goodness maintains the status quo, so the mind keeps proposing repetitive desires (e.g., eating the same food repeatedly).
  • Ego in passion creates and expands, so intelligence generates new ways to fulfill desires.

However, intelligence is like a double-edged sword. When it serves the mind, it aggravates illusion and bondage. But when it disciplines the mind, it becomes a tool for liberation.

Summary

The intelligence that obeys the mind becomes our enemy, reinforcing our entanglement. The intelligence that regulates the mind becomes our friend, guiding us toward spiritual growth.

Does this answer your question?

Thank you for your attention and participation.
Hare Krishna.

The post 47 Why some people are knowledgeably ignorant or intelligently foolish appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

46 If we are not the doers why are we held responsible – Gita 18.14
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. Thank you for your patience today. We are discussing today one of the philosophically critical as well as somewhat confusing concepts of the Gita, that is the concept of doership, which we may often have heard: we are not the doers. Then the next question comes up: why are we held responsible if we are not the doers? So we’ll be discussing that topic today. We’ll base it on 18.14 in the Bhagavad Gita: Adhishthanam tatha karta karanam che purthak vidam, vividhas che purthak cheshta, daivam chayvatra panchamam. Adhishthanam tatha karta. Here, five factors that contribute to action are described. Adhishthanam is the field of action, that is the body, specifically karta, which is the doer. Karanam is the senses, the instruments of action. Che purthak vidam, the different kinds of senses are there. Then vividhas che purthak cheshta and the different kinds of endeavours are there. Daivam chayvatra panchamam. The fifth is daiva, destiny.

So let’s look at this. I’ll be talking broadly today about five broad conceptions. I remember one of the first classes I heard, or one of the first classes I gave, was about verse 3.27 where it is said that to think that we are the doers is an illusion. I said that if we think we are the doers, it often leads to confusion. If we hear that we are not the doers, it raises many questions. So, what questions are raised? One devotee, who was known to be quite lethargic and always escaping responsibility, said, “If I’m not the doer, then why should I do anything at all?” I replied, “Okay, if you should not do anything, then why eat at all?” This is something that gives us pleasure, we do it, but that which requires effort or sacrifice is what we often don’t want to do.

So what exactly does it mean that we are not the doers? Some people are literally so lazy, or we could say figuratively so lazy, that if they were given the world championship award for laziness, they would ask, “Can it be home delivered?” But to say that we are not the doers, is that something which is meant to justify lethargy? Not at all. So let’s look at the session. We will start with discussing how work relates to bondage. The point of doership is very strongly related to bondage. So, how does work relate to bondage? Then we’ll analyze action in terms of the five factors that are mentioned in this verse. Then, what does being a doer or non-doer actually mean? Then we will talk about action in terms of the modes, and lastly, how the Gita recommends non-doership in the sense of giving up not action, but giving up the sense of attachment in action. So not renunciation of action, but renunciation in action.

Now, in today’s world, when we read the Vedic scriptures, the repeated emphasis on how we are entangled and how we need to be liberated can seem very strange because people ask, “Where are we bound? What is this whole idea of bondage?” And what is the idea of being entangled and wanting to be liberated? Is it a problem at all? We can start from a perspective that we can observe and then move forward.

Where are we all bound? Some of us, maybe some people, get trapped in abusive relationships. Some people may have an exploitative boss. If that’s the only job we have and we don’t have any alternative, we have to be there. Sometimes we have certain relationships where — now, abusive is a very broad word — but there may be unpleasant relationships, and we are there in those. What do we do? Sometimes we ourselves may be bound by addictive habits. So not only do some habits become addictive, but they may also be self-defeating. Now, what is the difference? Well, some people may be just addicted to caffeine, TV watching, or things that are not immediately harmful. But self-defeating behaviors are those that lead people into heavy drugs or alcoholism, which destroy their health and life. There are degrees of this.

Now, in today’s world, even if we don’t talk about bondage in terms of physical slavery — which was present in many parts of the world in the past — we are all experiencing around us a large amount of psychological entanglement, psychological bondage. Essentially, any kind of addictive habit or self-defeating behavior leads to this. Eventually, people who get addicted may succumb to criminal behavior and be imprisoned for their crimes. Being imprisoned is a very visible form of restriction or bondage, but when we are bound by our own behaviors, it may not be so easily visible. When we are in particular relationships, that may or may not be visible, depending on the relationship. The fact is, we all get bound at times, and we don’t want to be bound. At the same time, the nature of the world is such that it entraps us.

Many people nowadays don’t want to get married because they feel that marriage is so entangling. But the reason is not that they are detached or want to pursue something spiritual; they just feel that marriage is entangling. But then what happens is, if they don’t marry, they get entangled in loneliness or superficial relationships where they pursue one thing after another, after another. So there is no easy way to escape the clutches of bondage in this world. The overall entanglement, as Bhagavad Gita explains, is the soul’s entanglement with the world. The soul is spiritual, but it gets bound in the world. The soul performs actions, and as a result of those actions, the soul gets reactions. By those reactions, the soul gets bound. This bondage of the soul to the world leads to the repetition…

It leads to old age, disease, death, rebirth, and that cycle goes on and on. So basically, when we perform actions, what drives us to do them? The soul desires to enjoy, and the desire to enjoy is what binds us. So, in this way, we are all entangled.

Now, all that I talked about earlier, such as exploitative bosses, abusive relatives, self-destructive or addictive habits, or even prison, are all entanglements in the world. We all get caught somewhere or the other in this world. But even if someone is living free from any of these specific attachments or entanglements, they are still bound simply by having a body that goes through inevitable sufferings.

So, when we talk about bondage, what do we really mean by it? Bondage or imprisonment or any kind of incarceration refers to a restriction in freedom. Even in prison, a person can move about, but within strict limits. We are all bound in terms of time. We would all like to remain young, healthy, and active. But as time passes, we are restricted more and more, and it’s an irreversible restriction. We can’t do much against it.

If we consider the last form of bondage, say, someone is in jail, the two most important questions that person will have are: What got me here? and How can I get out of here? These are the two driving questions in all spiritual philosophy, especially the philosophy spoken in the Vedic scriptures. Other religious traditions also talk about the world in similar terms. For example, the Bible says the world is a “veil of tears.” Their understanding is that we committed original sin, which is why we are trapped here and need salvation through Jesus’ grace.

But all spiritual traditions, especially the dharmic ones such as the Bhagavad Gita, focus on these two essential questions: What got me here? and How can I get out of this entanglement? These are the driving questions, and answering them is the fuel of philosophy.

Now, what is the cause of entanglement? This is the background that brings us to the Bhagavad Gita. In the 18th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna asks more or less the same question he asked at the beginning of the Gita: Should I fight or should I not fight? However, his question now is more nuanced, as his understanding has evolved. Sometimes we think that as we grow, all our questions will be answered. While yes, many questions are answered, as we evolve spiritually, our questions become subtler and more nuanced. We never become omniscient, so we never have no questions. Sometimes, we may not have questions that stir us deeply enough to ask them, but Arjuna, having heard the Gita, repeats the same question—though this time, his question is more refined. He asks, What is the difference between renunciation and the renounced order? This is the essence of his question, and Krishna will answer it using the concept of doership and non-doership.

What binds us? As I mentioned in the previous diagram, it is the action that gives rise to reactions that binds us. Arjuna’s understanding was that action itself binds us. Krishna’s clarification is that it is the intention behind the action that binds us. So, it is not the action itself that entangles us, but why we do it—our motivation. Understanding this difference is critical for understanding the solution to the problem. It’s like diagnosing a disease: knowing the cause of the disease is essential for providing the right treatment. Yes, we are entangled, and this is a disease, but what is the cause of the disease?

Now, why does intention matter? Let’s consider an action: someone is giving charity, which is generally a good thing. However, suppose someone gives money to an alcoholic. Why do they give money? Perhaps it’s because the alcoholic will become more drunk and commit domestic violence, or maybe they want to manipulate the alcoholic. In this case, the action of charity is good, but the motivation is harmful. The intention to make the person more addicted and manipulable makes the act of charity bad. So, even though charity is good, if the motivation is bad, the outcome is also bad.

On the other hand, suppose someone kills a serial killer. The action is cruel and brutal, but if the motive is to protect society from this harmful person, then is the killing really bad? No, if this action is required for establishing order in society, then it may not be bad.

These two examples show how actions that are apparently good may be ill-motivated, and actions that are apparently bad may be well-motivated. The key takeaway is that it is our intention that determines whether our action entangles us or not. So, our intention is crucial.

Now, this brings us to the second section of our discussion: action analyzed in terms of the five factors. What are the five factors?

  1. Adhishthanam tatha karta: The place of action, the body, or the field of action.
  2. Karanam cha pruthak vidha: The instruments or senses.
  3. Vividhasha pruthak cesta: The various endeavors or efforts.
  4. Daivam caivatra panchayamam: The destiny, or the higher beings under the supreme being.

Let’s take a simple example to understand these five factors: Suppose there’s a cricket match going on, and there’s a batsman. The field of action is the Adhishthanam. It refers to the body of the batsman or the cricket pitch where the action is happening. Why does it matter? If the body is injured or the pitch is waterlogged, the batsman can’t perform. So, when we discuss these five factors, Krishna means that these are the factors that contribute to the action and its result.

In this case, the soul is the karta, the batsman. Imagine if a person dies on the cricket field. Even if the batsman is in good form and the fielder is alert, if the soul leaves the body, nothing can be done. There are also the instruments of action, like the senses. The difference between the field of action and instruments of action is that for particular activities, certain senses are especially important. For a singer, the throat is crucial; for a surgeon, the fingers; and for a batsman, the arms are key.

For different people and activities, certain senses are essential, and when those senses are not functioning properly, actions can’t be completed. For example, a batsman may be physically fit, but if their hand is sprained, they cannot bat. In such cases, the necessary action cannot take place.

Beyond physical ability, endeavor is also required. The batsman must practice, undergo training, and work out for years with coaching before reaching a high level of skill. Why is all this effort necessary? Because it improves the person. An average batsman can become a decent one with practice, while a talented batsman can become excellent. Talent refers to potential, while excellence is the transformation of that potential into reality.

Beyond talent and practice, destiny also plays a role in shaping outcomes. It refers to external factors that are beyond our control, like the pandemic, which halted sports, air travel, and tourism for months. Even when everything else is favorable, things may still break down unexpectedly.

For any action to yield results, multiple factors must align. I’m now linking this to the first point, which suggests that being bound by motivation and intention is crucial. We are only one factor in the process. To illustrate, if we consider the five factors of action — the soul, the body, the senses, endeavor, and destiny — it’s clear that while we can exert effort, we cannot always control the outcome.

Even when we are fully prepared, sometimes the result doesn’t come. For instance, the batsman may have a fit body, trained senses, and ample talent, but if destiny doesn’t align, the desired result may not materialize. There are famous stories of artists or poets who became celebrated only after their death, as their works never gained recognition during their lifetime. Similarly, a batsman might perform well but be thwarted by an unforeseen storm or injury, preventing the action from even taking place.

So, while it’s true that we must act for results to occur, even our best efforts don’t always guarantee success. The balance is understanding that we are doers, but not the sole doers. We contribute to the process, but we do not have total control.

Regarding the concept of doership, we can look to the Bhagavad Gita for insight. The Gita suggests that we are not the sole doers, but it also recognizes our role in actions. In one well-known verse (Bhagavad Gita 3.27), Krishna explains that actions are performed by the three gunas (modes of material nature), and the soul, due to its ego, mistakenly believes itself to be the doer.

However, this doesn’t mean we are completely detached from action. In Gita 18.63, Krishna tells Arjuna, “Do as you desire,” affirming that Arjuna does have a choice in the matter. Arjuna’s response, “Karishe vachanam tava” (“I will do your will”), shows his acceptance of his role in action. This demonstrates that while we are not the sole doers, we still participate in the process.

The Bhagavad Gita reconciles this apparent contradiction in Chapter 18, Verse 16, which states that those who believe they are the sole doers are deluded. Their perception is superficial because they fail to see that their actions are influenced by external factors beyond their control.

Understanding that we are not the sole doers brings humility and detachment. We can put in our best effort, but the result is not always guaranteed. Our role is contributive, not decisive. We can do our part, but we must recognize that destiny and other factors also play a role.

In conclusion, while our actions matter and we must take responsibility for them, we should not believe that we are the only ones shaping the outcome. Recognizing this truth helps us approach life with balance, humility, and understanding.

One reason people have recognized the value of religion is that many thinkers understand it serves certain fundamental needs. These needs are important for human beings. We are not merely rational creatures; we are also meaning-seeking beings. While rationality may provide a small sense of meaning—such as explaining why a fruit falls from a tree or why plants grow in certain ways—it doesn’t answer the bigger questions of life, like “What is the purpose of life?” Rationality falls short in answering these profound questions.

Interestingly, even atheists have begun to recognize the utility of religion. Some atheists have written books arguing why religion matters, not because they believe in a deity, but because they understand that religion offers a social value. For instance, there are atheists who claim, “I don’t believe in God, but I believe in belief in God.” In other words, belief in God—whether or not God exists—benefits people, especially in terms of physical and mental health. Studies, such as those compiled in the Oxford Handbook of Science and Religion, support this idea, showing that those who express belief in God through actions tend to be healthier, recover faster from illnesses, and have more stable mental health.

The point I’m making here is that faith doesn’t necessarily have to be directly in scripture or God. Faith can take many forms, and it is often tied to a person’s worldview. Our motivations for actions are deeply influenced by this worldview, which is rooted in our faith.

To understand someone’s driving motivation in life, we must look at their actions, particularly the key actions they take. The 17th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita addresses this idea by examining what a person eats, what kind of austerity they practice, what kind of charity they give, and what sacrifices they make. These actions are shaped by the three cosmic cycles we exist within: the physical, the social, and the spiritual.

For the body, some austerity is necessary. The body may crave excessive sleep, indulgence, or sensual pleasures, but some self-discipline is needed. For society, charity is required. For the higher reality, cooperation and sacrifice are necessary. Thus, the way we interact with the world reflects our level of faith.

In the Gita, Krishna categorizes actions according to the three modes of material nature: goodness, passion, and ignorance. He explains how actions, food, austerities, charity, and sacrifices can be influenced by these modes. Krishna tells Arjuna that the true problem lies in our motivation. It is not just our actions that matter; it’s why we are doing them. The key to liberation is understanding the underlying motivations and changing them accordingly.

Arjuna asks Krishna about the renounced order (tyaga) and sannyasa, terms often translated differently by various commentators. Krishna explains that even renunciation can be influenced by the three modes. This is a powerful insight: giving up action itself can be done in different ways, according to the modes of nature.

Renunciation in ignorance is when someone gives up responsibilities because of illusion or irresponsibility. In passion, renunciation occurs when a person avoids duty because it causes them trouble or discomfort. And in goodness, renunciation involves giving up worldly attachments and associations, which leads to freedom from bondage.

Krishna teaches that if Arjuna truly wants to renounce, he must not only give up action but also renounce attachment to worldly things. It’s not merely about abandoning responsibilities; it’s about transcending attachment to the fruits of those actions. By doing this, a person can remain active in the world without being entangled by it.

Thus, Krishna’s message to Arjuna is that true renunciation comes from understanding the deeper motivations behind our actions and making choices that lead to spiritual growth, detachment, and liberation.

The entire Bhagavad Gita is aimed at helping us reach a higher level of understanding. Of course, there are even higher levels beyond this, but the Gita provides a solid foundation for further progress. It’s like a 100-story building: if someone is already on the 10th floor, they are on their way to higher floors. Renunciation in the mode of goodness, as described by Krishna, is like being on the 10th floor—it’s an important step, but there is always more to ascend.

Renunciation can also be understood in terms of the three modes, as can many other things in life. In the 18th chapter, Krishna analyzes action and its factors in greater detail. In the 17th chapter, we explored how faith can be analyzed through the three modes, and now Krishna begins to examine action more closely. He addresses various components involved when we act, such as knowledge, action, the actor, intelligence, determination, and happiness. All of these can be influenced by the three modes.

Take knowledge, for example. When faced with decisions, such as whether to take the COVID vaccine, people may have different opinions based on the knowledge they have. Some are eager to take the vaccine, while others are apprehensive, thinking it might not be fully tested. Even with knowledge, desires often drive our choices. An alcoholic may resolve not to drink again, but in a moment of weakness, the desire for immediate pleasure takes precedence, leading to relapse. Knowledge, like desires, can also be influenced by the three modes.

Krishna also differentiates between knowledge and intelligence. Knowledge is our perception and how we absorb information, while intelligence refers to how we apply that knowledge—how we regulate or indulge our senses and how we think about our actions. Determination is also key: we may have the intelligence to do something beneficial, but our determination to follow through may waver. Many people make New Year’s resolutions only to abandon them after a short time. Krishna’s analysis helps us understand that our actions are much more complex than simply renouncing them.

So, how does liberation happen? We have discussed the analysis of action in the three modes. Krishna advises Arjuna that it’s not about renouncing action altogether, but about cultivating an inner detachment. True renunciation involves detaching from worldly association and aspirations, while still engaging in action. The Bhagavad Gita’s central teaching is that we should act with inner renunciation. Karma Yoga, a form of action with detachment, is one such method. In Karma Yoga, we perform our duties without attachment to their fruits. Krishna talks about “work as worship” in the Gita, which we’ll explore further in the next session.

Ultimately, how do we disentangle ourselves from worldly entanglements? By making our motivations selfless. If our motivation is not for personal gain but for a higher cause, our actions will lead to less entanglement. Arjuna is not fighting to win a kingdom, but to establish Dharma and serve Krishna. As we cultivate selflessness in our motivation, we become less bound by the world. The more selfless our motivation, the less our actions entangle us.

Beyond Karma Yoga lies Bhakti Yoga, the highest form of yoga. In Bhakti Yoga, we work for the pleasure of Krishna, offering everything we do to Him. When we work as instruments of Krishna’s will, there is no entanglement in worldly results. Krishna will take the karma and give us yoga—transcendental connection through His grace.

The Gita’s ultimate message is that we don’t need to change our occupation or lifestyle; we need to change our motivation. Arjuna’s duty as a Kshatriya remains, but his motivation must shift. This shift in motivation is the essence of Krishna’s teaching. By studying and applying the Bhagavad Gita, we can change our motivations and transform our lives, no matter where we are or what we do.

Why is this the case?

We discussed the five factors of action using the example of a cricket match, where we concluded that not only are the results not within our control, but even the action itself can sometimes be beyond our control. For example, our senses may fail, our intelligence might not function as expected, or our body may not be physically capable of performing a task. Therefore, the key factor that reflects our level of consciousness is not what we do, but what we desire to do. Our desires, in turn, shape our consciousness.

Now, let’s consider what we want. What are our basic desires? We have discussed these in terms of the three modes of nature. In the 17th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna explains how even faith can be influenced by the three modes. Those who are faithful to the scriptures and devoted to the Lord are elevated, while the faithless who reject the scriptures are degraded. But what about those who are faithful yet not to the scriptures themselves?

In the contemporary world, we see some people who accept the social or psychological utility of religion, even without firm belief in God. Medical science also supports the idea that religion can be beneficial for mental health. This indicates that faith plays a universal role in shaping our actions, and it can be observed in everything we do—whether in how we eat, perform rituals, or engage in charity.

Krishna also talks about how even giving up an action is an action in itself, influenced by the three modes. This relates to the concept of renunciation, where Krishna explains that the components of action—knowledge, action, the actor, intelligence, determination, and happiness—are all shaped by the modes of nature.

To avoid becoming entangled in the world, we must strive to make our motivations as selfless as possible. Karma Yoga is one step toward this selflessness. Karma Yoga offered to Krishna takes this a step further, and Bhakti Yoga represents the highest level of selfless action. Krishna tells Arjuna that, while he is not the sole doer, it is still his responsibility to act. Arjuna agrees to take action, but Krishna teaches him that his motivation should be for a higher purpose—not to get revenge or gain a kingdom, but to establish dharma, to act in accordance with his Kshatriya duty, and to ultimately please the Supreme Lord.

When we act with this higher motivation, there is no question of becoming entangled in worldly attachments. Krishna’s message is clear: we do not need to give up our occupations, but we do need to change our concepts and purify our motivations.

Regarding Renunciation in Action:

When should one renounce action? Generally, we pray before doing an action and thank the Lord afterward. But what about during the action itself? As our devotion to Krishna deepens, we will remember Him more during our actions. Initially, we may be focused on the external aspects of what we are doing—our appearance, how we are perceived by others, etc. But as we continue practicing bhakti, we begin to focus more on why we are doing something.

For instance, a person giving their first public talk might be very self-conscious, worrying about how they are perceived and trying to impress others. But with more experience, they will shift their focus to the purpose of the talk—why they are speaking and what they hope to convey. Similarly, as we practice bhakti, we become less focused on the world and more on Krishna, who gradually moves to the forefront of our consciousness.

At the beginning of our practice, we should try to offer our actions to Krishna. A prayer like “Narayanayati Samarpayami” (I offer this to the Lord) helps us maintain that detachment. Even in the midst of action, we can offer our body, mind, and intelligence to Krishna.

Regarding Yukta Vairagya:

What is mature renunciation according to the Gita, and what is the balance for a practitioner in the perfectional stage?

Yukta Vairagya refers to a balanced form of renunciation that connects us with the Supreme Lord. It acknowledges that while we are in the world and need to interact with it, our actions can be purifying and elevating when performed with the right motivation. As we practice bhakti, we become more detached from material desires, and our focus shifts toward the Supreme.

Yukta, in this context, means being connected with Krishna, and vairagya means renunciation. Together, Yukta Vairagya implies renunciation that is guided by devotion and connection to the Lord. As we practice bhakti, our motivations become purer, and we gradually let go of attachment to the world. This process is gradual, like a person recovering from an illness. If someone has a fracture, they experience pain when moving their body, but to heal, they must endure some discomfort. In the same way, detachment is a gradual process, and with each step, we become more focused on the Supreme.

In conclusion, Yukta Vairagya is not an abrupt renunciation but a steady shift in our consciousness, moving from attachment to detachment as we deepen our connection with Krishna.

Bearable Pain and Spiritual Growth

When recovering from an illness, if a patient takes on unbearable pain, the healing process will be hindered, and recovery may not occur. But how does one know what constitutes bearable pain? Typically, a doctor or physiotherapist will guide them, offering advice on what exercises or movements are safe. Ultimately, each patient recovers at their own pace because everyone’s body and mind are unique.

Similarly, in spiritual practice, growth requires a certain level of bearable discomfort. If we want to grow spiritually, we must be willing to step out of our comfort zones and embrace a level of challenge. There are things in life that give us comfort and pleasure, and the thought of giving them up may seem impossible. However, with some effort, we can regulate or even reduce these comforts.

We need to determine what level of discomfort is bearable for us. This is where yukta vairagya (renunciation in connection with Krishna) comes into play. Right now, we may not have complete detachment from the world or a fully strong attachment to the Supreme Lord. But that’s the goal—the perfectional stage. At our current level, we engage in the world not just to serve Krishna but also because we still have desires. The key is not to indulge those desires more than necessary. What is necessary, however, requires honest introspection and self-awareness.

Just like a patient in recovery who has to give up comfort for healing, we, too, must give up some of the comforts of material life to grow spiritually. But the question is, how much comfort should we give up? The amount of renunciation should be a bearable amount of pain. This is how we can understand yukta vairagya at our level. We are not called to renounce everything all at once, but to engage in spiritual practice while being mindful of our limitations.

Balancing Preaching and Financial Responsibility

If a grahastha (householder) wants to preach but lacks sufficient financial resources or support, should they postpone their preaching until they are financially stable? The answer is no; it doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Preaching doesn’t need to be a full-time endeavor. One can begin by sharing Krishna consciousness wherever they are, in whatever capacity they can, and as financial security increases, one can devote more time and energy to spiritual activities.

We shouldn’t neglect our material responsibilities, but at the same time, we shouldn’t postpone spiritual efforts. The principle is simple: if we use what we have in Krishna’s service, Krishna will provide more. But if we don’t use what we have for His service, why would Krishna give us more?

Pleasure-Seeking and Spiritual Growth

If we want to go to the spiritual world because we see the material world as a place of suffering, and the spiritual world as a place of happiness, is that renunciation in the mode of passion? Not necessarily, though it could be. The key here is that a devotee is not focused on pleasure; they are focused on love—loving Krishna and serving Him. In that love and service, joy naturally follows.

Service to Krishna, however, requires effort. In the Bhagavad Gita (9.13-9.14), Krishna explains that the greatest devotees worship Him with undivided devotion and work with great determination. If someone is already so attracted to Krishna, why is effort still required? Because anything in this world requires effort, and spiritual growth is no different. If someone is merely seeking pleasure, they won’t be able to make meaningful progress in their service to Krishna.

For example, when Srila Prabhupada came to America, he didn’t come seeking pleasure; he came with a higher purpose to spread Krishna consciousness. Had he been pleasure-seeking, he could have stayed comfortably in Vrindavan.

We all need pleasure, but the key question is: What kind of pleasure are we seeking? There are different levels of pleasure. One can seek pleasure in ways that only gratify the senses without any concern for others or the world. Or one can seek pleasure through fulfilling responsibilities, making contributions, and ultimately, serving Krishna. The highest level of pleasure is in the reciprocation of love with Krishna.

While we all desire to go to the spiritual world, we must remember that the true joy of the spiritual world comes from loving and serving Krishna, not from mere pleasure-seeking. The devotee’s struggles in this world are not due to a desire for sensory pleasure but because they are distracted from serving Krishna. A devotee does not mourn the loss of sensory gratification but desires to serve the Lord without distraction.

Desire for Pleasure and Spiritual Purpose

We all desire to go to the spiritual world, and in one sense, any reason for striving toward that goal is valid. However, if our primary motivation is simply to seek pleasure, we may find that even the association of devotees and the practice of bhakti become troublesome. The pursuit of material pleasure might even tempt us to think that the material world offers more immediate satisfaction.

This desire for pleasure is not exactly renunciation in the mode of passion, but it can resemble it. To progress spiritually, we need to elevate our understanding beyond the mere pursuit of pleasure. A devotee is not driven by the quest for pleasure, but by the desire to serve. The essence of devotion lies in service, not in seeking personal enjoyment.

Ethics and Motivation in Actions

The question of whether the intention behind an action or the action itself is more important has been debated extensively. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna emphasizes the importance of motivation. Arjuna, for example, is told to fight the war because it is his dharma, his duty as a Kshatriya, even though he is reluctant. The context in which the action is performed shapes its spiritual significance.

In the case of Arjuna, Krishna encourages him to act with the right motivation, not necessarily because the action itself is the most important aspect. However, this doesn’t mean that action itself is unimportant. Actions, motivation, and consequences all matter.

For instance, if someone accidentally causes harm, like in an accident, their culpability depends on the specific circumstances. Karma is complex, and we cannot oversimplify it. Following the spiritual master’s instructions is crucial, but it doesn’t mean that other aspects of life—like common sense and responsibility—can be ignored. Spiritual life requires intelligent decision-making, and we cannot neglect the practical aspects of life, even while engaged in service.

For example, when some devotees died in a car accident while rushing to distribute books, Srila Prabhupada was asked if this was part of Krishna’s plan. He responded gravely, saying that while their intention was noble, they should have exercised more caution. Their service to Krishna was commendable, and they will receive blessings for it, but there is also a level of personal responsibility in the way we approach situations.

This aligns with the story of Ajamil in the Bhagavatam, where he initially went to the forest to gather wood for a yajna, but he became distracted by impure thoughts and actions. This shows that while we may be engaged in service, we must also remain mindful of what we focus on and how we conduct ourselves.

Conclusion: The Role of Intention, Action, and Consequence

In summary, when it comes to spiritual actions, it’s not just about the action itself, nor is it solely about the intention. Both the action and the motivation play a role, and the consequences of our actions also matter. Krishna emphasizes that motivation is central, especially in the context of Arjuna’s war, but it doesn’t mean that consequences are insignificant. Every action must be carried out responsibly, with intelligence and caution.

Thank you very much.

Srimad Bhagwat Gita Ki Jai.

Shri Prabhupada Ki Jai.

The post 46 If we are not the doers why are we held responsible – Gita 18.14 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

45 Speak to give peace of mind not a piece of your mind – Gita 17.15
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. Thank you very much for joining today for this discussion on the Bhagavad Gita.

Today, we will be discussing one of the most important, yet often misunderstood or under-applied verses from the Gita, particularly in terms of how we conduct ourselves and our relationships with others. Applying this verse in our practical devotional life can be a game-changer. The topic we will explore is: “Speak to give peace of mind, not a peace of your mind.” This is based on Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 17, Verse 15.

In this verse, Krishna speaks about the nature of the words we use. He advises that we speak words which do not agitate others. Our speech should be truthful, pleasing (priya), and beneficial (hitam). Additionally, Krishna mentions that repetition of scripture is also a form of the austerity of speech or discipline in speech.

Today, we will cover four main points:

  1. The power of speech
  2. How to regulate and use the power of speech
  3. Why we may self-righteously misuse this power
  4. How to speak purposefully and effectively

1. The Power of Speech

Words can have a tremendous impact—both constructive and destructive. The power of speech can be life-saving or life-damaging, depending on how we use it.

Constructive Speech: Words can be encouraging, appreciative, and motivating. They can empower others and give them strength. In fact, if someone is contemplating suicide, a few encouraging words can save their life. Speech can literally be life-saving.

Destructive Speech: On the flip side, speech can be incredibly damaging. Words can hurt more than swords because, while swords leave visible wounds that may heal, words leave invisible wounds that can devastate a person’s emotional and mental state. When faith is shattered, it is like a broken pot—it can be fixed, but it will never be the same as before. This shows that words have the power to damage deeply and irreparably.

As Chanakya Pandit says, “One who wishes to rule the world needs expertise of tongue more than expertise of sword.” Historically, leaders needed not only skill in battle but also the ability to inspire and motivate their soldiers. However, while some used their speech to create devastation (like Hitler, whose oratory caused immense suffering), others used their words positively to inspire and empower people. This shows that words shape our world in either constructive or destructive ways.

2. Regulating the Power of Speech

We all carry a loaded weapon with us every day—our tongue. And unlike a gun, we don’t need a license to have it. While we don’t carry a physical weapon, our words are like a loaded gun, and we must be cautious in how we use them. Words can break hearts, stir anger, and create lasting damage.

For those of us who are articulate, we must be even more careful. The ability to speak well means we can have a greater impact, whether positive or negative. We need to remember that every time we speak, we have the power to either build someone up or tear them down.

3. Why We Self-Righteously Misuse This Power

We often misuse our speech when we are angry or upset. For instance, when I get angry, I can use my words in a way that is harsh, sarcastic, or unforgiving. In these moments, I must remind myself of the importance of choosing words that are not just a release of my anger but are also responsible and kind.

Even when we speak about Krishna, our words must serve our own purification and the edification of others. This is why Krishna’s guidance on speech in the Gita is so crucial—it helps us regulate our emotions and avoid misusing the power of our words.

4. Speaking Purposefully and Effectively

Krishna emphasizes four qualities of speech in this verse:

  1. Anudvega Karam: Speech should be non-agitating. We should avoid saying things that stir negative emotions in others.
  2. Satyam: Speech should be truthful. Lies, half-truths, or deceitful words can cause harm, so honesty is essential.
  3. Priyam: Speech should be pleasing. While the truth can be hard to hear, we must find ways to express it in a way that doesn’t harm others.
  4. Hitam: Speech should be beneficial. Our words should help others grow, both materially and spiritually.

Krishna also highlights the importance of scripture in speech, as citing sacred texts is a form of austerity. Repeating the words of scripture in our daily speech is a form of spiritual discipline.

In conclusion, we must recognize the power of our words and use them thoughtfully. Whether it’s in our relationships with others or in our service to Krishna, we should aim to speak words that promote peace, love, and understanding. By doing so, we will not only purify our hearts but also contribute positively to the world around us.

These are four components of disciplined speech: Vanmayam tapa ucyate. So, it’s interesting—the concept of austerity of speech. The austerity of speech, I have translated here as “discipline of speech.” Why specifically austerity or discipline? See, austerity means that there is something we can do, but we voluntarily choose not to do.

For example, austerity in eating, such as fasting. That means we have food to eat, but we choose not to eat. If somebody is starving because they don’t have food, then they’re not really fasting. That’s not fasting; that’s starving. Fasting as austerity means I have food, and I may even have the right to eat it, but I voluntarily choose not to eat it for a higher purpose.

Similarly, when we talk about disciplining our speech, we have the power to speak and may even have the right to speak, but we carefully regulate our speech. Just as we may perform austerity of the body—when we fast, we regulate what goes into our mouths—when we talk about vanmayam tapa, we regulate what comes out of our mouths.

There are two types of austerity: annamayatapa (regulating food) and vanmayatapa (regulating speech). In both, there’s pleasure in eating whatever we like, but we carefully regulate what we eat for a higher purpose. Similarly, we may speak many things and find pleasure in it, but we regulate our speech for a higher purpose. That’s vanmayatapa, austerity of speech.

In the austerity of speech, there are two aspects: being sensitive and being sensible. Being sensitive means we consider people’s feelings and the emotional impact of our words. At the very least, what we speak shouldn’t agitate others. The theme of our talk is “Speak to give peace of mind.” At the best, we aim to speak in a way that uplifts others and makes them feel happy. This is the emotional side of speech.

On the other hand, speech should also be sensible. This means it must be truthful (satya) and beneficial (hita). While many truths may exist, not all truths are beneficial to hear. For example, if a student in their first year finds math difficult, they may express their frustration. While it’s truthful that math can be challenging, telling the student about a 500-page book they will have to study is truthful but not beneficial at that moment.

Thus, truthful speech is the lower bar, and speech that is both truthful and beneficial is the higher bar. This is sensible speech.

Now, let’s look at extremes. If something is sensitive but not sensible, it can be harmful. For instance, in medicine, sometimes pain must be caused for a greater good. If a doctor avoids giving an injection to a child to avoid hurting them, they might be sparing the child from immediate pain but allowing greater harm in the future. Similarly, if we avoid speaking truth because we fear hurting someone’s feelings, we might let them continue on a harmful path. This is being sensitive but not sensible.

On the other hand, if we are sensible but not sensitive, we risk being harsh. For example, a doctor who operates without anesthesia is being sensible about saving the patient’s life but is not sensitive to their present suffering.

When we communicate, we need to be concerned for both the present and the future. If we focus only on the future and ignore the present, we risk being ineffective. If we focus only on the present and ignore the future, we risk being irresponsible.

So, finding the balance between sensitivity and sensibility is key. It’s not always easy to know the balance, but it’s easier to recognize the extremes. If we go off balance, we will feel a “bumping” sensation, like going off the road. Speaking the truth without compassion is hard-hearted, and having compassion without truth is empty-headed. Both extremes make speech ineffective.

To summarize, effective speech must be both truthful and compassionate. We must care for people’s feelings while also considering their future. To achieve this, we can think of speech in terms of two axes: the content of speech (whether it is truthful or not) and the consequence of speech (whether it is compassionate or not). By ensuring both aspects are balanced, we can speak in a way that benefits others emotionally and practically.

So, the best form of speech is when it is kind-hearted and level-headed, as this is most likely to be effective. This means that there is both truth and compassion. If there is only truth without compassion, we may be logically correct, but we won’t be psychologically correct. Our speech will fail to have the desired effect. On the other hand, if there is neither truth nor compassion, it can be worthless or even destructive, as is the case with gossip or rumor-mongering, which are unhealthy forms of speech.

If we are compassionate without being truthful, then our speech becomes “empty-headed.” Nowadays, political correctness can go to extremes, where we are so sensitive that we avoid speaking the truth altogether. Let’s examine these ideas one by one.

Political correctness is not always bad. Certain words can convey unnecessary negative connotations, which need to be avoided, and that’s perfectly fine. However, political correctness can sometimes go to extremes, especially when moral posturing about sensitivity comes at the expense of sensibility. For example, biologically speaking, there are two genders, but gender theory now suggests that gender is a social construct rather than a biological fact. Some gender theories even claim there are 12, 7, or 63 genders, each with its own pronoun. In some places, such as Canada, it has become a legal offense not to address someone by their preferred gender pronoun.

While we do not want to offend people, moral posturing often becomes a way of demonstrating sensitivity without being sensible. Yes, people have their individuality, and we should be sensitive to their gender challenges, such as gender dysphoria. But when reality is rejected in the name of political correctness, are we truly helping people, or are we hurting them?

In the Western world, especially in Europe and America, there is ongoing debate about transgender women—those who transition from male to female. Some claim that transgender women are women because that’s how they identify, but there are concerns, particularly in sports competitions. Transgender women who were originally men may easily win female competitions, leaving women who have trained for years at a disadvantage. Should there be a distinction made here? Is it right to allow transgender women to compete in women’s categories? This is a politically volatile issue, but the point is that sometimes political correctness can go to extremes.

Likewise, logical correctness can also go to extremes. When communicating with people, we must inspire them, not just instruct them. Many can tell others what is right and what is wrong, but people need to be inspired to act on the right thing. Often, before people care about how much we know, they need to know how much we care. If we present an airtight rational case and expect people to follow, we may find they ignore our advice because their hearts were not touched. We are not merely creatures of logic. While logic is one factor we consider in decision-making, it is not the only one. That’s why simply speaking the truth without compassion often doesn’t work.

When there is neither truth nor compassion, the speech becomes particularly destructive, as seen in gossiping. What happens when we gossip? We tend to gossip when we hear something we like about someone we dislike. For instance, if we hear negative news about someone we already have negative feelings toward, we may feel a perverse joy in sharing it with others. Another way to define gossip is the Sanskrit word prajalpa, meaning unnecessary or damaging speech. When we speak negatively about someone to those who cannot do anything about it, it is irrelevant and harmful.

Gossiping also involves poking others into issues that are not their concern. For example, spreading news of political scandals or drama in another group is not relevant to those who cannot influence the situation. In our movement, we need to remember why we’re here: to move toward Krishna. If we have the resources, inspiration, and experience to continue moving toward Krishna, why should we focus on what is happening elsewhere? This doesn’t mean we remain ignorant, but we should not make it our duty to spread negativity.

In the Bhagavatam, Uddhava does not inform Vidura that Krishna has left the world because bad news will spread on its own. Why share bad news? While there are times when we must share unpleasant truths, especially in positions of responsibility, gossiping is unnecessary and counterproductive.

Effective speech, therefore, should open people’s eyes and hearts, not shut their mouths and minds. When we speak to open people’s eyes, we help them see things differently. Instead of merely telling them which way to go, we show them the consequences of their choices and let them decide which path to take. Opening people’s hearts means gaining a place in their hearts so that they trust us and are willing to follow our guidance.

Conversely, shutting people’s mouths means insulting them while refuting their arguments. While we may win the battle by proving them wrong, we risk losing them for good. If we make others feel insulted, they will likely never come back, especially in today’s world where spirituality is just one option among many. Therefore, we must speak to inspire and connect with others, not to belittle or alienate them.

Why should people come to us if they feel insulted by us? Now, let’s talk about closing people’s minds. What does this mean? It means that we present such unacceptable arguments that people decide we’re not worth engaging with. We might present arguments that seem logical to us, but from their perspective, these arguments may be completely unconvincing. If someone gives an answer we find nonsensical, we may decide, “I’m never asking this person again.” In that moment, their mind is closed to us.

Effective speech means being aware of the impact of our words and adjusting them to achieve the desired effect. We should moderate and modify our speech in ways that help open people’s hearts and minds, not close them. This brings us to the second part: regulating the power of speech.

The third part involves understanding why we may misuse the power of speech out of self-righteousness. Sometimes we justify speaking strongly by quoting from the Shastra, saying that a Sadhu’s words are like a surgeon’s scalpel—they may cause pain, but are necessary to cut through illusions. Examples from the scriptures, such as Vidura’s words cutting through Dhritarashtra’s illusions in the Bhagavatam, or the sages Angira and Parvat Muni helping Chitraketu Maharaj, are often cited as instances of strong speech.

While this metaphor of a surgeon’s scalpel can justify strong speech, let’s break it down. Surgery is not performed casually. First, consent must be given. A doctor cannot just drag a patient into the operating room and start cutting; they need the patient’s consent. Similarly, before speaking strongly, we must have the person’s consent—do they recognize that they are wrong and in need of correction? People often don’t acknowledge that they are wrong, or even that they need correction.

Now, let’s assume we are competent “surgeons” in this metaphor. Even then, we still need consent and should consider non-surgical treatments before resorting to strong words. Non-surgical treatment means trying a more positive and gentle approach first. For example, if someone is speaking something wrong, instead of immediately labeling it as stupid, we can appreciate their desire to learn. “I understand where you’re coming from,” or “I can see why you would think that” helps open the conversation without conflict.

Here are four “A’s” to approach non-surgical correction:

  1. Appreciation: Even if someone’s understanding is wrong, we can appreciate their desire to know. For instance, if someone quotes a spiritual teacher with an incorrect perspective, we can still acknowledge their curiosity about spirituality.
  2. Acceptance: Even if the point is wrong, we can accept that the person has made a sincere effort to understand. This creates a space for more open dialogue.
  3. Acknowledge: We can acknowledge the validity of their concern. Even if their expression of it is mistaken, the underlying concern might be worth addressing. This shows respect for their effort to engage with the topic.
  4. Address: Instead of countering or crushing their argument, we can address the concern beneath their words. Sometimes, by addressing their deeper concern, we can help them rise to a higher understanding without confrontation.

For example, if someone says, “God is impersonal,” we might say, “I understand why you think that, and in a way, it’s true. God has an impersonal aspect, but He is also personal. The Bhagavad Gita says that the personal aspect is the highest and most complete revelation of the Absolute Truth.” This approach helps raise their understanding without directly confronting their perspective.

In conclusion, before speaking strongly, we must first consider whether we have consent, if we have attempted a gentler approach, and if we are ready to administer our words with care, just like a surgeon with a patient. Only then can our speech have the desired effect, both in terms of truth and compassion.

Telling someone, “Mayavadis are meant to go to hell,” or “Stop speaking like this,” is not going to be effective. Strong words like these are more likely to close minds rather than open them. We must try non-surgical intervention before resorting to strong words.

In this context, anesthesia and pain medication represent the warmth of the relationship, trust, and appreciation that soften strong words. Without a solid relationship, our words can feel like a sudden, unprepared surgery. Anesthesia, in this metaphor, is the trust and bond between us and the person we are trying to help. Without it, our words can seem harsh and unthoughtful. Pain medication, on the other hand, represents the ongoing support from a compassionate, empathetic team that can help minimize the hurt caused by strong words.

We may pride ourselves on how many people we’ve brought to Krishna, but who knows how many we may have driven away with our forceful or inappropriate words? If we only focus on speaking the truth without considering its impact, we might unknowingly alienate those we seek to help.

Now, let’s move on to how to speak purposefully and effectively. Some argue that our scriptures are full of strong speech, but it’s essential to understand that these strong words were effective because they were spoken at the right time and with the right relationship. Take the example of Vidura speaking to Dhritarashtra. Vidura’s words cut through Dhritarashtra’s illusions, but that only worked because Vidura had built a strong, patient relationship with him over time.

Vidura didn’t speak harshly right away. He had been advising Dhritarashtra for a long time, but Dhritarashtra rejected his advice. Only when Dhritarashtra lost his attachment to Duryodhana after his son’s death did he become ready to hear Vidura’s words. So, it wasn’t just the strength of Vidura’s words, but Dhritarashtra’s readiness to hear them that made the difference. Words spoken at the wrong time or in the wrong way can backfire and close someone’s heart.

Vidura’s patience is a key lesson. He didn’t burn bridges with Dhritarashtra by speaking harshly too soon. He didn’t join the battle and kill Dhritarashtra’s sons, which would have closed Dhritarashtra’s heart to him forever. Vidura understood that timing and relationship were critical in delivering his message effectively.

Now, this doesn’t mean we should never speak strongly, but we need to consider the consequences of our words. When people have wrong conceptions or are making wrong choices, sometimes strong words are necessary. However, the goal is not just to speak the truth, but to correct misconceptions or help others make better choices. We must also be mindful of how our words affect the person’s willingness to accept the truth.

The choice is not always between speaking the full truth or compromising the truth. Sometimes, it’s about whether our words will attract people to the truth or alienate them from it. Speaking the truth harshly can lead to the person walking away feeling alienated, even if we believe we are correcting their mistake. The key is not just what we say, but how it’s received.

When people make wrong choices, we may be tempted to correct them forcefully, but we need to consider the impact on the relationship. Sometimes, it’s more productive to allow them to make mistakes and learn from them, as long as we maintain the relationship. For example, with parenting, we may need to be firm when children are young, but as they grow older, if we force them to follow a particular path, they may resent us. Forcing them may ruin their relationship with us and with Krishna. Sometimes, letting them make their own choices and learn from them is more productive in the long run.

If we say, “One day you’ll realize your stupidity and come crawling back,” even if the person is wrong, we risk damaging the relationship permanently. It becomes an issue of pride, not truth, and they may never return, even if they eventually realize their mistake.

In conclusion, speaking strongly can be necessary at times, but we must carefully consider the effect of our words. Are we correcting misconceptions and helping people make better choices? Or are we pushing them away? The goal is to speak with purpose, compassion, and awareness of how our words will impact the relationship and the person’s willingness to change.

Sometimes, preserving the relationship is more important than being right. Some might argue that there are references in our tradition where people speak strongly, and yes, those references exist. However, there are many other references that emphasize sensitivity in communication. Let’s look at a few examples:

For instance, in Nectar of Instruction (Updesha Amrit), it is said that great devotees are free from the tendency to criticize others. Bhakti Siddhanta Thakur also advises, “Don’t criticize anyone, whether devotees or non-devotees. They have their own conceptions; let them be. Correcting them is the responsibility of their spiritual master, not yours.”

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna speaks about how harsh speech is a characteristic of the demoniac, not the divine. He says in the verse Anudvika Karam Vakyam that words should not agitate others’ minds. Even if we are enlightened and others are not, Krishna tells us not to disturb people’s minds but to engage them in a way that gradually elevates them.

Krishna also teaches how to handle differences of opinion without being disagreeable. He says that while some people believe activities like Yajna (sacrifice), Dhana (charity), and Tapas (austerity) should be renounced, others think they should be performed. Krishna refers to the former group as “Manishinaha” (those who have controlled their minds), acknowledging their respect for the path of spiritual disentanglement, even if their conclusions differ.

This shows that we should look for the good in others rather than zero in on their faults, delighting in criticizing them. We need to appreciate where others are right rather than simply pointing out where they are wrong. The Shastras provide ample examples of sensitive speaking, and this is seen in both the Bhagavad Gita and Bhagavatam, among others.

Looking at Prabhupada’s example, we can see he used the word “fools and rascals” sparingly. He used the term 2,791 times in his conversations, 1,373 times in his lectures, and only 157 times in his written works. Despite Prabhupada speaking strongly at times, he always did so in contexts where the trust had already been established, and the audience was receptive. He reserved stronger language for situations where he had earned the right to correct, such as with his intimate disciples, while his written works were generally more measured.

In fact, in 1976, when a disciple asked if they could transcribe his lectures, Prabhupada replied that it would be unnecessary, as his message was already contained in his books. This shows that Prabhupada preferred his teachings to be shared in a considered, respectful manner.

Prabhupada’s sensitivity is also evident in his dealings with life members in India. For example, when a disciple began growing his beard and dressing like a hippie, Prabhupada’s response was gentle. Instead of criticizing harshly, Prabhupada simply pointed out the difference between the pictures of the prostitute from Haridas Thakur’s story, one before and one after her spiritual transformation, highlighting that a devotee’s appearance should reflect their seriousness in practice.

Thus, while Prabhupada did use strong words when necessary, his overall approach was one of balance. He spoke effectively, using strong language only when the situation warranted it. His example teaches us that to be faithful to Prabhupada’s mood is not about mimicking his use of strong language but about speaking effectively to fulfill his purpose.

To correct someone, we need the right relationship, the right context, and the right disposition. Criticizing someone publicly may humiliate them and make them less receptive. Furthermore, we need to be sure that our own information is accurate. Correcting someone based on faulty information or logic is not helpful and may even harm the relationship.

In conclusion, humility in speech means recognizing that our words alone will not have an effect unless they align with destiny or Krishna’s will. Before speaking, we should pray, not as a ritual, but genuinely ask Krishna to speak through our hearts and open the hearts of the audience. When we examine Prabhupada’s mood in Markine Bhagavat Dharma, we see his deep dedication and humility. Prabhupada prays, “Krishna, you make my words understandable to them.” This is not just about his accented Bengali English, but his desire to connect with their hearts. His prayer was remarkably successful, as it helped him transform countless hearts and inspire people.

Rather than focusing on speaking strongly, we should focus on speaking humbly. We must discern when we are acting as Krishna’s agent and when we are acting out of ego—speaking to prove others wrong versus speaking to give them peace of mind. The ultimate peace of mind comes when we connect people to Krishna, speaking in a way that inspires them to engage with Krishna, rather than simply instructing them.

For our speech to be effective, the greatest quality we need is virtue. Humility and tolerance are crucial when presenting our worldview, understanding, and dealing with wrong conceptions or choices. We must act not just to correct others, but to correct them in a way that allows them to receive the correction positively.

Today, I discussed how we can speak in a way that gives people peace of mind rather than a piece of our mind. First, we explored the power of speech: Constructive speech can encourage and save lives, while destructive speech can devastate. Words shape worlds, as Chanakya said, and for that, we must speak with sensitivity and sensibility. Truth without compassion is hard-hearted, and compassion without truth is empty-headed. We should aim to speak in a way that acknowledges others’ feelings and cares about their future trajectory.

We often feel justified in speaking strongly, thinking that it will cut people’s illusions. However, as we discussed, the example of the surgeon and the need for consent, preparation, and appropriate intervention shows that we cannot simply rely on strong words. Our words must come from a place of relationship, respect, and preparation.

Prabhupada’s example further emphasizes this point. He spoke strongly at times, but he also understood when to speak gently. He was sparing in his use of strong words, especially in his written works, and only used them when appropriate in private conversations with his disciples. Being faithful to Prabhupada’s mood does not mean speaking harshly, but speaking effectively—choosing the right words at the right time to serve the purpose of Krishna’s mission.

Finally, humility in speech involves knowing that Krishna will act through us and the hearts of those we speak to, not just our words. Our goal should be to connect with Krishna and inspire others to do the same, speaking with humility, sensitivity, and a focus on the ultimate peace of mind—connecting to Krishna.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Prabhupada spoke in different ways at different times, and we need to consider the context—Deshikaal Patra (time, place, and circumstance). Rather than judging whether speech is harsh or strong, the key is effectiveness. From my experience, I haven’t seen that strong speaking is effective. Often, when people continue despite strong speaking, it is due to their sincerity, not because of the forceful speech. I’ll share an example from my college days: a close friend, a social activist, came to our temple. Someone spoke strongly against a popular spiritual teacher, calling him a “demon.” This made my friend stop attending our programs, and soon, very few people came. This person later became a Mayavadi sannyasi in that very same organization. What did we gain by speaking strongly? Nothing but damage.

Sometimes, people ask if speaking flowery words dilutes the principles. While it’s true that Prabhupada emphasized the importance of purity in practice, our preaching isn’t about finding one moon and extinguishing a thousand stars. The problem arises when we focus on criticizing other paths instead of building relationships. The Vedic culture is multi-level: those who cannot practice pure bhakti are given alternative paths, like worshipping the devatas. Even impersonalism, while not the highest, is respected. For example, the Bhagavatam does not criticize Shamik Rishi, even though he was an impersonalist. Instead, it shows respect for his path, just as King Parikshit showed respect for him.

When we engage with people, we must remember that we cannot always know someone’s spiritual level. People may follow a Mayavadi teacher without fully understanding Mayavada or impersonalism, attracted by other qualities like social service or charisma. So, are we speaking flowery words? It’s all about context. “Flowery words” is a value judgment. Our speech should help people come toward Krishna, not extinguish their potential for growth. We may end up engaging in debates about the nature of God, thinking we’ve won, but the other person might walk away thinking that the whole concept of God is confusing and opt for atheism instead.

In the end, our actions sometimes create barriers to our message. Websites like Quora often depict ISKCON as fanatical or judgmental. Are all those people foolish? No, they’ve likely had negative experiences with strong or dismissive preaching. Unfortunately, our movement can sometimes be our own enemy, damaging its own preaching. I’ve met many people who were victims of harsh or strong preaching, and I’ve tried to help them salvage their spiritual lives.

As for the question of dilution, it’s important to understand that this is also a judgment. Was Prabhupada diluting when he accepted life members? He didn’t force them to dress a certain way or chant 16 rounds immediately. Instead, he spoke with them reasonably, welcomed them, offered them prasad, and showed kindness. Prabhupada’s ability to balance strong philosophical teachings with compassionate engagement is often understated. The recordings we have focus on his strong words, but they don’t always capture the full scope of his interactions, which were often gentle and respectful.

So, when we look at today’s movement, which is mostly congregation devotees, we must ask ourselves: how do we define a devotee? Everyone is a volunteer, and many come to Krishna Consciousness from different backgrounds. Speaking strongly in a judgmental way can push people away, making spirituality an option they reject. Instead, we should aim to speak in ways that draw people in, fostering their connection to Krishna through respect and understanding.

The content shared in the discussion emphasizes the importance of effective communication in spiritual or philosophical conversations, especially when conveying truths that may be difficult for some people to hear. Here’s a breakdown of the main ideas discussed:

1. The Balance of Strong Speech and Compassion

It is important to speak the truth boldly, especially in spiritual settings, but this should be done with awareness of its potential emotional impact. Strong speech should not be aimed at attacking individuals but rather addressing the ideas or philosophies they hold. When delivering a strong message, we should be mindful of how it might affect others emotionally.

2. The Danger of Harsh Speech

While it is necessary to speak the truth, the speaker warns that harsh speech—speaking in a way that disregards the feelings or emotional state of others—can be counterproductive. Such speech, even when true, may drive people away or alienate them, especially if they feel personally attacked or criticized. This is seen in how many people who are disgruntled with ISKCON have gone to other religious movements due to feeling hurt by strong speech or the presumption that one side is always right.

3. Context is Key

The speaker stresses that context plays a major role in how a message is received. The same philosophical truth can be presented in different ways depending on the audience’s emotional state, background, and understanding. For instance, if someone is an atheist, attacking them directly for their beliefs might be unproductive. Instead, engaging them in a conversation, making them feel like a partner in exploration rather than an adversary, may lead to more productive outcomes.

4. Avoid Making It Personal

When discussing spiritual or philosophical issues, it’s crucial not to make it personal. The focus should be on critiquing ideas rather than criticizing the individual. For example, if someone holds a particular belief, rather than criticizing their character, it’s more effective to discuss why their belief may be flawed and provide alternative perspectives.

5. Understanding the Audience

In order to communicate effectively, it’s important to understand your audience—to know their experiences, emotional triggers, and context. This understanding allows us to tailor our speech in ways that minimize unnecessary harm while still delivering important truths. For example, if someone is struggling with depression, using a sensitive approach may be more helpful than offering harsh criticism of their lifestyle.

6. Sensitivity to Personal Experiences

Sometimes, certain topics—like suicide or mental health—might be too painful for certain people to hear, especially if they’ve had direct experiences with them. In such cases, it’s important to adjust the examples or avoid triggering personal pain, if possible. The idea is that we must be mindful of emotional dimensions while still conveying the message that material life is transient and ultimately unsatisfactory.

7. Spiritual Speech and Emotional Impact

The overall message is that effective spiritual speech should aim to elevate, inspire, and guide people without causing unnecessary harm. Strong truths are necessary, but how we speak those truths matters just as much as what we speak. Sensitivity, empathy, and understanding are crucial elements in making sure the message lands in a way that helps others grow rather than pushing them away.

Conclusion

In sum, strong speech is important in conveying the truth, but it must be delivered with compassion and care for the emotional state of others. Understanding context, avoiding personal attacks, and tailoring our approach based on the emotional needs of the audience are all essential aspects of effective communication in spiritual matters. The goal is not just to be right but to be effective in helping others on their spiritual journey.

So thank you Param Kurn Prabhu for that important question and thank you everyone for your participation.

The post 45 Speak to give peace of mind not a piece of your mind – Gita 17.15 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

44 Isn’t spirituality a matter of the heart Why so many rules Gita 16.24
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So, today we discuss the 16th chapter, 24th verse, where we’ll be talking about the role of rules in spirituality.
Three questions we’ll discuss: Is spirituality a matter of the heart? Why are there rules? And what if we can’t follow the rules?
This is based on 16.24.

Tasmad shastram pramanam te, karya akarya vyavasthitau, gyatva shastra vidhanoktam, karma kartum iharhasi.

So, tasmad shastram pramanam te.
Therefore, by the praman, praman is an authorized source of knowledge, and that is shastra.
By scripture, karya akarya vyavasthitau. Understand properly, vyavasthitau, systematically, karya and akarya—what is to be done and what is not to be done.
Gyatva shastra vidhanoktam. And having understood gyatva, shastra vidhan, whatever the teaching of scripture, karma kartum iharhasi, it behooves you, iharhasi, for you to do the right action.

So, there are three things over here. Krishna is saying that from scripture, use scripture as a source of knowledge to understand right and wrong actions, and with that understanding, act appropriately.
So, in the broader context of the Gita, it is about whether Arjuna should fight or not. In the overall context of our life, this verse is saying that we should make scripture a guidebook for our life.

Now, scripture contains a lot of things. The Bhagavad Gita itself has a lot of information, a lot of analysis, a lot of explanation or revelation.
One important aspect of what scripture contains is guidelines about how to act. There are dos and there are don’ts.
So, that is what we’ll focus on because here Krishna is talking about scripture as a guidebook for acting in life.

So, if the Bhagavad Gita is a spiritual book and we want to grow spiritually, isn’t it a matter of the heart?
And if it is a matter of the heart, then why do we need rules? And if there are rules and we can’t follow them, does that mean our heart cannot be nourished or grow?
We’ll discuss these three questions today.

So, often rules are seen as external, particular disciplines, practices, and the heart is seen as internal, and spirituality is about the heart.
So, isn’t it a matter of the heart? Yes, it is. At the same time, what is the heart? The heart is like a field that needs to be carefully cultivated.

Now, some things grow naturally in a field, but not everything that grows naturally in a field is desirable.
So, if the heart is like a field, then the Bhagavad Gita has used in the 13th chapter the metaphor of kshetra. Kshetra is like a field.
And in the kshetra, certain things happen. So, if you have to cultivate the heart, now the important thing is not everything in the heart is loving or lovable.

Now, whenever we talk about the heart, we talk about love. That’s the usual association. And God is love. Just be filled with love. Act with love.
Now, love is a very sweet sounding word. And it’s important, of course, love is the deepest aspiration of the human heart to want to love and be loved.
At the same time, the heart is not just filled with love. The heart is filled with many other impurities apart from love also.

So, therefore, if you consider from that perspective, what all does the heart contain?
If we use the metaphorical comparison of the heart with the field, then the heart contains weeds of impurities.
And then it also contains the seeds of virtues, seed of ultimately the topmost virtue, devotion.

So, what do we need to do? Just like in the field, the weeds have to be removed and the seeds have to be cultivated.
So, just as cultivating a field requires careful action, similarly cultivating the heart also requires careful action.

So, yes, it’s a matter of the heart. But within the heart, the desirable has to be cultivated. The undesirable has to be eliminated.

Now, that raises the question, what is the heart? So, is it the biological organ?
Well, of course, that is one way of referring to the heart or one thing we refer to when we use the word heart.
But generally, when we use the word, say, “You broke my heart,” we’re not really saying that the biological organ broke into pieces.
So, that’s not what we are referring to. We are referring to the seat of emotions.

So, normally in spiritual, say, when spirituality is a matter of the heart, devotion is a matter of the heart. When we say it, we’re talking about the seat of emotions.
Now, what exactly is the seat of emotions? So, we could say it’s a combination of the mind and the soul.
The soul is the spiritual essence that we are, and the mind is the surrounding mind, is the first… we could say the first covering around the soul.
Here, I’m referring to the mind as using the mind as a generic reference to the subtle body.

So, the emotions are present in the mind also.
So, if you consider the seat of emotions, then there are emotions that come from the soul, and there are emotions that come from the mind.
So, both can refer to the heart. I’ll explain how both refer to the heart. But let’s first look at the mind and soul a little more closely.

So, if you look at it from this perspective of emotions, the mind is the seat of material emotions because the mind itself is material. It’s subtle matter, but it’s still matter, whereas the soul is the seat of spiritual emotions.
So, the soul is, if you remember a long session in a session several months ago, we had discussed the inner screen, the inner seer, and the outer scene.
So, the inner screen is like the computer screen on which we say we are playing a virtual game. We are playing a video game of some virtual reality, something like that.
So, then, “Hey, this person is attacking over here. This enemy is attacking and we are fighting, we are winning, we are losing.”
We will have a panorama of emotions over there. Now, all those emotions are associated with what’s going on on the screen. So, that’s the mind. So, the seat of material emotions.

Now, I have not yet used the word source because it’s not… we really can’t talk about the source here.
Emotions have no existence without consciousness, and consciousness ultimately comes from the soul.
So, no emotion can be experienced if there is no soul, and there is no consciousness. Here we are talking about seat means where they rise from.
A king is seated on a throne. That doesn’t mean the king originated on the throne.

So, the particular emotions, they may come from various sources, but we are talking about seat means where they reside primarily.
So, that is this. So, where the soul is by nature pure, and the soul has a nature to love the Lord.
That nature is dormant right now. But so the soul is also spiritual emotions.

So, again, spiritual emotions are not just love. In relationship with Krishna, there are various rasas, there are various emotions.
There is anger, there is fear, there is humor. So many emotions are there, but it’s all connected with Krishna and the transcendental world.

So, now with respect to the mind, the emotions can be pure, impure, or mixed depending on the kind of impressions that we may have.
In the previous session, we discussed about the divine and demoniac nature.
So, we talked about two levels of inertness. The mind can have virtue or vice.
In the demoniac, the virtue is a lot more. In the devoted and the divine, in the godly, the virtue is much more.

So, accordingly, there can be pure or impure or mixed emotions in the mind.
Now, the emotions that are associated with the soul are always pure because the soul is pure.
And now the mind is very dynamic. So, every action that we do creates impressions on it.

So, right now, say you are hearing this talk, every time you hear, it’s not just the information that is going in that’s important.
But along with that, the very activity of hearing creates an impression. And those impressions are important because they shape our future actions.
On the other hand, in most of material existence, the soul proper is inactive. That’s why sometimes we have songs like “Jeeva Jago, Jeeva Jago,” O soul, awaken, awaken, “Uttishta, Jagrta, Praapyavaram, Nibodhata.”
The Upanishads say that arise, awaken, activate yourself, attain that which is eminently desirable now for you.

So, that refers to the awakening of the soul.
So, when we do spiritual actions, devotional actions, that is when the soul becomes awakened. Otherwise, our actions don’t really touch the soul. And in that sense, the soul is the non-doer.
So, the soul’s consciousness is entangled, but it is more the conditioned consciousness.

The soul is not even aware of spiritual reality, let alone experiencing any emotions in relationship with it.
So, based on this understanding, for most of us, for most of the time, the emotions we experience are material. They largely come from the mind, stimulated by external factors. At the same time, there are emotions associated with the soul, and we do experience them sometimes. We want to experience them more and more.
When we talk about the heart, it can refer to the mind when we are speaking of superficial emotions. For example, when someone is materially attached and loses something precious, they might metaphorically say, “My soul is shattered.” But this is in a non-literal sense. In reality, it was their mind that was very invested in that thing, and they were disturbed by the loss. They might feel distressed or devastated, but the soul’s emotions are not involved here.
When we are relating to Krishna, that’s when the soul truly comes into the picture.

Now, regarding emotions and love: I’ve mentioned cultivation. The paradox is that the matters of the heart can’t be left solely to the heart. Why?
Because when we talk about the heart, what are we referring to? The surface matters of the heart—essentially the matters of the mind—can overshadow and predominate over the deeper matters of the heart, which are connected with the soul.
If we consider the heart to be multilayered, when we say, “Follow your heart,” what do we mean? We mean follow your deepest longings and aspirations. It doesn’t mean just doing whatever you feel like doing, even if the emotion is fleeting and fickle.
So, the heart has surface matters, and if we consider it broadly as the seat of emotions, we don’t want to be carried away by fleeting emotions or surface-level feelings. We want to reach the deeper, more meaningful emotions.
For example, if we like to read something—whether it’s informative, educational, or spiritual—that can give us a sense of deep fulfillment. But if we get a notification on our phone, we might feel the urge to check it or watch a video. This urge isn’t coming from the heart; it’s the mind leading us away from deeper fulfillment.
Thus, not every feeling necessarily comes from the soul. This is why matters of the heart can’t be left solely to the heart. We want to cultivate the deeper aspect of our heart and not let the surface emotions overshadow it. And that’s where rules come in.

Just as cultivating a field is not simple—it requires knowledge and understanding—cultivating the heart requires guidelines and rules. There are principles, rules, and methods for cultivating the heart, just as there are for farming.
Rules are not just about controlling or imposing a way of life; they are meant to help us grow. They help us bring out the best within us and drive out the worst.
Earlier, we talked about weeds and seeds: we need to remove the weeds and nourish the seeds. Rules help us do this.
There are rules in daily life—traffic rules, school rules, etc. Even if we are good at something, like singing, we can’t reach our full potential without discipline. A good singer needs commitment, which involves following certain rules. For example, committing to practice for an hour each day or avoiding foods that might harm the throat.
When talent is combined with commitment, it leads to greatness. The same applies to emotions: we may have some emotional capacity, but rules help our devotion grow further.

In spiritual life, rules come from the scriptures and saints. The scriptures are guidebooks on how to develop love for the Lord and grow spiritually. The saints, who have walked the path themselves, know the pitfalls and can help us avoid them.
So, it’s not just the scriptures; it’s also the saints. Spirituality is a living tradition, and the scriptures alone don’t give all the answers—saints provide guidance on how to apply those teachings in different situations.
At a general level, rules help bring out our best and drive out our worst. In spiritual life, they empower our virtues and disempower our vices. This is how the rules of spiritual life work.

When we talk about rules in spiritual life, we might wonder, how does love relate to rules? Isn’t the ultimate purpose to develop love for the Lord?
Yes, but first, let’s consider love in general and then look specifically at love for the Lord.
Imagine a pendulum: on one side, there’s the belief that love knows no rules at all, and on the other side, there’s the view that love is only known through rules. According to this view, it’s only when we follow the rules and become disciplined that we can truly experience real love.
So, which is it? Actually, the balanced understanding is that love respects rules, and at times, love transcends rules as well. Let’s break it down.

When does love know no rules?
Normally, when we are driving or walking on the road, we follow traffic rules for safety. But imagine a mother sees her child in the middle of the road, lost and unaware of the danger. In this case, the mother may rush in to save the child, even though breaking the rules (entering the road) is unsafe.
Why would she break the rules? Because she cares more for the child’s life than for the rules themselves. Traffic rules are meant to protect people and promote smooth travel, but when someone’s life is at risk, love transcends the rules.
So, when we say love knows no rules, it doesn’t mean love is careless. In fact, love is more careful—it prioritizes something more important than rules.

When is love known only through rules?
Now, let’s understand how rules can lead to love. Rules, in this context, represent commitment and diligence.
Some of the deepest connections we develop—whether with people or activities—are through diligence. When we connect with people, it’s not just about initial attraction; the bond deepens through commitment. When that person needs us, we’re there for them, and when we need them, they’re there for us. This mutual support strengthens the relationship.
Love at first sight may be powerful, but the true test is what happens over time. After many years together, enduring challenges, sharing a deep understanding—that’s a much deeper form of love.
How does this happen? Through commitment. Commitment means following the rules: caring for each other, being faithful, and taking responsibility. This consistent commitment deepens the connection.
So, when we talk about love and rules, we’re not referring to a rigid set of dos and don’ts, but to the commitment that helps deepen the relationship.

Balancing the Two
Both perspectives are true. Love transcends rules at one level, but love is also known through rules. Without commitment and consistency, love remains superficial. If we are merely attracted to someone, we may claim to be in love, but if the attraction fades, it shows the relationship was not built on anything lasting.

Returning to the earlier idea of the heart referring to the mind or the soul, we can see that surface emotions may be strong but fleeting. Deeper emotions may not always be as expressive, but they are more enduring.

Spiritual Life and Rules
Now, let’s apply this idea to spiritual life. In devotion, love can transcend rules.
When devotion becomes spontaneous, love transcends the rules. But transcending the rules doesn’t mean ignoring them; it means caring for something more than the rules. In these cases, breaking the rules is not disrespectful to the Lord—it pleases Him.
For example, in the Ramayana, Shabari was offering berries to the Lord. She tasted them first to check their sweetness before offering them. Normally, offering food that has been tasted is considered sacrilegious. But her love for the Lord was so pure that He accepted her offering, despite the apparent breach of rule.
Similarly, the Gopis of Vrindavan left everything behind to meet Krishna when they heard His flute. According to societal codes, it would have been improper for women to go out alone at night, but the Gopis’ love transcended societal norms. Their actions were not immoral but trans-moral—glorious and pure.

There is a stage in spiritual life where love transcends the rules, but this is the state of spontaneous devotion. And spontaneous devotion doesn’t come automatically. It is the result of conscientious practice, which requires discipline.
Conscientious devotion gradually leads to spontaneous devotion. And conscientious practice means following rules.

The Role of Rules in Spiritual Life
Love is not just something that happens suddenly. Yes, it can be felt suddenly, and that’s wonderful, but love also needs to be nourished and cultivated to grow deeper and stronger.
In conscientious devotion, there is a synergistic relationship between feelings and actions. Sometimes, we feel our way to actions—our feelings inspire our actions. At other times, our actions (through prescribed sadhana, such as chanting or performing pujas) shape and nurture our feelings.

Devotion often starts with a desire: “Hey, I like this. I want to do this.”
Some days, we wake up and feel like we want to take darshan of the Lord. We act on that feeling and go to see Him. Sometimes, we feel our way to actions. But other times, we don’t feel like doing something, yet we do it anyway. And as we act, the feelings start to come gradually. This is conscientious devotion, where we don’t deny our feelings, but we don’t depend on them either.

We understand that at our level, feelings can be fickle. If our deeper heart (the soul) is activated, we will feel a connection with Krishna. However, if our mind is hyperactive and dominated by the lower modes—passion and ignorance—the soul can become buried, and we may not feel any devotional or spiritual emotions at all.

At such times, we may have to simply act our way to feelings. When we act in devotion, even if we don’t feel like it, our actions can eventually lead to the emotions we desire. Similarly, when we feel a devotional desire, we act on it.

In bhakti, we start where we are. If we feel devotional, that’s wonderful, and we should seize the opportunity to do as much as we can. But sometimes, we don’t feel that way. Even then, we see it as an opportunity to discipline ourselves and purify our hearts. By performing devotional practices, we express our love for Krishna—not because it feels good, but because we want to please Him.

This dynamic is present in all relationships. For example, a mother might not feel like caring for her crying baby in the middle of the night, but she does it anyway. As she picks up the baby and comforts it, her natural love and affection for the child grow. Similarly, in our relationship with Krishna, even when we don’t feel devotional, our actions can bring out the love within us.

In this context, rules help us cultivate devotion. They guide us in conscientious practice, which eventually leads to spontaneous devotion. In the scriptures, we learn what to do and what not to do in devotional life. As it says in the Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu, bhakti is a form of cultivation: “Anya-bilashita-shunyam, jnana-karma-adyanavritam, anukulyena krishnanushilanam bhaktir uttama”—bhakti is the practice of cultivating the desire for Krishna’s service, free from ulterior motives.

Why do rules matter? Some say devotion is more than just following rules—and that’s true. Devotion is about more than rules, but it’s not less than them. What is the “more”? It’s the desire for devotion. Rules are essential, but they must be infused with a desire for devotion. In other words, we act our way to feelings and pray for the Lord’s help: “Krishna, when I come to see You, I may not feel devotional, but please help me to feel devotion.”

To understand this better, imagine a pendulum. On one side, if we only follow rules without any desire, it becomes mechanical—just going through the motions. On the other side, if we only focus on desire without practice or discipline, it can lead to sentimentalism—feeling emotional without the grounding of rules. The key is balance: following rules while also nurturing the desire for devotion. This combination transforms our heart.

Devotion is often associated with emotion, and sometimes people think that if we follow rules, there’s no room for emotion. But love is expressed in many ways, and emotions aren’t always overt. For example, when a child does well in school, the mother may express her love with a hug and congratulations. This is an emotional expression of love. However, love can also be expressed by concealing emotion.

For instance, if a child is leaving for a hostel and feels sad, the mother might not cry openly, because doing so could cause the child to become more upset. Instead, the mother conceals her emotions to help the child remain strong. Similarly, if a loved one is injured, the mother, or a doctor treating the child, may need to suppress her emotions in order to provide the necessary care. In these cases, love is expressed by controlling and concealing emotion.

In bhakti, love for Krishna also goes beyond emotions. It’s about dedication. Emotions should deepen our dedication, not distract us from it. If we become overwhelmed with emotions, we might forget our responsibilities. For example, if a child is hurt, the mother can’t afford to be paralyzed by emotion; she must care for the child. Similarly, devotion to Krishna is about service—keeping our focus on Him and serving Him with dedication.

In the Nectar of Devotion, there is a story of Krishna’s servants, Rakta and Chitra, who are fanning Krishna. As they gaze at His beauty, tears come to their eyes, but they suppress their tears because they don’t want their emotions to interfere with their service. Their dedication to service is more important than their emotions.

Similarly, in devotion to Krishna, we strive for balance: emotions should enhance, but not overpower, our service. Devotion is not just about expressing emotion; it’s about dedicating ourselves fully to Krishna, offering Him our hearts and actions.

This passage addresses several important themes about the nature of devotion and the role of rules, emotions, and submission to Krishna in spiritual practice.

Key Concepts from the Passage:

  1. Unemotional Devotion in the Gita:
    • The Gita doesn’t emphasize effusive emotion but rather stresses calm, stoic dedication to action and service.
    • Arjuna’s breakdown in the first chapter of the Gita highlights how excessive emotion can interfere with one’s judgment and duty. Krishna guides him to rise above these emotions and perform his duty without being overwhelmed by them.
  2. Different Expressions of Devotion:
    • Gita: Stoic devotion, focused on disciplined action and service.
    • Bhagavatam: Contemplative devotion, inward and absorbed in remembrance of Krishna.
    • Chaitanya Charita Amrita: Ecstatic devotion, marked by outward expressions like dancing and singing in love for Krishna.

The devotional approach varies based on context, but in all cases, the devotion is for Krishna.

  1. Rules and Emotions:
    • Rules in devotional practices serve as a foundation that can help us connect with Krishna, even when we don’t feel a deep emotional pull.
    • While the Gita emphasizes disciplined action over emotional expression, the Bhagavatam and Chaitanya Charita Amrita allow for a more expressive form of devotion, each suited to different contexts.
  2. Nascent Devotion:
    • If someone is not able to follow rules or express love for Krishna, the key is the intention to connect. Even if someone is not following the rules perfectly, their heartfelt calling out to Krishna can lead to spiritual progress.
    • Nascent devotion reflects a genuine desire for Krishna but may lack the full discipline or consistency of a more mature practice.
  3. Challenges in Following Rules:
    • Not everyone can easily follow every rule. Bodily conditionings, like physical health or temperament, can influence one’s ability to follow certain practices.
    • For example, some people may struggle with early mornings or fasting, and these challenges shouldn’t diminish their devotion. Determination can be impacted by bodily factors, and one should understand that different people may find certain practices more difficult than others.
  4. Understanding Limitations:
    • Acknowledging one’s physical or mental limitations (such as the difficulty in waking early or fasting) is important. The goal is always to connect with Krishna, and sometimes adjusting practices to one’s situation is necessary.

In summary, the passage underscores that while following rules is essential for spiritual growth, it should be balanced with a heartfelt desire to serve Krishna. Emotion in devotion varies across different texts, with the Gita promoting disciplined action and the Bhagavatam and Chaitanya Charita Amrita celebrating ecstatic devotion. Ultimately, devotion is about the heart’s longing for Krishna, and even if we struggle with rules, sincere effort can lead to growth.

But that doesn’t mean we have to deprecate those who are not following the rules. We can avoid these binaries and not minimize or trivialize the importance of rules. We don’t disrespect those who follow the rules either; we appreciate them. However, we don’t have to deprecate or minimize those who don’t follow the rules. Spiritual advancement should not be reduced to just following rules; it is multifaceted. So, we focus on the purpose, not on the rules themselves. We all have certain conditionings, and because of those, following rules may not always be easy.

For instance, consider bodily limitations—like the inability to eat certain foods, bathe with cold water, or wake up immediately. These are understandable as bodily limitations. But what about rules of a different nature? For example, some may struggle with anger, greed, or lust. These challenges come from the conditioning of the mind, not the body. So, it is important to recognize that these struggles are also a matter of conditioning. In this context, resolute intention is more important than righteous action. We know from the Bhagavad Gita that even if a devotee performs terrible activities (Sudhara Acharo), if their intention is to serve Krishna, they are still considered well situated.

Krishna emphasizes that it is not the righteousness of the action that matters, but the virtuous, resolute intention behind it. Krishna’s teachings highlight the importance of intention over action. He tells Arjuna to consider such a person as well situated because their intention is pure. Krishna’s compassion is evident here; he warns that resolute intention will eventually lead to righteous action. As Krishna says, “Kshipram bhavati dharmatma,” soon such a person will become saintly, virtuous, and peaceful because their intention purifies them.

Krishna declares that those with a resolute intention to serve Him, even if their actions are imperfect, will never perish. When Krishna refers to a “devotee,” He is not referring to someone whose actions are always righteous, but rather to one whose intention is steadfast in serving Him. This understanding can be extended to our struggles with moral principles and emotions. We may sometimes assume that following the rules is the sole indicator of Krishna consciousness. For example, if someone isn’t waking up early, doing their practices on time, or following specific moral principles, we might think they aren’t Krishna conscious.

However, Krishna consciousness is inclusive, meaning both following and not following rules can still fall within it. Even if someone cannot follow all the rules for any reason, they are not excluded from Krishna consciousness. The essence of Krishna consciousness lies not in rigidly following rules, but in staying connected with Krishna, regardless of moral or physical shortcomings. If someone fails in their practices, they can still “fail well” by maintaining their connection to Krishna. Krishna consciousness is not about meeting external standards; it’s about staying devoted and connected to Krishna, no matter the circumstances.

In Krishna consciousness, even if we fall short in our practices or virtues, the key is to remain connected to Krishna. It’s not about perfect success but about staying committed, even in failure. As Krishna says, even if one falls, they are still within His grace as long as they remain resolute in their intention. The difference between falling “down” within Krishna consciousness and falling “out” of it is significant. If someone falls down but still remains committed to Krishna, they are still part of the path. However, if someone falls out and abandons their connection with Krishna, they are no longer on the path.

Somebody might be in the renounced order, where they are respected and gain prestige and fame. If they are unable to maintain that renounced order, they can transition into the householder order and still practice bhakti. Of course, moving from brahmachari to grahastha is not a fall-down; it is simply a progression. However, if someone was a sannyasi and then becomes a grahastha, conventionally, this is seen as a reproach, implying a fall. But even in this case, they can still fall within Krishna consciousness. The key distinction is that if someone gives up the practice entirely, equating Krishna consciousness solely with a particular standard, they are falling out of Krishna consciousness. So, if you can’t follow the rules, it’s not the end of the road. It simply means that you need to take a different road to Krishna consciousness.

We can still fall within Krishna consciousness, even if we fall short of certain standards. Krishna consciousness is not just about following rules; it is about staying connected with Krishna, regardless of how we might fail. Now, Krishna consciousness is quite nuanced. In fact, the opposite is also true. For example, a seeker may start by following rules and rise from lethargy to become very determined—waking up early and following moral principles. This is progress in Krishna consciousness. However, it’s also possible that someone may rise in Krishna consciousness but in a way that leads them away from it. For instance, they may become so proud of how strictly they follow the rules that they are more interested in their own glories rather than Krishna’s glories. This indicates they are no longer truly Krishna conscious.

This is why it’s important to understand that Krishna consciousness is not merely about the rigid following of rules, nor is it meant to minimize devotion. The two are very different. There is a difference between falling down and falling away. We may fall down, but we don’t want to fall away—falling away means we give up the practice of bhakti entirely. When we fall down within Krishna consciousness, it means that we previously thought Krishna consciousness was only about following certain rules. But when we cannot follow those rules, we can still remain in Krishna consciousness at a different level. So, how do we fail? We continue to move forward, acknowledging that devotion is not just about our ability to follow rules but about our heart’s intention to move toward Krishna.

When we stay connected with Krishna, remembering Him, we gain higher insight. Through this insight, we will understand the futility of sensuality and develop a higher taste for loving Krishna. With this insight and taste, we will gradually cut off attachments and illusions that hold us back. So, the most important thing is to stay connected with Krishna. If we remain connected, we will be cleansed, and through this purification, we will become contented. These three—connection, cleansing, and contentment—are progressive. It all begins with being connected to Krishna, and that is the pathway to perfection in life.

The level at which we stay connected to Krishna may vary from person to person. We don’t need to judge those who cannot stay connected at a particular level; instead, we should understand the inclusive nature of Krishna consciousness. It encompasses both success and failure, as long as the direction remains toward Krishna.

To summarize what I’ve shared today: I discussed three main things: Why we follow rules, why rules are needed, and how devotion is a matter of the heart. Devotion requires cultivation, just like a field requires following rules to ensure healthy growth. Without rules, one might be good, but with rules, they can become the best version of themselves. Rules help bring out our virtues and disempower our vices. I also discussed how love knows no rules, but love is known through rules. Love respects rules and occasionally transcends them. Love transcends rules not because it doesn’t care, but because it cares for something greater.

We need to practice conscientious devotion now, which involves following rules. Over time, this will lead to spontaneous devotion. Often, we may act our way to the right feelings, and eventually, those feelings will guide our actions. We begin wherever we can, and through this process, we rise toward greater connection with Krishna.

When we talk about conscientious devotion, it does involve following rules, but is devotion just about following rules? Is it more than that? Yes, it is. Devotion is not just about following rules; it is more, not less. We discussed how if there is only adherence to rules or only desire for devotion, it can be unbalanced. Purely following rules can become mechanical, while solely desiring devotion without rules can be sentimental. However, combining both—rules with a heartfelt desire for devotion—leads to transformational devotion.

In the scriptures, we see different types of devotion. The Bhagavad Gita portrays a more stoic form of devotion, the Bhagavatam’s devotion is more contemplative, and the Chaitanya Charitamrita is ecstatic. These variations are based on context. Even a great devotee like Arjuna can restrain their devotion. We don’t have to be exhibitionist; devotion can be expressed both through open emotions and through the restraint of emotion. This same principle applies to devotion.

I also discussed the challenges of following rules. The four quadrants we talked about include nascent devotion, mature devotion, and superficial devotion. Nascent devotion is when someone is beginning and may struggle with rules. Mature devotion is when someone follows rules with a heart that longs for Krishna, while superficial devotion involves following rules without love or submission to Krishna. A person may parade their devotion without real growth.

Nascent devotion should be nurtured. Krishna consciousness is not just about following rules; different people have different conditions. Some may struggle with physical practices like fasting, bathing in cold water, or waking up early. That’s okay—do what you can. One vision is that Krishna consciousness means following rules, but not following them doesn’t mean you’re not Krishna conscious. Krishna consciousness includes both adherence to rules and deviation from them.

Even if we fall, we don’t have to fall out of Krishna consciousness. We can fall in Krishna consciousness, as the verse “Apichet Suduracharo” suggests. If someone’s intention is virtuous and they have resolute determination, they will eventually rise to a higher spiritual level.

In bhakti, the most important thing is staying connected to Krishna through remembrance. This connection serves as a sword, cutting through illusions, giving higher taste and insight. Over time, we become cleansed, contented, and more devotional.

Now, regarding a question on deity worship at home versus in the temple, different levels of rules apply in different contexts. Just like traveling by car, train, or plane requires different protocols, temple worship has more rules, as the deity in the temple is considered more manifest. As you practice, you’ll get used to the rules, and it will become easier to see beyond them, focusing on your connection with Krishna. Rules are there to help nourish your devotion, but it’s okay if some rules feel too overwhelming—just do what nourishes your heart and respect higher standards when appropriate.

For Sahajiyas, who might not follow rules, they fall into nascent devotion, but if they don’t follow rules because they think they’re beyond them, that’s problematic. This leads to sentimental rather than transformational devotion.

The verse “Sarthave Sattvam Vishnu” is a rhetorical device, emphasizing the same point through both affirmation and negation. It’s common in scripture to repeat something in different ways to stress its importance.

Contemplative emotion in the Bhagavatam refers to how many exalted devotees are described in a more contemplative way rather than in ecstatic expressions. For example, while characters like Prahlada Maharaja may dance and sing, figures like Sukadeva Goswami or Maharaja Parikshit are shown in a more meditative mode. The Bhagavatam emphasizes the power of hearing and absorption in Krishna.

As for the question on sharing Krishna consciousness and the potential for pride, the cure for pride is not repressing our talents but purifying our intentions. If you share Krishna consciousness and receive appreciation, it’s important to stay humble. The issue isn’t sharing ideas, but recognizing that we should not seek praise for ourselves, but rather seek Krishna’s approval. Avoiding pride isn’t about repressing our abilities; it’s about refining our intentions and motivations.

Well, is it that simple? Just like if we get exposed to some explicit images, we may feel lust at that time. But does that mean that before that, we had no lust in our heart? Lust is there, but maybe it’s not provoked. Similarly, pride is also there in our hearts. It’s not provoked. So, of course, we don’t want to deliberately go out and expose ourselves to sexually explicit stimuli. Similarly, we don’t go out and deliberately do activities solely for our own praise. But if something is for the service of Krishna, yes, there might be some desire for personal appreciation also. That’s okay.

What happens is that when we start serving Krishna, through that service, we start realizing, actually, yes, getting appreciation from others gives me some pleasure, but serving Krishna gives me much greater pleasure. Somebody might sing very nicely. Initially, they may sing and want others to appreciate. Once, I gave a class, and I had prepared very well for it, feeling that the whole delivery was of high quality. After the class, nobody appreciated it, and I was extremely annoyed. Then, somehow, that thought struck me: when I was giving the class and preparing for it, I was absorbed in Krishna. That is important. When I was absorbed, I was relishing everything so much. So, people didn’t appreciate. Maybe if I had done something wrong, it’s fine, but maybe everybody was busy, or whatever happened, they didn’t appreciate. That realization came that, okay, even if they had appreciated, what would have happened? They would have spoken for a few moments, and I might have remembered it for some time. But if I remembered Krishna for an hour while giving the class, for several hours while preparing the class, that is much more important.

That contrast wouldn’t have come if I had thought that only when I become pure enough and have no desire for appreciation would I give a class. Well, then I might be waiting for the rest of eternity. So we start our service, and we can always have some senior well-wishers who can tell us if we start becoming proud, arrogant, or presumptuous. If they tell us, we can take that feedback into consideration. That way, we can all learn when to stop being creative or resourceful in Krishna’s service.

But in general, as I said, the cure for pride is not repression of talent. If you have talent, use it in Krishna’s service. By using that talent, we’ll get some glorification from the world but also a connection with Krishna. Gradually, we’ll realize that connection with Krishna is actually more relishable, and then we won’t be attracted to the glorification of the world. However, if we don’t use our talent, we may not do that service, but somebody else will. And when they do that service and get the appreciation, we’ll start feeling envious, thinking, “Why couldn’t I have done that?” That is not a healthy attitude at all.

If somebody gives a wonderful class and then everybody says, “What a great class that was,” we may snidely try to pull them down. For instance, we might say, “Did you see how much prasad they are eating? Don’t get impressed by that. They are not sense-controlled; they are attached.” We try to pull them down in a snide way. We don’t have to be like that. We do our service, and through that connection with Krishna, we’ll become purified of whatever desire for appreciation we have.

There is another big subject I’ll briefly mention. The desire for appreciation is different from the desire for glorification. Appreciation is more about fostering a human connection. When we want appreciation, if we have done something and someone appreciates it, we get connected with that person more and more. How do our connections happen? They happen through reciprocation. Appreciation doesn’t have to be exhibited to the whole world. It can just be a matter of reciprocation.

In contrast, glorification means we want the whole world to know what we did, and that is the primary purpose of doing it. I think the need for reciprocation and appreciation are normal human needs. If we don’t get that fulfilled in the devotee circle, we will seek that fulfillment in other circles. We all want to love and be loved. And how do we know we are loved? There are many ways. One way is when we are valued and appreciated. So we want that too. It’s a need.

We can’t dehumanize ourselves by reducing the human need for appreciation to the ego’s need for glorification. Once, Prabhupada was asked by a devotee who was a very good Kirtaniyer. He was doing Kirtans when Prabhupada entered the temple, and Prabhupada just patted him on the head while passing by and said, “Good Kirtan.” The devotee felt so gratified and enlivened. He spontaneously asked Prabhupada, “Prabhupada, sometimes I feel proud.” Prabhupada just patted him on his head again and said, “What’s wrong with that?”

Now, we may say pride is a demonic quality, and there’s so much wrong with it. But the point is that we’re doing something worthwhile for Krishna, and yes, if some little pride comes, gradually it will go away because we will get the taste of Krishna through that devotional service. So the cure for pride is not the repression of talent. It is the purification of intent.

There is a Geeta Daily article on this topic. Most of the classes I give, I would say 70 to 90 percent of the content is already there on geetadaily.com in different articles. For those who would like to reflect more on this, especially if there are any quotes I use in class, most of them will already be there as articles. You can either subscribe to Geeta Daily or visit Geeta Daily to find those articles.

In the future, since I’m not sharing the PowerPoint, I can try to share links to Geeta Daily articles related to the classes I’ve spoken about. For example, in today’s class, I would say “Love is both expressed and concealed.” There’s an article about that. Then there’s an article about “Falling out of Krishna Consciousness and falling in Krishna Consciousness,” with the exact title. There’s also an article about “The surface level of the heart and the deeper level of the heart,” and “Devotion is more than rules and not less.” You can find articles on these topics on Geeta Daily.

Please feel free to reach out if you’d like to join the WhatsApp group, where I can share related articles. Thank you very much for your time, and I hope this class was useful to you all!

Thank you.

Hare Krishna.

Hare Krishna.

The post 44 Isn’t spirituality a matter of the heart Why so many rules Gita 16.24 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

43 Are some people innately bad – Gita 16.06
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So today we will discuss the topic of the divine and the demoniac nature. This is Chapter 16 from the Bhagavad Gita. And what we’ll discuss is: are people basically good, and are some people innately bad? This is based on Gita 16.6. Krishna is speaking here that there are two kinds of living beings. In this material existence, in the created world, there are two kinds of people: the divine and the demoniac. Krishna says, “I have spoken about the divine nature in detail.” The detail refers to this being the sixth verse. In the first three verses of the Gita, Krishna has spoken about the divine nature. But earlier, he also talked about the qualities of the godly in the 12th chapter, in the 13th chapter, early in the 10th chapter, and in the second chapter when he talks about Sita Pragya. The 12th chapter talks about the devotees, and the 13th chapter talks about the characteristics of those in knowledge. So all those refer to his Vista Rahasya Propto. I have talked about this in detail, 254 to 72, 13 to 20, 13, 8 to 12, and 10, 5, 6 also. So, like that, he has talked about the divine qualities. Now, Asuramparth Meshudu, I’ll talk about the demoniac qualities, or the qualities of demoniac people. One significant word Krishna uses is Abhijatosi, which means they are born with these characteristics. So sometimes we put it this way: some people are wise, and some are otherwise. Those with divine nature are wise, and those with demoniac nature are otherwise.

Now, let’s look at these. We’ll discuss first: Are some people innately bad? What makes some people bad or demoniac? And how are they reformable? When we talk about people’s innate nature, there are different theories about human nature. We could go into many details, but in our chapter on relationships, we have discussed this briefly. So I’ll just mention it here. We have discussed it in detail. So there is one theory that people are innately good, and society makes them bad. For example, communism operated on this ideal, and social determinism is what they believe about human nature. Communism is more of a political ideology about how society should be organized, whereas the underlying view of human nature is social determinism. That means everybody is an influence of their society. So if somebody has become a brutal terrorist, why? It’s because the society did not integrate them properly.

Currently, in France, there is an attempt to contain the radicalization of Islam. Much of the Western media often only coddles radical Islam. You may be aware that there was a brutal beheading of a school teacher who showed some cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in his class. The New York Times had an article titled “A Teacher, A Killer, and the Failure of French Social Integration.” That title means why did this person become a killer? Not because there’s something innately bad with the ideology they were believing or because there’s something dark in their own nature, but because French society failed to integrate them. It’s possible, but it’s not necessarily a social failure. Generally, the idea is that people’s bad deeds are considered social failures.

On the other hand, there is—if you can imagine a pendulum—one side where people are innately good, and if they behave badly, society makes them bad. On the other side is the belief that people are innately bad. This is the belief of many religions, not just ideologies, but religions that propagate ideas like original sin. In the Abrahamic tradition, Adam and Eve sinned against God, and since that time, what is called the original sin has passed down to all of humanity like a genetic defect. Therefore, everybody is innately bad. Of course, here, Christians may say that actually, because we are made in the image of God, we are good, but without the saving grace of, say, Jesus, we will tend toward badness. We will tend toward evil. Now, both of these ideas have their utility and their flaws. Yes, society does influence people.

And some people, just from childhood, seem to be too violent, too aggressive. So the idea is that if we say that only society makes people bad, then what about people who live in a good society, who are relatively from good families, have wealth and prosperity, yet they also become evil? If you say people are innately bad, then the question arises: not everybody is equally bad. If the original sin has contaminated everyone, then why is not everyone equally contaminated?

So the Bhagavad Gita reconciles these two visions by talking about two levels of innateness: the soul and the mind. The soul is by nature good and godly because the soul is a part of God. But the mind, how it is, depends on the impressions.

Let’s look at this from a diagrammatic perspective. You can see here three levels: the soul, the mind, and the body. When we talk about innate nature, what are we talking about? If we consider innateness at the level of the soul, then the soul is always pure because the soul is a part of God. So, is everybody innately good? We would like to believe that people are innately good. And yes, that belief is vindicated if we look at the level of the soul. Yes, everybody, at their deepest core, is good. But at the same time, at a functional level, everybody may not be good because the soul is covered by the mind and the body.

The mind has impressions. It carries these impressions based on past karma. Past karma can refer to the karma we have done in this life previously or in our past lives. When a child is born, the child is not born as a blank slate. The child has impressions from the past, and those impressions prompt the child to act in different ways.

So when Krishna says some people are born with divine nature and some are born with demoniac nature, it means that there are people who have done particular kinds of activities in their past lives. Those who have done demoniac activities in their past lives form those kinds of impressions on their mind. And that’s why they’re born with a demoniac nature.

So, can some people be innately evil? Well, at the level of the soul, no, but at the level of functioning in this world, some people may have something twisted inside them because of which they may behave in terrible ways. So it’s not just that society makes people bad.

Going back to the earlier point of social determinism, it’s not that society makes people bad. Two people may be born in the same family—two brothers, for instance. One becomes a criminal, and the other becomes an upstanding citizen. Both may have the same upbringing, but they choose different paths. It’s not just social influences; it’s also individual choices. And these individual choices are shaped by the individual karma that somebody is carrying.

Also, if you consider the Christian idea of original sin, the problem with that idea is, as I said, why is everybody not equally sinful? Our understanding, the Gita understanding, is that people have different levels of wrong tendencies because of the different levels of impressions in their mind.

Now, let’s look at what makes some people demoniac. If we take the same graph and visual as earlier, with the soul in the center and the mind and body around it, we can see that the white represents virtuous tendencies—the good impressions in the mind—and the black section represents the dark, evil impressions. Those who are born with demoniac nature may also have some good, but it is very little. On the other hand, within them, the evil is much worse, much greater. And that’s why, as Krishna describes, their characteristics are arrogant, violent, ignorant.

You can summarize this as: they think they know everything, even though they don’t know much, and they think if anybody doesn’t agree with them, they will destroy them. So ignorant, arrogant, and violent—that is their characteristic. These are unhealthy characteristics. These are people born with demoniac nature.

In contrast, those born with the divine nature have much more virtuous impressions within their mind. These impressions come from their past karma. Of course, actions in this life also affect this, and we will talk about that shortly. But those born with divine nature are inclined toward virtue.

Like that, in verses 16.1, 16.2, and 16.3, Krishna describes the divine qualities. In their case, the virtues are much more prominent.

Now, if you consider the demoniac nature further, the whole 16th chapter could be considered a description of those with demoniac nature. So, let’s look at these descriptions one by one. First, they reject any non-material reality. Krishna describes this in 16.8 and 16.9: there is no God, no foundation, no ultimate reality. Therefore, they ask, “What is the purpose of life?” Once you reject anything higher, then only the lower remains. If we reject the idea that there is a God, then what remains is the world and the pleasures that the world offers. Verse 16.9 says: “What other purpose is there for life than sensual pleasure?”

And then they become bound by their various desires for pursuing pleasure. Krishna says that they are bound by hundreds and thousands of desires. Why are they bound? Because they have devoted themselves to the fulfillment of karma and krodha (desire and anger). One characteristic of this is: the more our worldly desires, the greater our worldly anxieties—immeasurable anxieties, even to the point of death.

Why are desires and anxieties related, especially material desires and anxieties? Because whenever we have material desires, we seek things outside. Not only do those things give us pleasure, but they become the very purpose of our existence. Without them, our life itself seems pointless. So when we become so dependent on them, and things outside are not in our control (we may like to believe they are, but they are not), we experience greater fear, worry, and anxiety.

That’s why there is great chinta (anxiety). So, basically, the first two verses talk about the worldview, about the totality of reality. Once you reject the idea that there is a God, then what remains is the pursuit of material pleasures. And as they pursue this, they seek money. And they will pursue money at all costs. Krishna describes this in 16.13 and 16.14, saying that they will do anything—anyayanartha sanchayan, anyaya (injustice)—to earn money. For example, he describes the common mentality: “This much money I have attained, and that much I can attain more.”

So, at one level, everybody thinks that way. But beyond that, what makes them demoniac is that they start thinking, “If anybody comes in the way of my getting money, I am ready to even kill them.” The person thinks, “I have killed this enemy; now I’m going to kill that one as well. And then I will be Ishvara.”

Ishvara means the controller, and it can also mean God. So, basically, the demoniac believe that by gaining more power, position, and pleasure, they will become God. And for that purpose, they are ready to even kill.

There is this ordinary covetous mentality—”ordinary” doesn’t mean it is desirable, but it is widespread. Everybody wants more, but what are we ready to do to get more? What makes them demoniac is not just their desire for more, but what they are ready to do to fulfill that desire.

And then what happens? They are not just satisfied with gaining ungodly pleasures by ungodly means. They also want prestige. They want not just prestige, but even the prestige that comes from religion. That means after they gain money and power by ungodly means, they may perform some godly activities. They may give some charity, or they may do some sacrifices.

They think that if they give charity and perform sacrifices, people will praise them for how pious they are. Some people go to the temple to take darshan—”Oh, I want to behold the Lord.” But some people go to the temple to give darshan. For them, going to the temple is basically a photo op. They’ll post it on their social media, and people will think, “Oh, what a nice person.”

Especially if someone is a movie celebrity—now, I don’t want to paint all movie celebrities with the same brush—but for some of them, they may do all kinds of movies with gross sensuality. But they don’t want to lose the religiously minded public, so on a festival, they might go to a temple and take a photo. People will then think, “Oh, such a nice person. They go to temples too.” For them, it could just be a show.

Similarly, people may perform yajna, but they’re not doing it for the name of God. They’re doing it for naam (name and fame). When they do sacrifices, it’s just for show.

In this way, the demoniac not only perform ungodly activities, but they also contaminate godly activities with ungodly motives. So, we could say that the demoniac ruin everything. These are very dangerous people.

When Krishna is describing, “Asoma maya hata shatru dhanishe cha paranapi,” meaning, “These people I have killed and those I will kill,” he could be referring to Duryodhana. Arjuna is also thinking of Duryodhana. Sometimes when two people are talking, they refer to a third person but don’t mention their name, perhaps because they don’t want to specify it. But both of them know who is being talked about.

Duryodhana had these characteristics. In royal families, sometimes there is envy about who is going to become the successor or who is more popular. Envy, though bad, is not necessarily disastrous or dangerous. But from that envy, what did Duryodhana do? He was ready to even kill his own brother. He was ready to kill Bhima. When they were just teenagers, he made a plan during a picnic to kill Bhima. He made a feast, but for Bhima, he prepared a special feast. His plan was to kill Bhima, or at least attempt to. This is the mindset of a person with demoniac nature.

If you consider the spectrum of human beings, we could say there are people with demoniac nature, there are people with divine nature, and then there are people who have a mix of both. Although this has been shown in a particular proportion, we could say that at the extremes, the number of those with divine or demoniac nature may be very small. What will really differ is the mix of both in most people.

Earlier, we talked about the black-and-white conceptions of spirituality. We also need to avoid black-and-white conceptions of human nature. Sometimes, if someone is presumptuous, they might give a Bhagavad Gita to a person and say, “Read this 16th chapter, and from verse 6 onwards, you will find yourself there. And from the first three verses, you will find me.” The first three verses describe people with divine nature, and the remaining verses describe those with demoniac nature. This is presumptuous. We cannot presume—and it’s arrogant, disrespectful, and plain wrong—to say that the people we are dealing with are of demoniac nature. Most people will be somewhere in the mix.

So, earlier we talked about avoiding black-and-white conceptions, but it’s important to remember that black and white is not always bad. When a child is learning, first the child has to identify colors that are radically different. This is black, and this is white. Then the child can start identifying shades of gray. The key point is that there are shades of gray, and there are a few people who might be very demoniac, or very divine, but most will be somewhere in between.

What differentiates them is that even those with divine nature may have dark desires, but those with divine nature fight against their dark desires. When anger arises, when greed arises, when lust arises, they try to restrain it. Krishna will later talk about these three as the three gates to hell, which characterize those with demoniac nature. Lust, anger, and greed are the gates to hell, and the wise people fight against them. They try to restrain them and renounce them, whereas the demoniac people fight for them.

For example, Ravana had lust, and he abducted Sita. He was not the least apologetic or repentant about the fact that he abducted a married woman against her will. He fought and killed, and not only did he die, but his entire kingdom was devastated and his army killed for his desires.

So, just the presence of dark desires doesn’t make a person demoniac. It’s the attitude toward the dark desires that matters. Are they fighting for them or fighting against them? If they are fighting against them, they are not considered to have a demoniac nature. They are considered to have a divine nature.

Here’s the corrected and refined version of your text with improved clarity and grammar:


There is nothing beyond matter.
So, we could say these people are pure devotees of matter. Just as for pure devotees of Krishna, there is nothing except Krishna existing, for them there is nothing except matter existing.

Just as those who are devoted to Krishna understand that Krishna, as God, has inconceivable powers, such people will ascribe inconceivable powers to matter. For example, matter, which doesn’t experience anything, somehow evolves into consciousness and develops the capacity to experience things. Somehow, matter, which never organizes itself on its own unless there is some conscious agency, has organized itself into this whole world. That’s fanatical materialism.

Now, if you consider science, science is in one way functionally materialistic. When scientists function in the world, they operate with the presumption that anything we observe in the world must have a natural explanation from factors within the world. By “in the world,” I mean we observe any material phenomena. In science, the term used is “natural phenomena.” If we observe natural phenomena, we want a natural explanation for it, not a supernatural one.

For example, when Newton observed the apple falling, he believed in God. He even considered his scientific study as searching for an understanding of how God fashioned the universe. “Oh Father, I think thy thoughts after thee,” he said. He would consider his scientific discoveries as spiritual insights into how God created the world. So, he was definitely not materialistic.

At the same time, when he saw the apple fall, his question wasn’t “What made the apple fall?” in the sense of “God made the apple fall.” He wanted to understand the material mechanism behind it. So, scientists are functionally materialistic.

Some scientists may be fanatically materialistic, but they are a small minority. We cannot lump all scientists into one category. Functionally materialistic is different from fanatically materialistic.

Now, why is science functionally materialistic? The technical term for this is “methodological naturalism.” As a methodology, science is naturalistic. This means it looks for natural explanations for natural phenomena because the idea is that if something supernatural exists, we can’t control it, we can’t model it, we can’t create anything out of it. For example, if God made something happen, there’s not much we can do about it. But if gravity made the apple fall, we can understand how gravity works, and we can use that knowledge to make airplanes and other devices.

Functional materialism is not necessarily wrong and doesn’t necessarily imply that someone is atheistic. Why am I discussing this? Because we want to avoid the temptation to brand everyone who disagrees with us as demoniac, or everyone who is non-spiritual as demoniac. There is a broad spectrum of beliefs. Similarly, not all materialism is the same.

Not all atheism is the same, either. Some people are simply atheists, while others are anti-theists. We discussed earlier the radicalization of religion. Atheists basically say that God doesn’t exist. They may say this because they have either never seen convincing arguments for God’s existence or they’ve had bad experiences with people who represented God, such as hypocrisy or arrogance, which put them off.

On the other hand, anti-theists believe that the very idea of God is evil. Not only do they claim God doesn’t exist, but they also want to destroy people’s faith in God and legislate religion out of existence. These are fanatical atheists, not functional atheists. So, we cannot say that all atheists are demoniac.

We must look at various aspects of their lives. Yes, they reject the existence of God, but that doesn’t mean they will pursue sensual pleasures in the same way as a demoniac person.

Now, do atheism and materialism intersect? Yes, they do. Both reject any higher reality. However, they are overlapping but not identical. Why? Because there may be materialistic people who still believe in something higher. They may believe in some devata (deity), some higher power, or even in God. They may think that if they pray to God, He will fulfill their worldly desires. These people are religious materialists. So, religious materialists fall into a separate category that doesn’t overlap with atheism.

Among atheists, there may be some who believe that there is something higher, something beyond matter, but they may not accept that it is God. They might say, “It’s just a mystery.” They may find the conceptions of God they are taught by various religions to be naive or intolerant, but they are somewhat spiritually minded.

One prominent example is Albert Einstein. Einstein’s views have become a battleground for both atheists and theists to support their ideologies. There are quotes from Einstein where he talks about God, such as “God does not play dice,” and other quotes that suggest he rejected the traditional idea of God. Both sides use his quotes to argue their point.

But, if we look at Einstein’s views in context, it becomes clear that he rejected the idea of God as presented by the religions he was exposed to, especially the Abrahamic ones, which he found parochial. At the same time, his study of science made him feel that there must be some higher intelligence, some higher organizing principle, without which nothing would function. So, he accepted that there was something higher, but he didn’t necessarily define it as God in the conventional sense.

The point here is that we should avoid using figures like Einstein to justify simplistic caricatures of people who disagree with us. It’s not always a matter of clear-cut categories.

So, as I mentioned earlier, not all sensual pleasures are the same. Those with divine nature may also pursue sensual pleasures, but they do so in the context of life’s four primary goals—purusharthas—as we discussed in an earlier session. These four goals are dharma (virtue, morality, religion), artha (prosperity), kama (pleasures), and moksha (liberation).

Dharma is the cultivation of virtue and moral practices. Artha is the material prosperity one earns through dharma. Kama is the enjoyment of desires, and moksha is liberation from the cycle of birth and death. When one fulfills desires as part of this system, it is not entangling. Sensual indulgence, when aligned with dharma and artha, gradually leads one to realize that these pleasures are not the ultimate goal, and one seeks something higher.

And then one will rise toward moksha, which is liberation.
So, when dharma, artha, kama, and moksha are present, life is sustainable. I’ll explain why it is sustainable in the next slide. But it’s uplifting because what happens? By doing dharma, one is cultivating virtue. Because of that cultivation of virtue, one’s sensual inclinations gradually diminish. Their sensual inclinations get regulated and eventually purified.

In contrast, if you look at demoniac people, they are often dismissive. Dismissive about what? Dharma, artha, kama, and moksha. For them, there is no dharma, no moksha. They dismiss the idea of cultivating virtue and reject the idea of anything higher in life. Because of this, they simply pursue prosperity and sensuality—wealth and sensuality.

Now, this is unsustainable. Why? Because if you consider the way the world is going right now, we have, for example, disrupted the environment in our pursuit of prosperity. Many of the ways in which we are living are quite disruptive and not sustainable. We need to move toward alternative forms of fuel, or at least do something to sustain the environment.

But what happens? Both the divine and the demoniac may pursue sensual pleasures, but the difference is that the demoniac sees sensual pleasure as life’s only purpose and will pursue it at any cost. Artha and kama are all they pursue without considering anything higher in their lives.

I mentioned that they may even murder for money. So, how do we know whether someone is divine or demoniac? One way to understand this is by looking at their boundaries—what are the things they will never do?

It could be different for different people. For example, someone might say, “My elders may do something unreasonable, and I might get angry, but I will never yell at them. I will not raise my voice against them because that’s cultured behavior.” Similarly, if two people start fighting, they might behave like civilized human beings and not resort to violence. That’s a boundary. However angry I get, I will not hit anyone. In every family, disputes arise, but when it escalates to domestic violence, it becomes alarming. At that point, we may begin to question if we want to be with such a person.

We all get provoked at times, but the key is identifying the boundaries we won’t cross, even when provoked. For example, someone might say, “I may get angry and yell, but I won’t go as far as to kill someone.” That is a boundary. Of course, not killing someone isn’t just about being law-abiding—there are many aspects to law and order, but the point is there are boundaries.

If someone kills when provoked, then they are demoniac. But again, not everyone who behaves in a materialistic way is necessarily demoniac. Even materialistic people have their boundaries. Just because someone is sensual doesn’t mean they are equally given to excessive sensuality.

I remember speaking at Amazon in Seattle, where we discussed moral relativism. Someone argued that morality is subjective: whatever people believe to be right, is right for them, and whatever they believe to be wrong is wrong for them. However, when I asked this person if there are things in the world they believe are wrong, they gave examples like terrorists, child abusers, and rapists.

I asked, “Do terrorists think they are doing something wrong? They might believe they are doing a virtuous deed.” Just because they believe they’re right doesn’t make it right. This is not moral relativism. So, they agreed that not everything is subjective, and some actions are wrong universally. Boundaries of right and wrong may differ among people, but we all agree on certain principles.

No one is actually a moral relativist. Later, an Amazon executive, one of the managers who attended the seminar, said that people have their boundaries. With respect to those boundaries, people are not moral relativists but absolutists. They have clear lines that they won’t cross. For example, in Amazon’s apparel division, they sell clothes that may sometimes be skimpy, but they have a policy that they will not depict children wearing those clothes, as they don’t want to encourage pedophilia in any way. So, they have boundaries.

Now, demoniac people are defined by boundaries that are extremely loose, or sometimes there are no boundaries at all. Whatever they want, they will do for sensuality.

So, if demoniac people will do whatever they want for their desires, what checks them from doing something wrong? Let’s look at what checks us. We have two inner restraints: one is the power of conscience, and the other is the fear of consequences.

Conscience tells us, “Don’t do this. Don’t do that.” If our conscience is strong, we won’t even consider doing certain things, and if we try, we will feel bad, and that will stop us from continuing. The fear of consequences usually comes from having well-developed or at least functional intelligence. “This will get me into trouble, so I won’t do it.”

These are the two primary restraints we all have. For demoniac people, though, these two restraints function very differently. In practical terms, they have no conscience. For example, Duryodhan, when it was pointed out to him that he had wronged the Pandavas, said, “Even if I introspect, I don’t see anything wrong that I have done.” He didn’t admit any wrongdoing, let alone correct it.

They may fear consequences, but that fear is only there as long as they don’t have enough power to counter those consequences. Once they gain enough power, they can avoid the consequences. For example, mafia dons who can kill without fear of law enforcement—they don’t worry about the consequences because the law is in their pocket.

So, for demoniac people, if they have boundaries at all, those boundaries are simply because they don’t have enough power to avoid the consequences. They are not bound by conscience or moral principles, but by their ability to escape the consequences.

When we hear about such descriptions of demoniac people, there might be a tendency to “otherify” them, to treat them as an entirely different species. But the reality is, there are degrees of demoniac behavior, and most people, even those who may seem far removed from virtuous behavior, have their boundaries.

So, child abusers, rapists, psychopaths, terrorists, sociopaths, serial killers, school shooters, and murderous dictators—they are often referred to as animals, beasts, or less than human. We may almost treat them as though they belong to a different species entirely. But it’s not that simple.

The same dark tendencies that exist in them, to an extreme degree, also exist within us—albeit to a lesser degree. Remember the diagram of the dark side and the bright side? The dark side is much larger in them, but that darkness is also within us. We can’t just label them as demoniac and see ourselves as good people. I may be a good person, but that dark side is also within me, though it may not be as strongly expressed or developed. It’s there. And if I’m careless, if I indulge in it without mindfulness, my dark side may grow as well.

We must avoid treating them as if they are a completely different species. It’s easy to say, “I would never do anything like that.” But if we look back at our own lives, we realize we have all done certain dark deeds that might shock us today. “How could I have spoken like that? How could I have acted in such a way?” We all have moments where we realize our dark side may be much stronger than we thought. It may be darker than we initially believed.

Of course, this doesn’t mean our dark side is as extreme as those of murderers, sexual predators, or tyrants. But we all have a dark side, and sometimes it can lead us to do things darker than we would ever expect.

We need to have a healthy fear of what we are capable of. Be terrified of how terrible you can become in order to never become that terrible. What does this mean? When we see demoniac people, we shouldn’t just say, “Those are horrible people. They are demons.” We must understand that if we don’t control our own dark side, we could end up just like them. That’s why we must be careful.

When we read the epics, such as the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, or the Bhagavatam, it’s easy to identify with the virtuous characters—perhaps the Pandavas, or Ram, Hanuman, or Vasudev Devaki Nanda Maharaj. We may even identify with the Lord himself in our devotion. However, to gain the full benefit of studying the scriptures, we should also try an intellectual and emotional exercise: identify with Kamsa or Ravana. What made them act the way they did?

While the situations in these epics may seem far removed from our lives, consider this: If we were in Germany during the Nazi regime, who knows? We might have become part of the Nazi machinery, either actively participating or passively allowing it. Would we have resisted? We don’t know. Books have been written about ordinary people who ended up committing horrendous acts. One example is the story of a Polish police regiment during World War II. Initially just regular law-abiding officers, they were forced to carry out Nazi orders, killing thousands of people by the war’s end.

There is also the famous Stanford prison experiment, where students assigned the role of jailers became brutally abusive toward the prisoners, even though the prisoners were also students and not criminals. Within days, the jailers turned violent, and the experiment had to be shut down. These ordinary students became capable of cruelty in a short time. This shows that even well-meaning people can fall prey to their darker sides under pressure.

So, we cannot stay proud of our purity or our virtue. We need to protect and nourish it because, in provocative circumstances, we too could do terrible things. We shouldn’t just identify with the demoniac people in an abstract way; we need to look at them and cultivate a healthy fear of our own dark side, which can be just as destructive if not properly controlled.

Now, are demoniac people reformable? Yes, everyone is reformable. The question is, after how long, and at what cost? They may have a dark side, but they can counter it. The problem is, they may not want to. Some people have lust, anger, and greed, and they see these traits as sources of power and pleasure. They don’t want to give them up. Even when they recognize that their desires are becoming uncontrollable, they may not know how to fight these internal enemies. When the enemy is external, at least we can fight it. But when the torment is from within, what do we do?

Are demoniac people reformable? Yes, but it is not easy. For them to reform, they need to change their mental impressions. Their conscience is weak, and they may not even know how to activate it. Some may not even want to change.

If they encounter highly evolved spiritual saints, however, these saints may help activate their conscience. We have the example of Narad Muni transforming Murghari, a hunter who used to sadistically kill animals. Narad Muni’s association changed him. But Krishna, as a peace messenger, went to Duryodhana, and he was not transformed. Ravana, too, was not transformed.

For most demoniac people, activating their conscience is extremely difficult unless they face a severe consequence. In Narad Muni’s case, he also gave Murghari a vision of how the animals he had killed would come back to torment him in the future. This vision of severe consequence helped. But sometimes, people do not learn from such consequences in this life, and they may only learn in their next life, where they are reborn with a better disposition.

So, when it comes to controlling demoniac people, we can’t just be assertive with them. To be assertive would mean to be aggressive.

1. Passive, Aggressive, and Assertive Modalities:

  • There are three ways to deal with people: passive, aggressive, and assertive.
  • Passive and aggressive are extremes, whereas assertiveness is the ideal.
  • However, when dealing with demoniac people, assertiveness often requires aggression because mere discussion won’t suffice.

2. The Need for Confrontation with Demoniac People:

  • If people have a divine nature, conflicts can often be resolved through discussion and removing misunderstandings.
  • Demoniac people, however, don’t just misunderstand—they have malevolent intent. They want to hurt others.
  • Thus, confrontation, not just discussion, is necessary to deal with them.

3. Social Determinism and Aggressive Intervention:

  • Social determinism suggests people shouldn’t be treated as criminals or unjustly punished.
  • While it’s true that minor crimes shouldn’t result in harsh punishment, some people may not want to reform and require aggressive intervention.
  • In some cases, capital punishment may be necessary, though there are valid ethical concerns regarding miscarriages of justice (e.g., wealthy people evading punishment).

4. The Concept of Hell and Aggressive Intervention:

  • Just as we have prisons for wrongdoers, demoniac people may face aggressive intervention in the form of going to hell.
  • The concept of hell can be controversial today, especially given the descriptions of eternal punishment that seem incompatible with a loving God.
  • However, it’s important to understand that in the Bhagavad Gita, it’s not God sending people to hell; rather, it’s their own actions (karma) that lead them there.

5. The Role of Karma and God’s Presence in Hell:

  • Just as the law of gravity causes someone to fall if they step off a building, karma causes people to face consequences for their actions.
  • God does not send people to hell with a personal agenda; it’s their own wrongdoings that lead them there.
  • God is always present, even with those in hell, as His love never forsakes anyone. This shows His infinite grace.

6. Differences Between the Gita and Abrahamic Religions on Hell:

  • In Abrahamic religions, hell is often seen as eternal, and non-believers are sent there regardless of their actions.
  • In the Bhagavad Gita, hell is not eternal. Those who go to hell are wrongdoers, and hell serves as a “tough classroom” where they can reform.
  • God never rejects anyone; He accompanies all souls, even in hell, waiting for them to reform.

7. The Purpose of Hell in the Gita:

  • The purpose of hell is to help individuals develop fear of consequences and gradually reform.
  • Hell is not a permanent state. People will eventually be restored through God’s love.
  • The timeline for deliverance depends on the person’s free will: turning to Krishna and practicing bhakti will expedite the process, while cultivating vice will delay it.

8. God’s Love and Infinite Grace:

  • God’s love is present everywhere, including in hell. He waits patiently for everyone to reform.
  • Krishna never rejects anyone; His response is based on how we use our free will.

9. Summary of Human Nature:

  • There are two views on human nature: people are inherently good or inherently bad.
  • The Gita offers a middle path: at the level of the soul, everyone is good, but at the level of the mind, influenced by impressions, people can be good or bad.
  • Those with a divine nature have mostly good impressions from past actions, while those with a demoniac nature have mostly bad impressions.

10. Demoniac Behavior:

  • Demoniac people reject God and higher realities. Their nature leads them to harm others.
  • They need aggressive intervention, not just passive or even assertive approaches, to be dealt with.

They pursue sensuality as life’s only purpose. They’re ready even to kill for that purpose. And they use religion for prestige, not for purification. Although there is this characteristic of divine and demoniac, it’s a spectrum. We shouldn’t label people very casually as demoniac just because they’re materialistic or atheistic, because we discuss nuances. There can be functional materialists, not fanatical materialists. Most scientists are methodological naturalists or functional materialists. Even among atheists, some who are antitheists can be called demoniac, but not every atheist. So this Gita chapter talks in terms of black and white, because a black-and-white understanding is also required before we can identify shades of gray. Before and after this, Krishna has talked about the three modes. In the three modes, we can understand the shades of gray within the black and white as well.

Then we talked about demoniac people, their inner restraint, and the lack of conscience power, but they have fear of consequences only as long as they’re not powerful enough to counter the consequences. Can they be reformed? Yes. But it may take a long time, and they may not even want to be reformed. For them, sometimes, they have to face severe consequences in this life, or they may die and face severe consequences thereafter until they become reformable. Then we talked about how punishment is needed for some people. For demoniac people, you can’t just be assertive in terms of talking and explaining things to them. Assertiveness requires aggressiveness. There has to be confrontation. Sometimes they need to be punished, whether by being put in jail or sent to hell. We discussed how hell doesn’t point to a God who is cruel or unloving. It is also part of God’s loving plan for everyone. The Abrahamic conception of hell and the Gita’s conception of hell are significantly different. Within the Gita’s conception, no one is condemned forever. Everybody gets the consequences of their actions, but they also always have the opportunity to reform and attain the Lord. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. Sorry for going a bit over time today.

So, okay, it was ignorance, arrogance, and violence. Let’s look at some other questions.

Okay. A lot of questions. So, what happens to those who are in Brahma Jyoti? Usually, they are cleansed of most of their impressions, and then they will start over. Yeah, it’s something like starting from the beginning in the material world. Well, not exactly starting over again. They are still overall pure. So those who go to Brahma Jyoti might come back from there. If they are fortunate enough to associate with devotees, they might get elevated quickly and liberated. Yes, but generally, to go outside the material world, the subtle body also has to be given up.

Why is it that in Satyuga, there are more people with divine nature, and demoniacs are the lowest? Yes, that happens because there are two distinct things here: there are many universes, and souls can exist in different species at different levels of activity or dormancy of consciousness. Generally, if the souls of demoniac nature are in animal species, they will just act like animals. Now animals may also have some variety, like some dogs being more kind and others more aggressive, but it’s not a huge variety in behavior like the spectrum of human behavior, because humans have much more free will. So the souls of demoniac nature might be in lower species at that time. In Satyuga, souls in human bodies may be more pious and virtuous.

Is karma wiped out at the time of annihilation? I haven’t heard anything like that. Karma can only be wiped out by the practice of bhakti. The passage of time doesn’t wipe out karma. So, it’s more likely that in the more pure ages like Satyuga, the souls with demoniac nature are elsewhere. They are not in human bodies. That’s why the world can be overall with divine nature.

Okay. So the question here is, how do you differentiate between being selfish and protecting one’s self-interest? If somebody has been exploited in the past, when they try to be selfless but then are exploited, they again gravitate towards selfishness. How do we motivate them to balance it? I think this is something delicate. We also have to be intelligent. Intelligent means we need to observe when we act in a particular way with people: What is the effect? What is the response? Is it leading to something good? Say, if we help someone, like giving charity to a poor person, but if they use it to get drunk and then cause domestic violence, we aren’t really helping them. So we can look at the consequences of our actions. Sometimes the people we help may even turn against us. They might start demanding more and more or develop an entitlement mentality. Rather than generalizing from our specific experiences, we can learn from them. There’s a difference between learning from experience and generalizing from experience. Learning from experience means, yes, people can act this way, so I should be careful. Generalizing from experience means, because people act this way, people are bad. No, that’s not fair.

So, envision a pendulum. If we are naive, we might think everybody is good. But we can go to the other extreme, where we become cynical and believe everyone is bad. The balance is that everyone deserves the opportunity to earn trust. We don’t believe everyone is good or bad, but rather we say, “I don’t know. Let me give them some opportunities and see.” So, by giving people opportunities to earn trust, we deal with them as individuals. If we’ve been burned before, it’s understandable to be cautious, but we don’t have to be so cautious that we never get involved. Being selfless is good, but we can’t be brainless. The point is that we have to use our intelligence. We can try being selfless in small ways and see the result. If there’s a good result, we can move forward; otherwise, we won’t. That’s how we can maintain balance. Then, thank you.

Among functional materialists and fanatical materialists, which is more dangerous? I would say fanatical materialists are much more dangerous. Functional materialists, on the other hand, might not be as dangerous unless influenced by fanatical materialists. Otherwise, they’re just going through life. Most people in material existence are functionally materialistic. Krishna himself spoke in the Bhagavad Gita 5,000 years ago, and he said those interested in spirituality are one among thousands. So, most people are functionally materialistic. Does that make them bad or dangerous? Not necessarily.

There are a lot of questions. Let me see how many I can answer now.

For Kshatriyas, when they kill, they do not incur sin, but then what about the Nazis? Does that rule apply only when they are following their duties? For example, a policeman does not get punished when shooting civilians while shooting a killer.

Yes, this does not apply to the dharmic people, like Hitler’s stooges. I agree fully. Our individual responsibility is not taken away from us because of society’s actions. If everybody is robbing, then I may also be inclined to rob, but does that make robbery a lesser crime? While the court might show some leniency if a person grew up in such a situation, a wrong thing is still wrong. Just because everyone else is doing it doesn’t make it right.

So, just because society is engaging in demoniac activities does not make those activities right. However, people need to be strategic. There is no point in becoming a mindless martyr. If you don’t participate, the Nazis will just kill you. So, you need to be intelligent about how to handle the situation. Some Germans helped the Jews escape during the Holocaust. There are stories like Anne Frank’s, where she survived for a while, finding goodness even in those times.

If everybody is doing something wrong, and for us to do the right thing is difficult, doing the wrong thing may not be as culpable as when everyone is doing the right thing and we do the wrong thing. Still, a wrong thing does not become right just because everybody is doing it. Our individual agency and responsibility are not taken away by society’s situations.

In the famous Nuremberg Trials, many Nazis said they were simply following orders. But the Nuremberg Trials ruled that this could not be used as justification because what they were doing was brutally wrong.

Does this address your question, Athena? Yes? Thank you.

Now, when we say that everybody will be delivered, what about those who will forever misuse their free will? Well, everyone has the potential to misuse their free will, but that’s unlikely. Sooner or later, people will awaken. Maybe they will face enough consequences, or perhaps they will be fortunate enough to meet saints. Through this, they will gradually reform and be delivered. It may take a long time, and that’s why we try to provide opportunities for reform as much as possible.

Now, regarding the question from Param Karuna Prabhu about Lord of the Flies by William Golding — it’s a very good book illustrating how ordinary people can become demoniac as well.

When the divine fights the dark side, it means that one can either ignore or combat it. Sometimes, lower desires can be ignored. We just continue doing whatever we’re doing, and the desires may come and go. But sometimes, these desires start pressing us too much. When this happens, we have to find more active ways to defend ourselves, such as chanting intensely to fortify our defenses.

Sometimes neglecting the mind works, but it isn’t always enough. Imagine being in a fort where people outside are screaming and threatening you. If they don’t have any weapons, you can neglect them, and they will eventually go away. However, if they have weapons, they may force their way in, and we need to actively defend ourselves. In this case, we use stronger purifying activities such as chanting more, reading more, praying more, or keeping ourselves busy with positive, spiritual activities.

Now, there are questions about the conception of hell in the Bhagavad Gita and how to reconcile Krishna as a compassionate God with verses like 16.19, where Krishna says he sends people to hell. Sometimes when reading the Gita, we forget that Krishna is not just an abstract principle — he is a person with emotions. He experiences the full range of human emotions, though he is not controlled by them.

For example, when Krishna says, Tanaham Dushyataha Kruran — “I cast them to hell,” Prabhupada translated Kruran as cruel, and Dushyataha as envious. But Prabhupada uses “mischievous” here because Krishna is speaking with his heart, expressing his concern and exasperation with people like Duryodhana.

When Krishna says, I will cast them into hell, it is not to be taken literally, but as an expression of his frustration and concern. The purpose is not to send people to hell, but to guide them toward reform. It’s a loving warning, like when a parent says, If you do this, you will have no place in my house — it’s not literal, but a way to deter the child from harmful actions.

We should understand that some of Krishna’s statements are directional, not literal. They are meant to convey a truth in a more emphatic way, and they should be interpreted in context. For instance, Krishna says that everyone can be delivered, but it may take time. People who misuse their free will may face consequences, but the possibility of reform and awakening is always present.

In conclusion, the overall teachings of the Bhagavad Gita emphasize the possibility of reform for everyone, regardless of their past actions, and it is important to understand the context of Krishna’s words when interpreting them.

Thank you very much for your participation. Hare Krishna!

The post 43 Are some people innately bad – Gita 16.06 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

42 How to see God’s hand in our life – Gita 15.15
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. Thank you very much for joining today. Today, we’ll be discussing one of the most commonly quoted verses from the Gita, 15.15. We’ll explore the topic of how to see God’s hand in our life, beginning with a philosophical perspective on God’s hand in material existence and then moving toward practical applications in our lives. This is the verse. Now, there are two distinct points in this verse that we need to understand, along with the correlation between them. The first point talks about God’s inner presence and action in our lives. Close to the heart, God resides. In the heart, close to every living being, He resides, and from there, He gives knowledge, remembrance, and forgetfulness. This describes the inner presence and action of the Lord.

The second half of the verse states, “Vedaishcha sarvair aham eva vedyo”, which means that by all the Vedas, it is Krishna who is to be ultimately known, and “Vedantakrit vedavid eva chaham” explains that He is the author and knower of the Vedas. How can Krishna claim to know the goal of the Vedas? The Vedas are a vast body of literature, but Krishna asserts that He knows them because He is their creator. As the author, through the literary incarnation of the Lord, Vyasadeva, Krishna composed the Vedas. Now, what is the link between these two sections? One is that Krishna resides in the heart and acts within it while the other is that He is the goal and author of the Vedas. The connection lies in the fact that these are two broad sources of guidance for the soul in the material world. Krishna asserts that He is the guiding force in both ways.

This section is part of Chapter 15, often referred to as “the eyes of knowledge.” Chapter 15 comprises 20 verses, making it one of the smallest chapters in the Gita, along with Chapter 12. Despite its brevity, Chapter 15, also known as Purushottam Yoga, succinctly covers the philosophy of living. The chapter is divided into four parts. Verses 1 to 5 describe the world as a place of illusion, exemplified by the upside-down tree metaphor discussed in the last class. Verses 7 to 11 delve into the soul’s transmigration in the material world, explaining how the soul is entangled and moves from one life to another, seeking worldly pleasures. This section concludes by explaining how we can raise our consciousness to a spiritual level and begin to see the divine by observing how even our material needs and desires are fulfilled by a higher arrangement.

The verses 12 to 15 focus on perceiving the divine action within the material world, explaining how one can see non-material or divine influence in sustaining the material. This section concludes with verse 15.15, the most important verse in this chapter, which we will analyze today. The final section, verses 16 to 20, discusses the various features of spiritual reality, ultimately identifying the Supreme Lord as the highest reality. The entire chapter presents a condensed philosophy of living in material existence by addressing four aspects: entanglement in material existence, transmigration, perception of the divine within material existence, and realization of ultimate spiritual reality.

Today, our topic focuses on how to see God’s action in our lives, based on verses 15.12 to 15.15, with verse 15.15 as the centerpiece. We’ll explore three aspects: appreciating how God sustains us materially, understanding how God reciprocates with our desires, and recognizing how He bestows His grace. The term Jnana Chakshu (“eyes of knowledge”) is significant here, as mentioned in 15.10 and implied in 15.11, describing how one with spiritual vision can perceive the soul’s entanglement in the material world and God’s actions within it. The Jnana Chakshu enables us to see how our existence depends on many factors beyond our control, even if we are not fully aware of them. This perspective forms the foundation of our discussion today.

How many of us are constantly aware that we are breathing? Usually, we only become aware of it when the air is no longer fresh, or we start feeling suffocated for some reason. That’s when we realize, “I’m not getting enough air.” Air is a basic necessity for existence, yet we often take it for granted. It’s not just air; there are many other things we need. We often think of basic needs such as food, clothing, shelter, air, and water. However, beyond these, there are numerous subtle factors necessary for life to exist on Earth. For instance, the temperature has to be regulated enough to support life.

When analyzing material existence, the Vedic texts often describe three levels: Adhi Atmik (pertaining to the self), Adhi Bhautik (pertaining to the social and material world), and Adhi Daivik (pertaining to natural or divine forces). At the Adhi Atmik level, for us to exist, our body must function properly. At any given moment, countless processes within the body occur without our awareness, such as digestion, blood circulation, and respiration. If any of these processes fail, we cannot control them much, and significant harm could occur. At the Adhi Bhautik level, social factors play a role in our existence. For society to function, there must be peace, but history has shown us that wars, crimes, and brutalities are all too common. Social harmony is essential. Lastly, at the Adhi Daivik level, nature must function harmoniously. Natural disasters such as tornadoes, heavy rains, floods, or famines can disrupt life. Our existence depends on countless factors beyond our control, even if we are unaware of them.

In recent times, the environmental movement has made us increasingly conscious of human impact on the environment. This awakening began roughly 50 years ago, while significant human impact on the environment started about 200 years ago with industrialization. Gradually, people are becoming more aware of the need to protect and preserve the environment, though there is still much progress to be made. This growing awareness is akin to a newborn’s gradual understanding of the world. A newborn cannot survive without immense parental care and protection. Initially, newborns cry when they are hungry, need a diaper change, or feel physical discomfort. At this stage, they are unaware of the world beyond their immediate needs. Gradually, as they grow, they begin to recognize their caregivers, particularly their mother, as someone who loves and provides for them. This growth in awareness reflects a broader truth: as we grow, we start to understand and appreciate the factors and people that sustain us.

Awareness and growth go hand in hand. Biological growth happens automatically, but psychological and spiritual growth require effort. As we mature, we are expected to recognize how much others do for us and to reciprocate. However, during adolescence, children often become more critical of their parents, focusing on what they perceive as shortcomings. It is usually only after they become parents themselves that they truly understand the challenges of parenting and develop a greater appreciation for their own parents.

Growing biologically means physical changes such as hormonal shifts and an increase in size. Growing psychologically means learning to manage emotions more effectively. For instance, children cry when they are angry, displeased, or lose a game. They may throw tantrums, but as adults, we are expected to handle emotions with greater maturity. While biological growth is automatic, psychological growth requires conscious effort. Similarly, spiritual growth is not automatic—it demands conscientious effort and introspection. A person may grow physically but remain emotionally immature or spiritually stagnant. Childlike innocence is a virtue, but childish immaturity is not. True growth involves progressing at all levels—biological, psychological, and spiritual.

Growth must happen conscientiously. There are various levels of growth: physical growth, psychological or emotional growth, and spiritual growth. Psychological growth primarily involves learning to manage our emotions better, so we don’t get swayed by everything that happens to us or around us. For example, when a small baby is uncomfortable, they may start crying immediately. However, when an adult is uncomfortable, they may not cry but instead seek help more consciously, perhaps by calling someone specific. This reflects greater awareness and emotional maturity.

At a spiritual level, growth involves an increasing awareness of life’s spiritual dimensions. We begin to recognize that life couldn’t be sustained without a sustaining principle. We become aware of the supreme spiritual reality—God—and His role in our lives. Spiritual growth is not merely about external practices like chanting more rounds, memorizing verses, or spending more time worshipping deities. While these activities stimulate and manifest spiritual growth, the essence of growth is connecting our consciousness with Krishna. These practices make our consciousness more receptive to Krishna’s presence—not just in specific manifestations like a deity or a sacred activity but throughout our lives.

The phrase “always remember Krishna” doesn’t necessarily mean constant factual recollection of His form as a bluish-black cowherd boy playing a flute and wearing a peacock feather. While such a visualization is helpful, especially during moments of quiet reflection, the deeper meaning is to become conscious of Krishna’s role in our lives while functioning in the world. For instance, as I speak now, my body is functioning—my throat is producing sound. I do not fully understand how this happens, but if I become conscious of it, I would feel grateful. Remembering Krishna in this context means recognizing His role in enabling us to function, grow, and exist.

Spiritual growth involves seeing Krishna’s hand not only in the extraordinary moments of life but also in the ordinary ones. We often attribute God’s presence to special events, such as when a prayer is answered, a disease is cured, a relationship progresses, or we achieve a career milestone. While it’s good to see Krishna in these moments, we should also see His hand in everyday occurrences. For instance, the fact that we have food to eat or that we are alive—both are signs of God’s grace. So many things could go wrong, yet they don’t. As we grow more aware of this, we naturally develop gratitude.

Gratitude arises when we focus on what is right in our lives rather than what is wrong. If we dwell on what is wrong, we may feel resentful instead. Unfortunately, many things that are right in our lives go unnoticed because we take them for granted. The material world is such that everything eventually declines over time unless we make a conscientious effort to maintain or improve it. Recognizing what is right helps cultivate gratitude, and gratitude is a very healthy emotion to nurture.

The Bhagavad Gita explains how God sustains us materially, offering specific examples at the cosmological, terrestrial, and physiological levels. In verse 15.12, Krishna says:
“The light of the sun, which illumines the whole universe, and the light of the moon and fire—know that these originate from Me.”
The Gita highlights how the energy of the sun sustains everything. The moon reflects the sun’s light, and even fire and electricity ultimately derive from solar energy. For instance, stored solar energy in plants provides fuel and energy, and many modern energy systems indirectly rely on the sun. Krishna declares that the energy of the sun, the fire, and all sources of light originate from Him.

The sun is the source of all energy, and without it, nothing could exist. Science has confirmed this reality in various ways. For instance, solar flares—powerful surges of energy from the sun—can disrupt Earth’s atmosphere. If a solar flare penetrates the Earth’s atmosphere significantly, all electrical and electronic devices could stop working entirely. That this rarely happens demonstrates how the universe sustains us in a delicate balance.

From a non-theistic perspective, some might call this a “lucky accident.” However, this term is misleading. Lucky accidents merely prevent bad things from happening; they don’t create or sustain the intricate systems that make life possible. For example, a lucky accident might prevent a car crash but wouldn’t transform a car into a luxurious Rolls Royce. In this context, the intricate harmony sustaining life isn’t a random occurrence but evidence of a purposeful design.

While Krishna consciousness transcends the mere acknowledgment of God’s existence, understanding this sustaining principle is valuable. Krishna states in the Bhagavad Gita that the sun’s energy originates from Him. The sun does not have independent energy; it is powered by Krishna’s divine energy. This understanding elevates our awareness to see how Krishna sustains material existence at various levels.

At the terrestrial level, Krishna highlights the Earth’s unique conditions that support life. The Earth floats in space, and while science attributes this to gravity, the nature of gravity remains a philosophical question. Science often names phenomena rather than fully explaining them. For example, gravity is described as the force that causes objects to fall or planets to orbit. But what is gravity? Newton offered a mathematical formulation of observed phenomena, while Einstein proposed that gravity is a feature of space-time distortion caused by massive objects. However, even these explanations are constructs within scientific models, not ultimate truths.

Krishna and gravity are not competing explanations—they are complementary. Science helps us quantify and utilize phenomena like gravity, but Krishna consciousness provides the ultimate sustaining principle. For instance, the Earth’s precise distance from the sun ensures a temperature suitable for life. If the Earth were closer, it would be too hot; if farther, too cold. Similarly, the Earth’s rotation speed is perfect for maintaining a balance between day and night. These factors align in ways that make life possible, demonstrating divine orchestration.

Krishna further explains that He nourishes vegetation as the moon. Some studies suggest that moonlight makes vegetables juicier and more nutritious. Beyond such specifics, the very growth of vegetation is a miracle. From tasteless soil and water, we get fragrant fruits like mangoes, which are not only nutritious but also visually appealing and aromatic. As Einstein noted, we can either see nothing as a miracle or everything as a miracle. The existence of plants that produce edible food is remarkable and depends on numerous factors beyond human control.

Human ingenuity, such as irrigation systems, has reduced dependence on nature to some extent. However, these systems still rely on the basics provided by nature, such as the availability of water. We can channel water but cannot create or ensure its presence. This dependence points to a higher power sustaining nature itself. Nature’s intricate balance cannot be explained as a purely mechanical force because, according to the scientific law of entropy, systems tend to disorder over time unless guided by an overarching principle. That principle is Krishna.

From a physiological perspective, Krishna explains in Bhagavad Gita 15.14 that He is the fire of digestion. Digestion, or metabolism, is a miraculous process. While we may take pride in earning our food, the effort required to digest it far surpasses the effort to procure it. The elementary canal’s peristaltic movements and other digestive processes involve an extraordinary amount of work. Despite advances in science, creating artificial digestive systems has proven nearly impossible due to their complexity. A digestive machine would need to be the size of a factory several miles long.

Many of the processes sustaining our existence operate below the radar of our awareness. Krishna says that if we see these processes spiritually, we can recognize them as divine arrangements. By acknowledging God’s hand not only in extraordinary events but also in the ordinary details of life, we can deepen our awareness of His action in our lives.

Krishna describes how we can see his presence in the world, whether it’s through the extraordinary (as in Chapter 10, Vibhuti Yoga) or the ordinary elements that sustain us (as in this discussion). While Chapter 7 highlights Krishna as the essence of things (e.g., the taste of water), each chapter emphasizes different facets of his interaction with the material world. Beyond the physical, Krishna also acts at a psychological level, especially in our hearts.

Extraordinary Manifestations

  1. Inspiration:
    Inspiration is an extraordinary phenomenon that often feels like a sudden, complete answer placed within us by a higher source. This is seen in creative and scientific breakthroughs, such as the work of Gauss and Mozart. The cognitive leap in such moments suggests a divine intervention, which many great minds have acknowledged as God’s grace.

Similarly, gifted individuals, like Shakuntala Devi, exhibit remarkable talents that seem beyond explanation. This sudden clarity or “knowing” in various fields is an example of the Super Soul’s guidance in our lives.

  1. Instincts in Animals:
    Instincts, or “programmed intelligence,” are another example of divine guidance. For instance, bird migration demonstrates remarkable precision, with birds traveling across continents and returning to the exact tree their ancestors lived in. While mechanisms like Earth’s magnetic field may offer a partial scientific explanation, they don’t fully account for how such intelligence is passed down or executed. This reflects the divine hand guiding even animals’ lives.

Ordinary Manifestations

Krishna’s actions are also present in the everyday aspects of life, though these often go unnoticed. For example:

  • Nourishment: Ordinary food sustains us far more than occasional delicacies, yet we overlook its significance. Similarly, the divine sustenance in everyday life is often underappreciated.
  • Digestion: The complex process of metabolism, which science struggles to replicate artificially, is another miracle of divine arrangement.

Super Soul’s Role in Our Lives

Krishna, as the Super Soul, not only sustains us physically and psychologically but also inspires and guides us through both extraordinary moments and the ordinary flow of life. Recognizing his hand in these aspects allows us to deepen our connection with the divine.

Knowledge, Remembrance, and Forgetfulness: Krishna’s Role

Krishna states that he provides knowledge, remembrance, and forgetfulness. These three aspects operate not only at the spiritual level but also in our daily functioning and even across lifetimes. Let’s explore how these principles manifest.

1. Knowledge:

Knowledge enables us to function in the body we have received. For instance:

  • Transmigration of the Soul:
    When the soul moves from one body to another, the new body comes with an entirely different environment. However, the soul adapts seamlessly. In humans, some knowledge is taught by parents, but in animals, much of it is instinctive. This innate ability to function comes from Krishna.
    • Example: A child prodigy playing a complex musical instrument effortlessly, or a baby animal knowing how to walk shortly after birth.
    • Even everyday skills, like speaking or walking, require complex coordination, which we perform without conscious effort. These abilities are manifestations of knowledge granted by Krishna.
  • Daily Life:
    When we perform tasks, consciously or unconsciously, Krishna provides the knowledge we need. For example:
    • While speaking, we instinctively choose the right tone, pause, and grammar without analyzing every rule.
    • Similarly, musicians, artists, or athletes often “just know” how to do things, which is a reflection of the innate knowledge Krishna provides.

2. Remembrance:

Remembrance allows us to access relevant knowledge or tendencies from this or previous lives:

  • Unfulfilled Desires and Talents:
    • Desires from past lives influence the kind of body and tendencies we acquire in this life. For instance, someone with a deep inclination toward music may have practiced it in a previous life, and Krishna facilitates this remembrance to continue their journey.
    • This is why certain individuals feel drawn to specific activities, such as art, science, or service, from a young age.
  • Practical Functioning:
    • Krishna ensures we remember what is necessary at the right time. For example, when interacting with someone, we recall relevant interactions to engage meaningfully. However, we do not recall everything at once, which could overwhelm us.

3. Forgetfulness:

Forgetfulness is a necessary blessing that helps us focus and function effectively:

  • Avoiding Cognitive Overload:
    • If we remembered every single detail about someone or every interaction, it would lead to cognitive dysfunction. Krishna ensures we forget irrelevant details, allowing us to function without distractions.
    • For example, we forget past traumatic events over time, which helps us heal and move forward. Forgetfulness thus becomes a gift, especially in cases where people struggle to let go of painful memories.
  • During Transmigration:
    • Forgetting past-life memories prevents us from becoming overwhelmed by unnecessary baggage. This allows us to focus on the life and body we currently inhabit.

Daily Application of Knowledge, Remembrance, and Forgetfulness

  1. Knowledge:
    • Enables us to function unconsciously, such as walking, speaking, or writing, without analyzing every step.
    • Talents like music, art, or athletic ability reflect Krishna’s role in providing innate knowledge, further refined through practice.
  2. Remembrance:
    • Allows us to connect to our talents, tendencies, and experiences from this and previous lives.
    • Guides us toward fulfilling our desires or pursuing our innate inclinations.
  3. Forgetfulness:
    • Protects us from distractions, unnecessary memories, or traumatic experiences.
    • Enables focus by discarding irrelevant information and ensuring mental clarity.

Krishna’s statement—”I provide knowledge, remembrance, and forgetfulness”—highlights his active involvement in our lives at every level. Whether it is the innate instincts of animals, the talents of prodigies, or the ability to focus and function daily, Krishna’s divine presence orchestrates it all. Recognizing this allows us to approach life with gratitude and a deeper understanding of his grace.

So there is knowledge we could say is more of the reservoir of relevant information, wisdom, whatever you want to talk about. Remembrance is what we draw from it, and forgetfulness is what is withdrawn from it—withdrawn from our consciousness. So this is constantly happening and enabling us to function, and that is the super soul doing that. Now, what is the role of the super soul in our spiritual growth? Basically, the same things—remembrance, knowledge, and forgetfulness—if you consider, depend on what is our desire. If you want to enjoy sensual desires, we will get the remembrance of how we will get the remembrance of the pleasure of enjoying. Oh, you enjoyed this; you enjoyed this food at this time; you enjoyed that particular TV show at that time; oh, you enjoyed that particular activity at that time. And those desires will keep coming to us, and quite often, the consequences of enjoying will be forgotten. Oh, you wasted so much time; you felt so miserable after that. And then the basic knowledge about how to go about enjoying—so somebody, somebody’s an alcoholic, and they get an urge again. And now when they get the urge, oh, I want to drink. They might have gone; they might have embarrassed themselves by drinking too much and abusing alcohol and made a mess of things, lost money, but whatever, they forget all that. And then they might not even consciously palate, you know, okay, maybe if I go there, there are probably no friends over there, nobody will detect me. Sometimes they may think consciously; sometimes they will not even think consciously—it will just happen.

So this knowledge, remembrance, and forgetfulness is in reciprocation with our desires. Now, if you have a desire to grow spiritually, then what we’ll remember is the joy of spiritual experiences, yes, and what we’ll forget is the pleasures of sensuality. We’ll forget the troubles, the austerities in spirituality. Oh, they don’t; this joy is so fulfilling; I want it. And knowledge is, okay, if I want that, how do I go about serving Krishna? So basically, remembrance, knowledge, and forgetfulness happen very dynamically and reciprocally for us, and that’s how we are able to move on. And now, if you are practicing bhakti and we are still getting remembrances of past sensual indulgences, what that means is right now, we just have to strengthen our devotional desire. And as the desire becomes stronger and stronger, then at a particular time, when we’ll come, the remembrance itself will go away, and it has happened to us for many things. Some of us might have been eating meat before we started practicing bhakti, and now even if we see meat, we’re not tempted by it. So that remembrance of the pleasure, remembrance of the enjoyment may not come, and that is not done by our effort; that is done by divine grace.

Just like every day, when we are tired and when we sleep, sleeping is a very routine activity, but how extraordinary it is, we realize when we are not able to sleep. Many times, if you’re not able to sleep, what happens? We might lie down in bed; there might be no noise around us; we might close our eyes, but it’s the switch that turns off our consciousness so that we can go from a wakeful state to a sleeping state. That switch is not in our control. So then, even sleep is a gift of God. Similarly, forgetting is a gift of God; remembering is a gift of God. Now, just because these things happen normally, in an anomaly, or effortlessly for us, that doesn’t mean that they are not having some higher arrangement behind them.

Thus, in our day-to-day lives also, we can start seeing Krishna’s action dynamically. And, of course, Krishna doesn’t just reciprocate with our desires; Krishna goes beyond reciprocating with our desires also. Krishna’s presence inside is that he is not just our destination, who exists in the spiritual world higher, far away from us—he’s also our companion; he’s present in our hearts. Suppose you take a flight, say you are in New York, and you go to LA to meet someone. Now, we have not met that person, and maybe we’ve not seen their photo, but we’re eager to meet them. And then somebody sits next to us in our flight, and we chat with them, but we’re not; we’re too eager to meet this person. And we get there, we go to the address, we knock on their door, and when they open the door, we find that person—the same person who was sitting next to us in our flight—but we didn’t know about them, and so we thought we didn’t really regard them very much.

So like that, we are on a journey; we are trying to go to Krishna, who is in the spiritual world, but actually, Krishna is right now next to us in our heart itself. So Krishna, if we even have a little desire for serving him, Krishna will magnify that desire. If we have a little desire to offer our thoughts to him, he will attract us. So now, when Krishna guides—in this verse, I said that there are two aspects: one is he’s present in the super soul, and the other is he’s present in the Vedas. So actually, both of them are ways in which Krishna is guiding us. Now, of course, not every voice that comes from within is God’s voice. There can be the voice of our ego or our mind also. That’s why we need education, purification, and devotion. We need to study scripture to understand what God’s plan and purpose overall for life is. Then we need purification—so that the voices of, say, greed, anger, or ego, they decrease—they’re not so blatant or loud. And then when there’s devotion, then that becomes our direct connection with Krishna. And then, “I’ll give you the intelligence by which you can come to me.” It is inside us; they become one with our consciousness. So the voice of the Lord, as it manifests externally through our guides, and as it manifests internally through our inner guide, it all becomes one, and then our life journey becomes very clear and confident.

So Krishna is actually very close to us. How close or how far is he from us? He’s just one thought away from us. He’s there in our hearts. If you just turn to think about him, he is there. And we may think of practicing bhakti as very difficult: I have to chant so many rounds; I have to read so many books; I have to do so many activities. Ultimately, bhakti is just about offering Krishna one thought—just offer him one thought. And then, after that, offer one more thought. Actually, if we offer him one thought…

He will give us many more thoughts about how to offer him many more thoughts, and then in this way, gradually, we will become absorbed. So Krishna is always reciprocal. However, with a devotee, Krishna is reciprocal but not always proportional. We may take one step toward Krishna, and he may take a hundred steps toward us. We may offer one thought to him, and he may give us a hundred thoughts about how we can remember him more, how we can become attracted to him more. In that way, he is not just reciprocating on the basis of law—”okay, I’m meant to be here; I’m functioning.” He is personally there, caring for us, and he will help each one of us to become elevated, to become attracted to him, and to ultimately attain him.

So Krishna’s presence as the super soul in our heart is for our sake. He is, we could say, the personal avatar of Krishna for each one of us. By looking at the dynamics of how the world functions externally and by looking at the dynamics of how our thoughts function internally, we all can see Krishna’s action around us—inside and outside—and thus become inspired and guided to move toward him.

So I’ll summarize. I spoke today on the topic of how to see Krishna’s action in our life. I talked about three broad sections: how to see Krishna’s actions materially, Krishna reciprocating with our desires, and lastly, how to see Krishna going with our desires.

First, I talked about how Krishna sees our desires and how we can see his action materially. Our existence depends on many factors beyond what is in our control, and as we grow from a newborn baby to an adult, we realize how much those around us are doing for us. Those physical, social, and environmental factors shape our existence. As we grow psychologically, we become aware of what others are doing, and we feel like reciprocating. When we grow spiritually, our awareness goes beyond just the people around us to the ultimate Lord, to the spiritual level of reality.

Then we talked about 15.12, 15.13, and 15.14, which describe Krishna sustaining us cosmologically, terrestrially, and physiologically—through the sun, through the suspension of the earth through gravity, through digestion, and through photosynthesis for getting edible food and vegetation. Then we discussed the super soul’s action in our life. We discussed how instinct and inspiration are examples of the super soul’s guidance in animals and humans. He reciprocates by giving us knowledge, remembrance, and forgetfulness—during transmigration from one life to another, during our functioning in life, in terms of habits, our tendencies, and our desires.

Beyond that, he helps us and goes out of his way to reciprocate with us if we try to turn toward him. If we have a strong desire, then he will give us the forgetfulness of whatever is undesirable. Forgetfulness, like sleeping, is a switch not in our control—it is in Krishna’s control. He is just one thought away, present in our heart as a guide. Internally and through scripture externally, both guide us together. Through education, purification, and devotion, these voices will become one for us. If we offer him one thought, he will offer us many more thoughts in return, and that’s how we’ll ultimately be able to attain him.

So thank you very much. Hmm, I can see there are some questions here. I’ll keep a record of these questions and try to answer them in the next session because today, I have to rush for another class in about 10 minutes. I have a class and have to go to the temple hall from here. So thank you very much for your attention and participation.

The post 42 How to see God’s hand in our life – Gita 15.15 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

41 What is the upside-down tree metaphor Gita 15.01
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Thank you all for joining today. We’re diving into one of the most vivid yet often misunderstood metaphors from the Bhagavad Gita: the metaphor of the upside-down tree. This unique imagery, found in the 15th chapter, serves as a profound representation of our material existence and its entanglements. Through this session, we’ll explore what this metaphor represents and its deeper spiritual significance.

In our previous session, we discussed the three modes of material nature as described by Krishna, particularly focusing on how these modes bind the soul to the material world. Starting from Chapter 13, Krishna delves into an analytical perspective—what could be termed as Jnana—to redirect our attention from the material world to the ultimate spiritual reality, which is Krishna Himself.

Chapter 13, for instance, identifies the root cause of our bondage: illusory desire. Krishna explains this beautifully in the verse:
“Purusha prakriti stho hi, bhumte prakriti jaan gunan, karanam guna sangosya, sadasad yoni janmasu.”

This verse, which Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur describes as the “seed of material existence,” highlights two key causes of bondage:

  1. The soul’s desire to enjoy the material world (kama).
  2. The influence of the modes of material nature (guna-sanga).

This seed verse (13.22) essentially encapsulates the problem of material existence, and the chapters that follow unravel its implications and the path to liberation. Chapter 14 elaborates on the three modes—sattva (goodness), rajas (passion), and tamas (ignorance)—and how they perpetuate bondage.

The 15th chapter then presents a metaphor to help us understand the nature of our entanglement. This is the famous metaphor of the upside-down tree, found in the verse:
“Urdhva-mulam adhah-shakham, ashwatham prahur-avyayam, chandamsi yasya parnani, yas tam veda sa veda-vit.”

This verse describes a peculiar tree:

  • Its roots are upwards, and its branches extend downward.
  • It is called ashwatha, often translated as a banyan tree, and is said to be imperishable.
  • The leaves of this tree are the Vedic hymns (chandamsi).
  • One who truly understands this tree is said to know the Vedas.

This statement—that understanding this tree equates to knowing the Vedas—is quite significant. Clearly, Krishna is not referring to a literal tree; this is not a botanical lesson. Instead, the tree is metaphorical, representing the material world and its entanglements.

Interestingly, Krishna does not explicitly say, “This tree represents the material world.” The metaphor is implied rather than directly stated. This requires us to use our intelligence to infer its meaning, as it is not self-evident on the surface. The deeper significance of the tree, its roots, branches, and leaves, must be uncovered through thoughtful analysis and reflection.

In today’s session, we’ll explore the structure and symbolism of this tree, its connection to Maya (illusion), and what it teaches us about the nature of the material world. By understanding this metaphor, we can gain insights into how to cut through the entanglements of material existence and move toward liberation.

Let’s begin.

In this context, we find that the metaphor of the upside-down tree in the Bhagavad Gita not only refers to the world but also helps us understand its true nature. When we grasp the essence of this tree, we can also grasp the teachings of the Vedas and learn how to navigate our lives in this world.

To begin, let’s look at the nature of the world itself. One recurring observation we can make is that something always seems to be wrong somewhere. With news constantly pouring in from around the globe, it’s clear that there are many issues at play—natural disasters, conflicts, and calamities that affect countless people. Yet beyond these specific events, there’s an underlying sense that something is fundamentally amiss in the world.

What is it that is wrong? There are a few broad categories we can consider:

  1. Dissatisfaction:
    One of the most apparent issues in the world is a universal sense of dissatisfaction. People are often unhappy with what they have, with who they are, or with how the world around them operates. Even when people go on vacation or visit a resort in hopes of escaping daily life, they may still feel a nagging sense that something is wrong. This dissatisfaction is pervasive, both on a personal and global scale.
  2. Moral Degradation:
    Another problem that adds to the dysfunction of the world is moral degradation. Left unchecked, humanity’s moral compass tends to decline. This isn’t about mere nostalgia for the past or moralizing about how things used to be better. It’s a recognition that human actions are directly causing harm. Whether overtly evil or covertly destructive, people’s choices and behaviors are often hurting others and the world at large.
  3. Physical Destruction and Decay:
    Beyond mental and moral concerns, there is the inevitable physical deterioration of the world. Everything in the material world decays, breaks down, and is eventually destroyed. Whether through natural forces or human actions, the world faces continual decline and destruction.

To better understand these issues, we can categorize them into three types of distress:

  • Adhidaivic: Distress caused by nature (e.g., natural disasters).
  • Adhibhautic: Social distress (e.g., conflicts, inequality).
  • Adhyatmic: Psychophysical distress (e.g., dissatisfaction, mental and emotional struggles).

These categories help us see that the dissatisfaction we feel often stems from internal struggles, external actions, and the inevitable decline of the material world.

Now, if we look at history, thinkers have long tried to comprehend the nature of the world. No one has ever truly viewed the world as a perfect place where everything is wonderful. But the pressing question remains: If the world isn’t wonderful, can it be fixed? And if so, how?

One answer comes from the idea of modernity. Modern thought proposes that human effort, especially through technological progress, can fix the world’s problems. The belief was that if we could advance technologically, we could conquer nature’s disasters, provide for our material needs, and thus alleviate our dissatisfaction. The expectation was that through progress, life would become safer and more comfortable, leading to a more harmonious existence.

A related idea is that transhumanism, a branch of science concerned with overcoming human limitations, shares some surprising similarities with the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. Transhumanists identify the same problems the Gita points out—old age, disease, and mortality—and their solution is technological advancement. The goal is to combat these issues and extend human life indefinitely.

But even beyond these technological hopes, there was the belief that reason and rationality could bring about moral improvement. It was thought that as humanity evolved, reason would overcome ignorance and superstition, leading people to make better decisions. If people acted rationally, they would understand the consequences of their destructive behaviors and choose moral paths.

Yet, as we look at these solutions, we must ask: Are they truly addressing the root cause of the world’s problems? Is it really just a matter of more technology or better reasoning, or is there something deeper that needs to be addressed?

The First and Second World Wars were profound shocks to the modern psyche. Despite having advanced science and technology, humanity continued to behave in ways that were deeply destructive. In fact, these advancements were sometimes used to cause even greater harm. The wars demonstrated that technology alone cannot prevent mankind from making choices that lead to destruction.

Now, it’s true that certain problems can be addressed through human effort. For example, in the case of a pandemic, we work together to find cures and mitigate the disease. Specific issues like these can and should be fixed through human ingenuity. However, when we look at the world as a whole, the problem is more complex.

Some people believe that the world will be fixed by divine intervention. For instance, Christianity teaches that the Second Coming of Christ will transform the world into a paradise. This belief suggests that if we propitiate God, the world can become a place where all desires are fulfilled. This idea has also influenced movements like the “prosperity gospel” in America, which holds that worldly prosperity is a sign of God’s favor. In essence, if we satisfy God, the world will become a happier, more fulfilling place.

But the Bhagavad Gita offers a different perspective. It doesn’t promise that the world will become a perfect place for enjoyment. Rather, the Gita teaches that the purpose of life is not to indulge in worldly pleasures but to transcend the material world. The world can be fixed enough for us to carry out this transcendent purpose, but we need to approach it with the right mindset. By combining human effort with divine guidance, we can cooperate to fix the world in a way that supports our spiritual progress.

In an earlier discussion, we likened the world to a hospital, not a hotel. A hospital doesn’t provide luxury or endless comfort—it provides what is necessary for recovery. The goal is not to stay in the hospital but to transcend it. Similarly, the purpose of the world is not for enjoyment but for spiritual growth. Just as a patient must cooperate with the doctor to recover, we must cooperate with divine wisdom and intelligence to transcend the limitations of the material world.

The world is “fixable,” but this fixability depends on the intelligent cooperation between humans and the divine. Without this cooperation, the world cannot fulfill its purpose of supporting our transcendence.

This brings us to the concept of Maya, or illusion. The fundamental problem we face is not that the world is inherently evil, but that we are caught in illusion. So, what exactly is the nature of this illusion?

When we say something is wrong, is it merely an illusion? To explore this, we need to understand that illusion can occur in two ways. First, there’s illusion in perception. For example, when a stick is placed in water, it appears bent, even though it isn’t. Similarly, a mirage may appear to be water, but it is not. These are examples of how our senses can mislead us.

But is this the kind of illusion we’re talking about in the material world? Are the things we find attractive simply illusions in perception? Yes, at some level, this is true. The material world presents many things that seem appealing—attractive people, objects, experiences. But this attraction isn’t entirely illusory. The beauty or appeal we perceive is real to some extent, though it may not be what it appears to be.

This leads us to a deeper understanding of Maya. It’s not just about mistaken perception; it’s about illusion in conception. This means that we conceive of things as having purposes or meanings that they don’t actually have. We may think that the purpose of the world is to enjoy sensory pleasures, but the true purpose is spiritual growth and transcendence. This is the deeper illusion we are caught in—misunderstanding the nature and purpose of the world itself.

In the Bhagavad Gita, the metaphor of the upside-down tree is used to describe the illusory nature of the material world. This metaphor goes beyond simple perception and addresses deeper misconceptions, especially how we conceive the world and our own identities.

To illustrate this, imagine a child encountering fire for the first time. The child might mistakenly think of the fire as a toy because it looks shiny and attractive. This is not just a perceptional illusion but a deeper misconception—illusion in conception—where the child wrongly associates the fire with something safe and playful, rather than recognizing it as something dangerous. This deeper misconception is what the Gita highlights as the true form of illusion in the material world.

The Bhagavatam further explains that the fundamental illusion in the world is the belief that everything exists separately from Krishna. For example, we might find someone physically attractive, but the illusion is thinking that this attraction exists for our enjoyment. A spiritual perspective sees the attraction as a reflection of Krishna’s divine power, and the goal is to direct our attraction toward Krishna, recognizing the divine spark in everything.

Furthermore, we also experience illusion in self-identification. Just as a madman might think he is a king, we mistakenly identify ourselves as our bodies and the roles we play in society, which are temporary and not our true nature. This false self-identification contributes to the confusion and dissatisfaction we experience in life.

Ultimately, the material world itself is illusory because it encourages wrong perceptions, wrong conceptions, and false self-identifications. The upside-down tree metaphor illustrates this concept, symbolizing how the world appears to be one thing, but in truth, it is a reflection of deeper spiritual realities. Through various texts, such as the Bhagavatam and Shankaracharya’s works, this metaphor helps us understand the complex nature of the material world and the spiritual wisdom needed to transcend it.

This metaphor points to the need to perceive the world and ourselves from a spiritual perspective, recognizing the divine presence in everything rather than being trapped in illusions.

The upside-down tree metaphor in the Bhagavad Gita represents the disorienting and illusory nature of material existence. Prabhupada explains that being upside down feels unnatural and uncomfortable, much like how a thoughtful person feels something unnatural about life in this world. There’s a sense that something is wrong or off in the material world, but it’s hard to pinpoint exactly what.

When we think of the concept of “upside down,” we often imagine a reflection. In a mirror, we see an image that reverses left and right, but when something is reflected in water, it appears upside down, which is more aligned with the metaphor. The upside-down tree in the Gita signifies that the material world is a reflection of the spiritual world, but it’s distorted. This distorted reflection exists because of the conditioned soul’s desires. The desire to enjoy the material world creates the illusion, and if these desires were absent, this reflection would not exist.

The “normal tree” in this metaphor refers to the spiritual world, which is the true reality, while the upside-down tree represents the illusory material world. Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakur further explains that the higher planets in the material world are closer to the roots of the upside-down tree, symbolizing that beings in higher realms are closer to reality, or spiritual truth. Conversely, those in lower realms are farther away from this truth.

Water plays a significant role in this metaphor. Just as a tree requires water for growth, the material tree grows through the influence of the three modes of nature (goodness, passion, and ignorance). The more entangled we become in these modes, the more the tree of illusion grows.

The Vedic hymns are compared to the leaves of the tree. In a tree, leaves are crucial for perpetuating the tree’s life cycle, just as the words of the Vedas nourish and sustain material existence. Krishna refers to the Vedic words as “flowery words” in the second chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, implying that they are part of the material illusion unless understood in the proper spiritual context. Thus, while the Vedic texts can guide us, they are also part of the reflective material world, and true understanding requires transcending this reflection to grasp the spiritual truth.

In the upside-down tree metaphor, the Vedic hymns are compared to flowers. Flowers are attractive but short-lived, symbolizing the material benefits derived from rituals in the Vedas. The Vedas offer numerous ceremonies and sacrifices designed to fulfill specific desires, such as having a child or curing a disease. These rituals, like flowers, attract us but do not provide lasting satisfaction. Even if one’s desires are fulfilled, the sense of fulfillment is temporary, and soon another desire arises, highlighting the fleeting nature of material enjoyment.

The true fruit of the material world, according to this metaphor, is distress. While one may climb the tree (engage in worldly pursuits), the ultimate outcome is suffering. Krishna often refers to the world as temporary and filled with distress, reinforcing that material pursuits lead to dissatisfaction and pain.

This metaphor emphasizes the unnaturality of material existence, portraying it as a reflection of the spiritual world. The message is clear: we should move from this illusory reflection to the reality of the spiritual world. One of the most famous Vedic aphorisms, tamasoma jyotir gama (from darkness to light) and mrityorma amritam gama (from death to immortality), suggests the journey from illusion to truth, from ignorance to knowledge, and from suffering to liberation.

To move from the reflection to the reality, Krishna advises using an “axe” (asanga shastra), a tool that can cut through attachment and illusion. By severing the attachment to the material world with spiritual wisdom, one can transcend the reflection and reach the true reality. This represents the path of liberation, where one breaks free from the cycle of material desires and suffering.

 Context: The discussion is about the metaphor of the “upside-down tree” from the Bhagavad Gita, which is often not well understood but is a significant metaphor in understanding the nature of the world.

 Background: The 13th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita explains that the soul is bound by material existence due to illusionary desires (Purusha prakriti stho hi). The 15th chapter uses the metaphor of the upside-down tree to further explain this bondage.

 The Metaphor: The “upside-down tree” is described in the verse:

  • “Urdhamulam adhashakham, ashwatham prahuravyam” (Bhagavad Gita 15:1).
  • The roots are upward, and the branches are downward, symbolizing a reflection of the real tree (spiritual world).
  • This tree represents the material world, which is disorienting and unnatural.

 Vedic Significance: The Vedic hymns are likened to the leaves of this tree, symbolizing rituals and ceremonies that can give temporary material benefits. They are short-lived like flowers on a tree.

 The Role of the Tree:

  • The tree represents the material world where we are bound by illusion.
  • The roots of the tree are higher (closer to spiritual reality), and the branches are downward (symbolizing the illusionary aspects of the material world).

 Human Dissatisfaction: The world inherently has issues:

  • Dissatisfaction with life, with people, and with circumstances.
  • Moral degradation and the tendency for humans to harm others.
  • Physical destruction and deterioration.
  • The world is constantly in a state of decline, which reflects the illusionary nature of material existence.

 Maya (Illusion):

  • Maya refers to the illusion in both perception and conception.
  • Illusion in perception involves seeing things wrong, like mistaking a stick in water for being bent or seeing a mirage.
  • Illusion in conception means misunderstanding the purpose of things, like the child mistaking fire for a toy.
  • The ultimate illusion is seeing the world as separate from Krishna, the true reality.

 Fixing the World: There are different views on fixing the world:

  • Human Effort: The idea of modernity suggests technology can fix the world’s problems, but the World Wars showed that technological advancement alone doesn’t solve deeper issues.
  • Divine Intervention: Religious perspectives like Christianity suggest that God’s grace can fix the world, but the Bhagavad Gita suggests that we must transcend the world through spiritual wisdom, not just fix it for enjoyment.

 The Purpose of the World:

  • The world is not meant for enjoying; it is a place for transcending material illusions.
  • The world should be understood as a hospital, not a hotel – a place to cure our spiritual ailments, not a place for constant enjoyment.

 The Role of the Modes: The growth of the upside-down tree is nourished by the three modes of material nature. The more one gets entangled in these modes, the more the tree (material existence) grows.

 Higher and Lower Realms: The higher planets are closer to the roots (spiritual reality), and the lower realms are further away, representing the disorienting nature of material existence.

 Maya’s Illusory Nature: The world is illusory in both perception (seeing things wrong) and conception (understanding them wrongly). The ultimate illusion is to see anything separate from Krishna.

 Spiritual Liberation: The goal is to transcend the illusion of the material world and realize that everything is connected to Krishna. By understanding the world as a reflection of the spiritual reality, one can move from darkness to light and from death to immortality.

 Key Message: The upside-down tree metaphor illustrates the unnatural and illusory nature of material existence. To transcend this illusion, one must seek spiritual wisdom and move towards the reality of Krishna.

In conclusion, the metaphor of the upside-down tree from the Bhagavad Gita illustrates the illusory and disorienting nature of the material world. It suggests that the world, while appearing real, is actually a reflection of a higher spiritual reality, with the roots representing the eternal truth and the branches symbolizing the transient, illusionary aspects of material existence. The Bhagavad Gita encourages us to transcend the illusions of perception and conception, realizing that the ultimate truth lies in understanding our connection to Krishna. True liberation comes from moving beyond material attachments and recognizing the spiritual reality that underlies all of creation. The world is not meant for enjoyment, but for spiritual growth, and by overcoming the illusions of maya, one can attain enlightenment and eternal peace.

The post 41 What is the upside-down tree metaphor Gita 15.01 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Thoughts for the New Year
Giriraj Swami

We are entering the New Year, and on such occasions we take stock of what and how we did in the previous year and what we want to do in the next. Studies have shown, and probably many of us have experienced, that most New Year’s resolutions are broken during the first week. Still more are broken in the first month, and almost all are broken within the first three months.

Why does this happen, and what can we do? We are creatures of habit. We have developed certain habits over however many years—perhaps lifetimes—and to change our habits requires sincere desire and determined effort. One study showed that when a person is trying to develop a new habit, he has to consistently, diligently, strive to adhere to the new practice for at least thirty days. After thirty days, he is able to follow more easily but can be derailed by stress or changes in his life. After ninety days, it becomes just as easy to follow the new habit as not, and after a year, it is easier to follow the new habit than not.

So, what new habits do we want to develop in the next year? That depends on our goals. When I visited Pune some years ago, the Malhotra brothers arranged a program for me in the main hall, and at the end of the talk the general in charge of the Southern Command of the Indian Army asked an important question: “What is the aim for which we are born—what is the aim of our life? It certainly could not be to amass some wealth and ultimately die, or to make a building and then die, or to marry and procreate and then die. For our minor activities in life, we have the aims set first, before we get going to achieve them. When we train our people in the army, whatever they have to do, we first tell them what the aim is. And once they are clear what the aim is, then we decide what means to adopt to achieve it. And invariably we don’t go wrong. Now here it is—to my mind, my whole life is going to waste; I am still not very clear what is the aim of my life. Would you kindly enlighten us about the aim of life so that thereafter we can be very, very clear as to what we have got to do to achieve that aim?”

Srila Sanatana Gosvami asked the same question of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu:

‘ke ami’, ‘kene amaya jare tapa-traya’
iha nahi jani—kemane hita haya

‘sadhya’-‘sadhana’-tattva puchite na jani
krpa kari’ saba tattva kaha ta’ apani”

“Who am I? Why do the threefold miseries always give me trouble? If I do not know this, how can I be benefited? Actually I do not know how to inquire about the goal of life and the process for obtaining it. Being merciful upon me, please explain all these truths.” (Cc Madhya 20.102–103) He said, “In ordinary dealings people consider me to be a learned scholar (pandit), but I am so learned I do not even know who I am. So please tell me who I am and what is the goal of life.” And Lord Chaitanya replied, “By constitution you are an eternal servant of Krishna—jivera ‘svarupa’ haya—krsnera ‘nitya-dasa’—and the goal of life is to be reinstated in your constitutional position as His loving servant.”

If someone understands that he is not the body, that he is the soul within the body, and that his real relationship is not with the body or things related to the body but that, as he is a spiritual soul, his real relationship is with the Supreme Soul, then he can adopt the methods that are suitable for reviving his eternal relationship with the Supreme Soul, Krishna.

Srila Prabhupada formed the International Society for Krishna Consciousness to give people this knowledge: We are not the body but the soul, part and parcel of the Supreme Soul. Our real relationship is with Him, and our duty and goal in life is to revive our eternal loving relationship with Him, with God, Krishna. The whole process of sadhana-bhakti is to help us to awaken that eternal love for God.

nitya-siddha krsna-prema ‘sadhya’ kabhu naya
sravanadi-suddha-citte karaye udaya

“Pure love for Krsna is eternally established in the hearts of the living entities. It is not something to be gained from another source. When the heart is purified by hearing and chanting, this love naturally awakens.” (Cc Madhya 22.107) That love is eternally there within the heart, just as fire is within a match. You just have to strike the match and the fire will come out. Similarly, we just have to strike the heart by chanting and hearing about Krishna and that love will come out.

The main process is the chanting of the holy names of the Lord. We are in a Hare Krishna temple. We are part of the Hare Krishna movement, and we are known as Hare Krishna people. We are meant to chant Hare Krishna. And by our chanting Hare Krishna, the mirror of our minds can be cleansed (ceto-darpana-marjanam), the blazing fire of material existence extinguished (bhava-maha-davagni-nirvapanam), and ultimately our dormant love for Krishna awakened. Param vijayate sri-krsna-sankirtanam.

But there is also the matter of the quality of the chanting. Queen Kunti prays to Lord Krishna,

janmaisvarya-sruta-sribhir
  edhamana-madah puman
naivarhaty abhidhatum vai
  tvam akincana-gocaram

“Your Lordship can easily be approached, but only by those who are materially exhausted. One who is on the path of [material] progress, trying to improve himself with respectable parentage, great opulence, high education, and bodily beauty, cannot approach You with sincere feeling.” (SB 1.8.26) People on the path of material advancement want good birth (janma), material opulence (aisvarya), material learning (sruta), and physical beauty (sribhih). They cannot approach the Lord with feeling. And when we chant the holy name, we are trying to approach the Lord. The holy name of Krishna and Krishna Himself are the same.

nama cintamanih krsnas
  caitanya-rasa-vigrahah
purnah suddho nitya-mukto
  ’bhinnatvan nama-naminoh

“The holy name of Krsna is transcendentally blissful. It bestows all spiritual benedictions, for it is Krsna Himself, the reservoir of all pleasure. Krsna’s name is complete, and it is the form of all transcendental mellows. It is not a material name under any condition, and it is no less powerful than Krsna Himself. Since Krsna’s name is not contaminated by the material qualities, there is no question of its being involved with maya. Krsna’s name is always liberated and spiritual; it is never conditioned by the laws of material nature. This is because the name of Krsna and Krsna Himself are identical.” (Padma Purana, Cc Madhya 17.133)

Commenting on Kunti’s prayer, Srila Prabhupada cites scripture, that by uttering the holy name of the Lord even once, one can destroy the reactions to more sins than one is able to commit. “Such is the power of uttering the holy name of the Lord. There is not the least exaggeration in this statement. Actually, the Lord’s holy name has such powerful potency.” We are all suffering because of sinful reactions. If we were freed from sinful reactions, we would no longer have to suffer. As Prabhupada explains, however, “there is a quality to such utterances also. It depends on the quality of feeling. A helpless man can feelingly utter the holy name of the Lord, whereas a man who utters the same holy name in great material satisfaction cannot be so sincere.” Lord Krishna is akincana-gocaram, easily approached by those who are akincana, who have no material possessions.

Now, these statements may give rise to some questions. This word akincana means “without material possessions,” or “without a sense of false proprietorship.” Of course, there should be no duplicity in the matter, but this principle allows us, for example, to have an opulent temple. We may have a beautiful property, but as long as we remember, “This is Krishna’s property. This is Srila Prabhupada’s property. It is not my property; I am here only to serve them and use this property in their service,” we can be free from false proprietorship, false prestige, and false designations. And in that mood we can chant the holy name with feeling, approach Krishna with feeling. Otherwise, there is a subtle rivalry going on between us and Krishna. We come into the material world out of envy of Krishna. In effect, we want to take His position. We want to be the proprietor and controller and enjoyer (isvaro ’ham aham bhogi), which is actually Krishna’s position. While chanting Krishna’s name, we may be thinking, “Why should I be chanting Krishna’s name? People should be chanting my name—‘Giriraj Maharaja ki jaya!’ ” That is our sorry plight. We don’t want Krishna to be the center; we want to be the center. So, we chant the holy name with ourselves in the foreground and the holy name in the background. That is our tendency as conditioned souls.

The proper process is to chant with attention. We let go of all those thoughts about ourselves—“I” and “me” and “mine”—and focus on the holy name, on Krishna. Those other thoughts are irrelevant. They may come up, but we don’t pay them heed. We just focus our attention on Krishna, on the sound of Krishna’s holy name. And when we do that, we can actually feel His presence. We can appreciate that the holy name is Krishna Himself reciprocating with our sincere desires to serve Him.

This practice requires effort. We are habituated to think that we are the center of existence and that everything revolves around us. We see everything in terms of ourselves, not in terms of Krishna. But our habits can change. There is a saying that up to the age of twenty, you think that people are looking at you and like you, from the age of twenty to forty that they are looking at you and don’t like you, and then, after the age of forty, that they aren’t even looking at you or thinking of you. So, we have to reform this habit of thinking that we’re the center, always thinking about ourselves and that everyone else is thinking about us, too. We must know that Krishna is the center.

Once, when I was chanting my rounds at the beach in Carpinteria, I was sitting alone, chanting with attention—making a serious effort to be attentive—somehow thinking of different people who were close to me, and feeling how much they were suffering. I was actually feeling their pain. As I continued chanting, that sense of feeling for others expanded to people who weren’t so close to me, and then to the people on the beach, whom I didn’t even know. There weren’t many, but there were a few people surfing. And I was really feeling their suffering. Srila Prabhupada had joked that the surfers were actually “sufferers,” but I was actually feeling their suffering.

Then the feeling went beyond the human beings. There were pelicans at the beach. They fly very high and then suddenly zoom down and crash into the water. I understood that they were hovering high in the sky looking for prey and that when they saw some potential food they came straight down and crashed into the water. Ordinarily I would think, “Oh, how picturesque—flying so high and then diving into the ocean.” But now I was feeling, “They are in anxiety. They are hungry. They need food and are searching: ‘Where is food? Where is food?’ And when they see something and dive straight down and crash into the water, although they are birds, still, coming from that height at that velocity and crashing into the water is bound to be a shock to their system. And they don’t know whether they will actually get that fish or not. And whatever happens, after they come down, they go up and start the same process all over again. They are never satisfied—‘Now we can just relax.’ ” I was thinking, “What a life, full of anxiety, full of pain!”—and feeling it.

And the dolphins and the sandpipers and the seagulls—the same thing. I was feeling so much suffering on all sides. It was as if the illusion of material happiness and charm had been lifted, and this whole beautiful panorama became a horrible scene of intense suffering, which I was feeling. And I was just chanting, chanting, chanting. Then a little ladybug landed on my hand. Growing up, I thought that ladybugs were auspicious and cute. But this time I looked at the ladybug and thought, “This ladybug is suffering”—and, again, feeling it. Looking at the ladybug, I thought, “I don’t think I can take much more of this. I am feeling too much suffering; I am going to have a breakdown.” I wanted to help these creatures. I was feeling their suffering and desiring to help them, but it was getting to be too much.

Then I had the type of breakthrough that one gets when one chants with attention, with an effort to chant with attention. Suddenly I felt as if Krishna were speaking to me, revealing something to me. I got the intuition, or inspiration, in my heart that Krishna loves these creatures more than I do, more than I can even imagine. He loves them so much that He accompanies them as the Supersoul in whatever species of life they enter. And not only does He love them more than I can ever imagine, but He can actually do something to help them. I may feel for them and want to help them, but what is my capacity to help them? I may not even understand what’s troubling them. Parents sometimes experience that their baby is crying and they want to help but don’t know what the baby wants. They may think the baby is hungry, but the baby may be troubled by something completely different. Or even if they do understand what is causing the suffering, they may be unable to relieve it.

So, I was thinking, “Not only does Krishna love them, but He can actually do something to help them.” And then I came to the bottom of it. The problem was that I was trying to take the position of Krishna. In the Bhagavad-gita (5.29) Lord Krishna says,

bhoktaram yajna-tapasam
  sarva-loka-mahesvaram
suhrdam sarva-bhutanam
  jnatva mam santim rcchati

“A person in full consciousness of Me, knowing Me to be the ultimate beneficiary of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods, and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attains peace from the pangs of material miseries.”

When one recognizes that Krishna is the enjoyer, Krishna is the proprietor, Krishna is the best friend, one attains peace. I thought of what Srila Prabhupada often said, so simple yet profound—that your best friend is not he or she who poses as your best friend but he or she who tells you that Krishna is your best friend. Suddenly this whole problem of how to help these suffering souls became very easy. I didn’t have to help them personally; I just had to direct them to Krishna, who could really help them. And it was such a relief.

So, this is our mission: to serve Krishna. And serving Krishna means doing what Krishna wants, and Krishna wants that we should bring other souls to Him. As He says at the end of the Bhagavad-gita (18.69), His dearmost servant is he who preaches the message of the Gita. 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.” Sri Krishna Chaitanya Mahaprabhu also said, yare dekha, tare kaha ‘krsna’-upadesa: “Wherever you go, whomever you meet, just present the message of Krishna.” And that is something any of us can do. It is actually very easy. Any of us can do it.

When devotees, myself among them, first came to Bombay, two of Prabhupada’s early disciples, Shyamasundar and Malati, had a small daughter, Sarasvati, who used to approach respectable gentlemen who visited our center. Although only three or four years old, she would approach them and say, “Do you know who is Krishna?” And then she would answer, “Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” Srila Prabhupada commented, “That is preaching. She is repeating what she has heard from authorities, and even if she doesn’t have full realization, what she is saying is perfect, because she has heard it from authorities—Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” So, any of us can preach. We can simply repeat what we have heard from authorities—“Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” “Chant Hare Krishna and your life will be sublime.” “Come to the Hare Krishna temple.” And that will please Krishna.

When I noted devotees here on book distribution, in December, I could feel the enthusiasm to distribute Srila Prabhupada’s books. I thought, Srila Prabhupada is pleased. They have the spirit to distribute his books. The books are as potent and effective now as ever. So many people I meet—when I ask them how they came to Krishna consciousness, it goes back to a book. They got a book. The formula that Srila Prabhupada gave us over forty years ago still works. By giving them Prabhupada’s books, we are giving them Krishna and Prabhupada, the message of Krishna through Prabhupada, and that is enough to awaken their sense of Krishna consciousness and begin them on the path. Many of us are here because of Srila Prabhupada’s books.

So, we should try to develop the habit of putting Krishna in the center, putting the holy name in the center, putting Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Srila Prabhupada and their mission in the center, and that will make all the difference. Our spouse can be there, our children can be there, our house can be there, our work can be there—everything can be there—but with Krishna in the center, everything will be beautiful and peaceful. And as long as we persist in habits that may have been with us for many lifetimes—thinking that we are the center, we are the lords, we are the enjoyers, we are the proprietors—there will be so many problems, and in the end whatever we have will be taken away from us anyway.

So, it is most auspicious that we are beginning the New Year in the association of devotees. My request is that we use this coming year, and this valuable human form of life, for their proper purpose, in Krishna consciousness, and that in this endeavor we help and support one another. We can’t do it alone. And I pray that I can always remain in the association of such wonderful devotees, because I am sure that in this association, hearing their instructions, I will be nudged along on the right path, back home, back to Godhead.

Hare Krishna.

[Adapted from a talk by Giriraj Swami, January 2, 2010, Bhaktivedanta Manor, England]

 

 

Ushering the Year 2025!
→ Mayapur.com

Welcome 2025 With the Blessings of Lord Narasimhadev “By meditating upon He whose form is fearsome, all peace, happiness and prosperity can be obtained, all sins can be obliterated, the fear arising from evil spirits, fevers and unfavorable planetary positions can be removed, O Lord Nrisimha, please bestow upon us Your merciful side-long glance.” ISKCON […]

WSN November 2024 – World Sankirtan Newsletter
→ Dandavats

By Vijaya Das

The end of the year is almost upon us and what a year it's been. We haven't had such a successful year since 1983! In the Large Temples category, the temple that increased the most last month was Melbourne, Australia, with 15,495 book points. One reason they did so big was that the #1 book distributor in the world serves in Melbourne and--surprise, surprise--that distributor is a Vaisnavi! Mahalaxmi devi dasi earned 5,215 book points, the first time in decades that the top distributor is a lady. May Mataji inspire more Vaisnavis to go out and receive Lord Caitanya's mercy because she definitely received it last month. Among the Medium Temples, Perm, Russia, increased the most with 3,967 book points. We haven't heard much from Russia since the war with Ukraine began, so it's nice to see Perm back up on the charts. Must be a lot of prem in Perm! Continue reading "WSN November 2024 – World Sankirtan Newsletter
→ Dandavats"