Gita key verses course 8 – What is happiness? Why is it so elusive? – Gita 2.55
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So grateful to be here among all of you today, and I’ll be speaking on the topic of happiness. What is happiness, and why is it so elusive? We discuss this based on verse 255 in the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna is describing the characteristics of one who is enlightened. Prajayata, Kaman sarvan partamano, ganaan atmanyavadmanan. So prajahati says, “Give up the Kaman”—that is, give up desires. Sarvan parthamano, Parham: what kind of desires? Desires that have arisen from the agitation of the mind. Give up all those desires. This itself seems counterintuitive. We normally define happiness as the fulfillment and satisfaction of desires. But the first thing Krishna is saying is the abandonment, the renunciation of desires. Prajati—give them up. And then atmanya evad Mana Bush—when the mind turns inwards and becomes satisfied in the self, that person is actually enlightened. So essentially, Krishna is saying, give up outer pleasures and find happiness within.

So let’s break this down into three broad parts: what happiness is, what happiness is not, and how happiness can be enduring. There are many myths about happiness that control our lives, and these myths often run like program machines, pushing us to pursue certain things we think are enjoyable. That’s why we first discuss what happiness is not. The first thing is that happiness comes from meaningful engagement, not meaningless enjoyment. Normally, we equate happiness with enjoyment—“I’m enjoying, therefore I’m happy.” But more than enjoyment, what we need is meaning. Let me explain this.

Suppose there is a small child, and one child tickles another. Or, if a small child comes to visit a family and gets tickled, what happens? The child laughs. Now, is that laughter happiness? Okay, maybe it is some kind of happiness, but if it were really happiness, then with today’s technology, we could easily make a perpetual tickling machine, and we could keep tickling ourselves for the rest of eternity. Would we be happy if somebody kept tickling us? We would eventually say, “Please stop.” Biologically, we might be laughing, but psychologically, we would want it to stop. So, laughter alone, when it has no meaning, doesn’t bring any lasting happiness. In fact, there’s a prominent Academy Award-winning comedian who committed suicide. I wrote about him in one of my books, in an article titled “After the Laughter.” We laugh in public, but the quality of our life isn’t determined by the jokes we crack.

So, we don’t want simply enjoyment. We want meaningful enjoyment. The same principle applies to humor—most of us like jokes. But if somebody told us, “From tomorrow, you have no financial obligations, no family obligations, no professional obligations. Just sit and watch comedy shows for the rest of your life,” we might enjoy it for half an hour, an hour, or a few hours. But after that, we would want to do something meaningful. We would get bored. So, often we equate happiness with enjoyment, but if that enjoyment is without meaning—just tickling or comedy—it becomes boring over time. The same principle applies to entertainment. External pleasures are like the tickling of the body and mind. They might give some pleasure, but soon, they become boring. Krishna talks about the nature of external pleasure in 18:38 of the Gita, where he says: “At vi chaitanyasa, yogam, parinami, Visha, meva, tatsukam, Raja, Sam smitham.” Here, Krishna is talking about how pleasures derived from the senses and sense objects, while initially enjoyable like nectar, eventually turn into poison. The same thing which is initially enjoyable—after a while, you don’t want it anymore. So, the very thing that seems enjoyable, if it lacks meaning, soon loses its appeal.

Unfortunately, what happens? Happiness is elusive because we seek the initial nectar. The initial nectar goes away, and then we look for some other object where there’s initial nectar, and then that object goes away, and we look for initial nectar somewhere else. That nectar initially allures us, but the nectar soon disappears, and that’s how we keep chasing. We keep chasing. We keep chasing. One of my friends works in the TV industry; they told me that it’s all about TRPs. An interesting thing is that the maximum attention people have when they are watching TV is not when they are watching a program, it is when they are surfing channels. Because while surfing channels, they are hoping that something will be good, maybe the next channel will be good, the next channel will be good, the next channel will be good. But once they start watching a program, okay, some of it might be interesting, some of it might be boring, some of it might be just okay. So the attention goes down.

We all know this, but we just keep going from one object to another, to another, to another, and it’s elusive, because we are looking for the initial nectar, and that nectar ends. So the very thing we think will give us pleasure, after some time, it stops giving us pleasure. There’s some study done that nowadays, every time a new phone gets launched—what’s the latest iPhone? 11? Okay, iPhone 10 has already been replaced by 11. So now, when a new phone is launched, people stampede in stores to get the phone, but some surveys have found that 90% of the people who buy a new version of the phone don’t use any of the new features. Then why get the phone? It’s just glamor. “Oh, I have a new phone!” But after some time, that glamor just goes away. And then when we are attracted to the glamor, okay, the next phone comes out, and again, the glamor pulls us in. So we keep looking for the initial nectar. And there is that nectar, no doubt, but it is very initial.

An American playwright, Oscar Wilde, said that fashion—everybody wants to be fashionable—so he said fashion is a form of ugliness so unbearable that we have to change it every few months. Somebody who wants to be very fashionable, the worst put-down for them is when somebody calls them old-fashioned. The same dress, the same hairstyle, whatever it is—after six months, it just becomes “old-fashioned.” “No, buy something new.” That’s how happiness is elusive, because what we are looking for is enjoyment which, in itself, does not have any meaning, and that enjoyment doesn’t last for long.

Another way of understanding this is, let’s look at it from a diagrammatic point of view. When we have external pleasures, what is happening is that the senses and the sense objects come into contact. For example, our eyes see something enjoyable, or our tongue tastes something delicious. Now, when the contact happens, there is some pleasure. And that’s what we normally with the world tout as enjoyment. Yes, there is some pleasure. However, the problem is that all three—objects, their capacity to give pleasure, and the contact—are temporary.

The objects that give us pleasure, their capacity to give us pleasure, is temporary. The same food that is irresistibly delicious today, after two or three days, starts spoiling, and we can’t even keep it in our presence. The objects themselves are temporary, then their capacity to give pleasure. How long can we? The contact between them is also temporary. If we eat some delicious food, the taste stays on the tongue for some time, and then it goes in. And most importantly, our senses themselves have a finite, limited capacity to enjoy. Quite often, when we seek pleasure, what we do is think, “I don’t have good enough sense objects to enjoy.” “I don’t have attractive enough objects. If I only had a more attractive object, I would be happy.” And people keep searching for more attractive objects.

But even if we had the most attractive objects in the world to enjoy, what limits our enjoyment is not the unavailability of the objects, but the limitedness of our senses themselves. Even if we owned a five-star hotel with the best food, how much can we eat?

I was at a program in a university in Canada, and there was a student who had a poster on his T-shirt that read, “90% of the world’s women are beautiful. The remaining 10% are in my college.” What that meant is that in today’s world, we, through the media, are presented with the most attractive-looking objects from everywhere. And when we get captivated by that kind of sensory stimulation, the sensory stimulation available in the real world always fails in comparison. So in general, we always keep hoping that there’ll be some better enjoyment out there somewhere, but the sense enjoyment, when we seek pleasure through that, is intrinsically a doomed project—not because we don’t get good enough objects, but because our senses themselves have a finite capacity to enjoy.

That’s why Krishna says that it’s not just about making a separate point. Earlier, I said the pleasure stops being pleasure when it becomes boring. But it doesn’t just become boring; it also becomes distressing, because we get hooked to it. Some spiritual teachers ask, “How does it become distressing?” Well, see, everything in this world is short-lived, except the craving.

The craving stays for a long time. Somebody who is alcoholic may drink and drink and drink enough, and then they may throw up and have a hangover and everything. But at that time, they may say, “I’m never going to drink again.” However, maybe just that very evening, they think, “When can I go and have a drink again?” Krishna says that this craving is nitya-varina—it can become like an eternal enemy. It stays on and on and on and on.

So, actually, the search for pleasure is often the cause of the greatest trouble. The search for pleasure is often the cause of the greatest trouble. If you consider addiction, nobody is born smoking a cigarette from their mother’s womb. But what happens? They think, “I’ll just enjoy a little bit.” They enjoy a little bit, but afterward, they become addicted to it. About drinking, it is said that first the drinker takes a drink, then the drink takes a drink, and then the drink takes the drinker. So people get hooked to it. The craving completely binds.

So, this seems like pleasure in the whole world glamorizes it as pleasure, but actually, it is not pleasure. It disappoints and then it torments. So now, what happiness is not? Let’s look at what happiness is. I started by saying that happiness comes not from meaningless enjoyment. Meaningless enjoyment means just some stimuli, something that stimulates our senses or our mind. But happiness comes from meaningful engagement.

If you look at it broadly, we live in a materialistic society that often defines success and happiness in terms of collecting and consuming—just get more and more and more, enjoy more and more. Alcoholism is a widespread problem, and it is a serious issue, but equally widespread and often not talked about is shopaholism. Shopaholism is when people just shop, shop, shop, till they drop. People keep shopping, shopping, shopping. Why? Because just buying gives some thrill, some pleasure. “Oh, I’m getting something new. I’m getting something new.”

So often in today’s world, collecting and consuming are considered to be sources of pleasure. The more toys you have, the more successful you are, the more famous you are. Sometimes, somebody might have a big house, but all that big house provides them is the privilege to have a lot of space in which to feel lonely and unhappy.

Now, there’s nothing against big houses, nothing against wealth, nothing against having possessions. But the problem is not having possessions. The problem is thinking that possessions will bring happiness. It’s how possessions are used that determines our happiness—not just having the possessions. So the world tells us that collecting and consuming is what gives us pleasure, but actually, if you look at the most deeply satisfying moments of our life, they are centered on something else. It’s on connecting and contributing.

When we had some very deep, meaningful, sweet interaction with someone, if you look back at our own lives, even if we went to some place where there was a lot of enjoyment, it was maybe connected with another human being. And it was not just the drinking at the party, but it was how we connected to the other human being. Even in that, that is much more meaningful than the sensual stimulation. So we want to connect with others.

Contributing means we want our existence to count. We want that by our existence, by our living, by our acting, we can do something worthwhile for someone. This is a deep-rooted need within all of us. In fact, for this sake—connecting and contributing—we are often ready to do the opposite of getting sensual stimulation. Some people make sacrifices. Somebody might decide, if there is a big crisis and people need blood, they might just donate their blood. Actually, they’re getting nothing; their body’s blood is being taken away and fully donated, because they feel they’re contributing something.

So it is actually when we connect with other human beings and contribute to others, contributing our existence, our actions, that’s what brings satisfaction. Let’s look at it a little bit more.

We all know the importance of loving and being loved. In fact, when we want to connect with people, physical attraction is obviously a part of it. But after some time, that loses meaning. What we truly desire is a deeper connection. We long to love and be loved. Harvard Medical School conducted a survey of American teenagers and youth, particularly from the 1960s when the hippie culture began. Around that time, there was what is called the sexual revolution. The sexual revolution was the idea that, in the past, there were many rules and regulations that restricted our enjoyment—and not just enjoyment, but they were seen as restrictions to expressing love. The movement advocated for no rules, just free love.

However, the result was surprising. When they studied young people who attended parties and engaged in casual encounters, they found that most of them felt profoundly lonely and guilty. Although their bodies may have been in contact with many others, they realized in their hearts that they were merely using each other to scratch an itch. One person was using the other, and vice versa. This led to a sense of loneliness and guilt. Too much focus on physical sensations diminishes deeper emotional connections, which is why there is so much loneliness in today’s world.

We want to connect, but we also want to contribute. In today’s world, even among youth, there is an increasing inclination toward activism. Activism means wanting to do something tangible, such as joining environmental, social, or cultural movements. The world feels so complex, and we often feel insignificant and lost within it. I was at a temple with a nice devotee community, but most of the kids weren’t attending the temple. Their parents were anxious, so we had a talk. I suggested an idea of activism, and the parents decided to make the entire temple eco-friendly. They invited the kids to take responsibility for this, and the kids formed a committee. Every week, they came to the temple, not just to hear the class or see the deities, but to ensure all the waste was disposed of in an eco-friendly manner. At that age, they wanted to do something, not just sit idly.

There is a zeal in all of us to contribute in some way. To the extent that these two elements—connection and contribution—are present, happiness can be considered multi-layered. While physical sensations are fine, they are peripheral. A deeper happiness comes when we connect and contribute.

So, who do we connect with? We connect with our family members, friends, and people in society. And what do we contribute? We can contribute in various ways. But what will make this happiness enduring? The happiness that comes from connecting and contributing is of a different nature. It may initially feel like poison but ends up being nectar. Connecting with another human being is not always easy. You may hope to meet someone, and the first moment you meet them, you feel a connection. But love at first sight is just the beginning. The real test is whether the connection endures.

Initially, there may be attraction, but for the connection to endure, there must be commitment. Relationships, especially deep and enduring ones, are like planting a tree. At first, you water the tree, and after a long time, the tree will bear fruit and provide shade. So, connecting with another human being at a deep level requires commitment and effort, much like nurturing a tree. Even contributing meaningfully requires that we have something worthwhile to offer.

For instance, if someone wants to contribute by becoming a doctor and serving underprivileged people, they first need to learn to be a doctor. Developing abilities requires dedication and hard work. This happiness, the deeper kind, may feel like poison in the beginning, but once we endure the challenges, we reach the nectar, and it becomes immensely fulfilling.

However, what happens when we compare these two types of happiness—the poison in the beginning, nectar in the end, versus nectar in the beginning, poison in the end? From an external perspective, the latter seems to promise immediate pleasure. The world presents endless objects with their initial nectar-like appeal. We jump from one to the next, distracted by the promise of instant gratification. Those who are not committed to anything may get distracted by anything. Even the thinnest layer of nectar will look attractive, and we get carried away.

If we want to pursue true happiness, we must recognize that we will have to endure the poison. This requires wisdom. If we let ourselves be swayed by the world’s definition of pleasure, we’ll just keep chasing fleeting sources of happiness that soon stop being pleasurable and eventually turn unpleasant. Happiness will elude us, and unhappiness will overwhelm us.

To make happiness enduring, we need a spiritual connection and understanding. Krishna, in the Bhagavad Gita, advises us not to chase after desires for external pleasure. He says, “Give up these desires, for they will end.” But what should we do instead? “Turn inward,” Krishna tells us. The Gita explains that beyond the body and mind, we are essentially spiritual beings. The soul is part of the whole, the all-attractive Supreme Being—Krishna.

The connection between the soul and Krishna is the source of ultimate happiness. When we connect with Krishna, it is a source of supreme joy. This connection, unlike fleeting sensory experiences, is eternal. The connection with Krishna is not physical; it is a connection of the heart and consciousness. When we connect with Krishna, it brings enduring happiness.

Earlier, I mentioned connecting and contributing as the key to meaningful happiness. But if we seek something eternally meaningful, something enduring, we must connect with Krishna. This connection with Krishna is the essence of bhakti. Bhakti Yoga is not just a set of rituals. It’s not just about visiting temples or performing sacred rites. All these practices have a purpose—to connect us with Krishna.

Sometimes people have a negative attitude toward rituals, but when rituals are infused with spirit, they become spiritual. When we engage in these practices with the right emotional disposition, they connect our consciousness with Krishna. To the extent that our consciousness is connected with Krishna, we experience inner serenity, stability, and satisfaction.

Now, we may ask, “How do we live in this world and function, while also connecting inwardly?” Bhakti has both aspects. There is connection internally, and there is contribution externally. Through our devotion to Krishna, we connect with Him, and through our service to the world, we contribute. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna talks about how we can spiritualize our activities in the world, turning every action into an offering of service.

The work that we do can have different motivations. We might work for remuneration to sustain our lives, but that is not the most inspiring motivation. When we perform our work as an offering to Krishna, we find deeper fulfillment. And through this devotion, we gain perfection and satisfaction.

Let me conclude with an example. There were three teachers in a school, and they were asked, “What are you doing?”

The first teacher said, “Can you see I’m trying to hammer some sense into the stupid case?” So the second teacher said, “Okay, I’m earning my living.” The third teacher said, “I am helping create the future of the world by shaping the minds of those who will be the future of the world.” The activity is the same, but the vision is different. And when the vision is different, the motivation level is different, the inspiration level is different.

So if we just look at every activity that we do, there are going to be problems. And no work in the world is easy, but if we have that vision—okay, this is such a disagreeable kind of work, so many problems over there—then not only are we fighting against the world, but we are fighting against our own mind also to get the work done. We’ll be half-hearted, we’ll be lackadaisical, we’ll not be happy. We’ll just do it, but it’ll be a struggle. If we think, “I’m just doing it for earning a living,” then what happens? The work itself is not meaningful. It is only the result of the work that is meaningful. And then the work becomes something we just have to go through so that we can get the result.

But if we can have this devotional vision—of course, there the vision was not exactly devotional, but it’s a bigger picture—and the teacher is thinking, “I’m contributing to the future of the world,” and that brings much greater motivation. So bhakti gives us this vision: that each one of us has certain abilities, we have certain gifts, and each one of us can contribute to the world. The contribution itself is what we have. Some of us have lots of talent. Some of us have small talents, and some of us can make, from an external perspective, a big contribution. Some of us can make a small contribution, but the biggest contribution that we can make is the consciousness we bring to the world.

The consciousness we bring means that if we are constantly irritable, complaining, and annoying, then we just make our hearts darker. We make the world darker around us. Krishna is present within our hearts. He is the supreme light. And when we become connected with Krishna internally, that connection brings His supreme light, that divine light, into our heart and from our heart into the world. Each one of us can make our world a brighter and better place, not just by the work we do, but by the consciousness with which we do the work.

And when we have this presence of Krishna, we are not so dependent or affected by our situations, because our happiness doesn’t depend primarily on the situation. We are connected with Krishna internally, and that brings us inner satisfaction. And then we work externally. When we work in this way, each of us can make worthwhile contributions. From the world’s measuring standpoint, some of us may be able to make huge contributions. Some of us may not be able to make such huge contributions, but each of us can make a positive difference.

Now, how much of a positive difference that will be? Actually, if we look, we all can think of certain things we are doing that are making the quality of our life somewhat worse. And you can think of certain things, and just think for a few minutes—you’re thinking of two or three things: “If I stopped doing this, small things, my life could be better. Two or three things: if I start doing this, my life will become better.”

We all may resolve to do these things, but it’s not easy to act on our resolutions, because we are distracted by pleasure, or we are distracted by trouble. All this nectar is there—why go through this poison? We get distracted. But if we are connected with Krishna internally, then we will be able to have that inner strength. And with that inner strength, each of us can make a better contribution. It may be to our children as parents, it may be in our work environment, it may be as neighbors, it may be as devotees. How much better a contribution can we make? We all don’t know that yet. Discovering that we all can be better human beings and do better things than what we are doing right now—that is what can make our life an adventure.

If we pull our act together, connect with Krishna, and let Krishna empower us, let Krishna’s love flow through us, how much good Krishna can do through us. That is what can make our life the ultimate adventure. So people think of adventure sports and adventure tours. They are all about getting some sensations—jumping out of a parachute, going to a hill station. All that is fine, but it’s superficial. The meaningful adventure in our life is when we connect with Krishna and become channels to contribute on His behalf.

And that, the Bhagavata says, is the art of happiness. Atmanya evadman, the soul connects with Krishna and then contributes in the world in a mode of service to Krishna. That is what will bring us intimate happiness.

I spoke today on this topic of what happiness is and why it is so elusive. So I started by talking broadly. We talked about 255 in the Gita. So I said there are three parts of what happiness is not: happiness is not just meaningless enjoyment, it is meaningful engagement. Meaningless enjoyment means stimulation. If somebody tickles us physically, or somebody tickles us mentally by humor, for some time it’s fine, but afterwards it becomes boring. Why? Because such pleasures are like nectar in the beginning, but poison in the end.

So we chase the nectar, and when the nectar ends, we immediately start taking a second nectar, a third nectar, a fourth nectar, and it just goes on and on. Fashion is a form of ugliness that soon becomes unbearable. And not only does it not only disappoint us, but it’s also distressing. Why? Because the senses and the sense objects are temporary. The senses are temporary, their connection is temporary, but the craving stays on and on. This craving torments us.

So what is happiness then? Happiness is not in two things. I said it is not in the four C’s. Does anyone remember those 4 C’s? Consuming or collecting? It is not in these things, but it is in connecting and contributing. Yes, thank you. Now, we can collect things, but what are we collecting them for? Is it just for consuming, or are we using those things to contribute, to connect?

Then, at a human level also, if we look, the deepest moments—the most fulfilling, most joyful moments—are when we connected with some other human being in a deeper way, and then when we did something which contributed to the welfare of someone else, which made us feel, “This is my existence. It counts.” So that brings a much deeper and enduring level of happiness.

And then lastly, I talked about how this happiness, through connecting and contributing, can be made enduring. That is, we connect not just with each other, but we connect with Krishna. So we are souls, and the soul is eternal. Krishna is eternal, and the connection between the two is established. And that connection can also be eternal, and it is established through devotion.

So we practice bhakti yoga by coming to the temple and doing various rituals. They become spiritual when we do them in the right spirit, and they establish an inner connection. And with that connection, we go out into the world, and according to our particular positions and dispositions, we make contributions. The biggest contribution we can make in the world is the consciousness we bring. If we are satisfied and cheerful, then the light of Krishna can shine through us and make our world a better and brighter place.

And we all can become better human beings and do better things if we connect with Krishna. All those intentions that we have—all those resolutions—we’ll implement them, and how much good we can do. Discovering that can become our life’s most exciting adventure. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. Are there any questions or comments?

Yes, please. In the beginning, when you started with the words, “We should not…” like, we should give up desires, yeah? And then later, you mentioned that we have to live in this world, so we have to be doing our work. That’s basically my question: the contradiction between the two.

Okay, yeah. So, initially, I said that we have to give up desires. But then I said we have to work in the world, and we have to contribute. See, see what Krishna specifically says over there: prajati ida kaman sarwan partha manukatan. Since those desires which come from the agitation of the mind—the mind is always chasing whatever looks attractive, whatever looks pleasurable—this looks like nice nectar, that’s nice nectar, that’s nice nectar.

So if we keep chasing that which looks like nectar, we will never get much pleasure. Actually, if we keep doing whatever we like, we will end up disliking ourselves.

If somebody just, you know, if they just stay on their phone or the computer, just clicking on any site that comes up, any YouTube video—watch this now—after a few hours, they think, “I wasted so much time,” and they keep doing it day after day after day. Those people who spend hours and days and weeks on video games and internet surfing, we actually look at them and see they have extremely low self-esteem. They are just unhappy people. They’re trying to forget that, so they don’t really like themselves.

So when Krishna is saying “praja, give up those desires,” He’s saying that the desire to look for some quick nectar—that is the desire you give up. But then we work meaningfully. And at the end of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells Arjuna, “Do your work. Nimitta matram bhava—become an instrument in service.” Do your service, make a contribution. That means we should be willing to go through the poison to get to the nectar.

Thank you. Yes, Krishna. One of the impediments to happiness is comparing our contribution with somebody else’s contribution. We think that our contribution is very small and theirs is so big. Therefore, that minimizes our own sense of satisfaction with what we’re doing. How do we overcome that?

When we make a contribution, sometimes we compare our contribution with others’ contributions and feel that our contribution is so small, which causes dissatisfaction. So what should we do about that?

Yes, the thing is, even when we contribute, the absorption is really critical. If somebody is making a contribution, but afterwards, they want glorification for their contribution, then if they get that glorification, they will be happy. If they don’t get that glorification, they will not be very happy.

So, we want to make a contribution, but actually, the essence of the contribution is that it helps us become more absorbed in Krishna. The contribution is not primarily what Krishna needs from us. Krishna wants our consciousness through that contribution.

There is that well-known verse just quoted in the Bhagavad Gita, 11.32 and 11.33, where Krishna says, “Dasmāt tvam pūrvasūrān māyā vaiṭaiḥ, niha nīvṛtaṁ bhavāśa miṣṭyācī”. He is telling Arjuna, “Fight this war. Rise, fight, attain victory. The enemies are already destroyed by my plan. You just fight, and when you have a flourishing kingdom, become an instrument in the fight.”

Now, this verse is actually saying something significantly deeper. As God had said earlier in 2.47, Krishna says, “Don’t be attached to the fruits of the work, Māyā ānī, and then He says, ‘yad karoshi yad ashnasi, yad juhoshi dadaśi yat’“—offer the fruits to Me. So, He says, “Don’t be attached to the fruits, offer the fruits to Me.” But this verse is telling us that the fruits are already with Krishna.

The war, the enemies are already defeated. So actually, Krishna doesn’t want the fruits from us. Krishna wants us through the fruits. It is in trying to offer the fruits to Krishna that we offer ourselves to Krishna. So if we get that priority right, ultimately, whatever service we do, yes, we want the external results to offer to Krishna. But the essential thing that Krishna wants—if Krishna wants, He can just get the results in one moment. We want to build a big temple. We might go and make endeavors to make various arrangements, but Krishna can, in the heart of the other Paramatma, inspire one person, and that person may just do everything. Also, if Krishna wants, He can do that, but He engages us so that we have some service. That’s why, if we focus on the point that the contribution is so that we can become absorbed in Krishna, then we won’t feel so dissatisfied if our contribution is less.

Another thing with respect to contribution is that a bigger contribution also means bigger distraction. Bigger distraction means, in the world, if somebody is making a bigger contribution, they might be doing it selflessly. But the more visible we become in the world, it is just the nature of the world that if we build a mountain, or if we build a mound, we have to dig a hole somewhere. So if somebody is making a big contribution, they are becoming famous in this world. Fame comes with infamy. And that, in one sense, both fame and infamy are big distractions. Fame can distract us: “I’m so great,” and then infamy comes. What happens? Anybody who becomes successful, somebody or the other will find some reason to criticize them, even if they have impeccable character. Still, people will find some reason. It’s just the nature of the world—people can’t tolerate it. Envy comes out, and then it’s very painful. So, bigger contributions don’t come free; they have their own costs. Of course, if Krishna wants us to do a bigger contribution, we’re happy to do it. But the bigger contribution also has a bigger distraction.

That’s why we can say that, at one level, Krishna knows what is the contribution that we can make best. And Krishna gives us that much empowerment. If we become purer, He may give us more empowerment. But becoming purer means focusing on Him rather than the world. So that’s why it’s not so much the quantity of our contribution, but the quality of our consciousness that matters in the realm of service.

There is a story of the monkeys. They’re all carrying giant boulders to help build the bridge for Rama, and there’s a squirrel who was carrying small dust particles, small pebbles. One of the monkeys said, “Hey, get out of the way! You’re coming in our way.” Rama told them, “She is doing her work according to her capacity, her fullest capacity, and you are doing your fullest capacity. I appreciate her, and I appreciate you.” So in the Lord’s eyes, the quantity of our contribution is not as important as the quality of our consciousness.

Thank you, Hare Krishna. Yes, in respect to connection and contribution, when one is in that position, with respect to commitment to connection and contribution, what my observation has been over time is that when devotees often get to the position of connection and contribution, various obstacles come up to test this. Sometimes the obstacles are so mind-blowing and staggering and derailing that we actually get off the path and call it quits. So my question is, how to identify this, how to relate to it, and what to do about it?

Okay, so when we come to the level of making connections or making contributions, various obstacles come, and they can overwhelm us. So what do we do at that time?

We can look at Srila Prabhupada’s example. I don’t think any human being could have faced as many obstacles as Srila Prabhupada did. He faced almost everything that he did—it just didn’t work. He tried starting a business, running a magazine, running an organization, working with his godbrothers—none of them worked. So what did Prabhupada do to move through it all? It was Ganga Vāgti—the Ganga keeps flowing toward the ocean.

Now, sometimes the Ganga might just be a small trickle flowing. Sometimes it’s a huge river. At times, it has to hit against obstacles again and again and again, maybe sneaking a little bit through, or sneaking left or right. But the Ganga keeps moving toward the ocean. So there is a path, and there is a purpose. The Ganga is not attached to this specific path. The purpose is to reach the ocean. If not by this path, then by some other path; if not by that path, some other path.

So, for us, even when we want to make a connection or contribution, we think, “This is the way I want to do it,” and sometimes things just don’t work. Srila Prabhupada was immensely determined, but he was also immensely resourceful. He wasn’t just forceful. “This is what I’m going to do now!” If this doesn’t work, “Let’s try that.” Prabhupada going to America itself was an example of not just his determination but his flexibility, adaptability, and resourcefulness. Even in America, he tried various things. He was in upstate New York initially, talking to more kind of people who other yoga gurus were going to. But then he went to the Bowery in New York City, and that’s where he got the most reciprocation.

So, there has to be that flexibility, that willingness to adapt. “Okay, this connection is not happening in this way. Maybe it will happen in that way.” “This contribution is not happening in this way. It may happen in that way.” This doesn’t mean we become fickle and give up at the first obstacle, but we need to be reasonable. Sometimes we might be inspired to do a particular thing, but maybe the time is not right, the place is not right, or the circumstances are not right. During that time, we might have to shift. So, we could decide on a reasonable amount of time and energy to put in. Suppose we are preaching at a particular point, doing a program at a particular place. We might do that for a few months, three months, six months, one year. But if we don’t get much reciprocation there, we might decide, “Okay, let me try somewhere else.”

So we need flexibility. In principle, a devotee is determined. As Bhakta Sanatan said, “If you are speaking about Krishna, if no one comes, speak to the walls. The walls will hear it. It is glorification of Krishna.” Now, that was in principle. But Prabhupada wasn’t satisfied speaking to the walls in India. He came to America. So when Bhakta Sanatan said, “Speak to the walls,” it means don’t lose heart if your service doesn’t seem to produce the results, or the connection or contribution is not happening. But that doesn’t mean we keep doing the same thing without change. We have to be resourceful.

That’s one point: like the Ganga, we have to be resourceful about moving forward. And the second thing is that when obstacles come, sometimes we may have to streamline.

There may be one activity with which we can very strongly connect with Krishna. We will be doing many things to connect with Krishna, and we may bring many things to contribute as well. But sometimes, we have to streamline and focus on that one activity through which we can connect very well. We might be doing various activities, but if we say we feel very connected by doing worship, or by doing Kirtan, or by studying the Bhagavatam, then that is what we need to focus on the most. That connection will become the source of our nourishment in general.

To conclude this point, in both our spiritual life and our day-to-day life, there are some activities that give us strength, and there are some activities that take away our strength. As Molibro quoted earlier, “Some people bring happiness wherever they go; some people bring happiness whenever they go.” What does that mean? People who bring happiness, we love to be with them. Being with them brings warmth, energy, and strength. But some people, as soon as they come, we start feeling like we can’t breathe properly, and then when they leave, we feel relief.

Now, in all our lives, both kinds of people exist. Some people, just by being with them, give us strength. Some people, being with them, take away our strength. We may not be able to entirely avoid those people if we are obligated or have committed relationships. But we have to make sure that the things that give us strength are not superseded by the things that take away our strength. We need to ensure that we get adequate strength, so we need to streamline our connection and maybe our contribution, so that we have the strength we need.

When we have adequate strength, then we can make whatever contribution we are making, whether it is less or more. So, be resourceful and vigilant. We need to be resourceful to find ways to contribute, and we also need to be vigilant to make sure that we are nourished ourselves. Only then can we go through the obstacles.

Okay, thank you. Yes, this verse talks about happiness through the self, but you’re talking about happiness with Krishna. So, I wasn’t able to understand—can you relate these two?

Okay, yes. So, here, “atman” refers to happiness through the self. But I brought Krishna into the discussion. Actually, the Bhagavad Gita has its own internal flow, and it leads toward a particular conclusion. At the same time, each verse is at a particular point in its flow. Broadly speaking, the flow of the Bhagavad Gita is this: initially, the Gita shifts Arjuna’s vision from the body to the soul. The first six chapters are primarily about how the body and soul interact and how to stay at the spiritual level while functioning in the body. So, the vision is shifted in the first six chapters from the body to the soul. There are three elements in existence: Jeev, Jagat, and Jagdish. Jeev is the soul, Jagat is the universe (the world), and Jagdish is the Supreme Lord.

In the first six chapters, Krishna shifts the vision from the body to the soul. Then, from the seventh chapter onward, Krishna shifts the vision from the soul to the whole, to Himself, to Jagdish. This is where Krishna introduces bhakti and talks about Himself and His glories—how He is the supremely attractive object and eminently worthy of our devotion. After that, in the last few chapters, Krishna shifts focus to the Jagat and how, with this spiritual knowledge, we should look at and function in the world. So, the Gita has its own thought flow.

What we did was take one verse, but we didn’t focus only on that verse. We used that verse as a launching pad to give the overall message of the Gita. This is also what Srila Prabhupada does. He might take one purport from the second chapter, but he explains it not just in that particular context, but in the context of the whole message of the Gita.

For example, in the second chapter, Krishna talks about Himself. In 2.61, He says, “Control the mind,” and in 2.61, 3.30, and 4.35, Krishna talks about focusing the consciousness on Him. In the second chapter, Krishna is primarily teaching mind control and sense control. But He also gives a hint that He is not just the teacher of mind control—He is also the object of control. The mind controls the mind and what you focus on. This becomes clearer later.

So, here in the first few chapters, verses 2.61, 3.30, and 4.35 give glimpses. But in the middle chapters, it becomes much more explicit. What I have explained is in terms of the entire philosophy of the Gita, and that is what we’ve used as a reference point to explain this verse.

Thank you. Yes, in this day and age, technology is the main thing. Back in the old days, we used to engage our kids in various activities, but now, a lot of the activities involve giving them a phone or some other technological device. And if you see what’s on some of these devices—not all of it is educational or positive—there’s a lot that is highly addictive, particularly to their minds. Then, they have to go out and make sense of the natural world, which is becoming increasingly lost. We seem to live in a screen-dominated world, and outside that screen, the real world is fading away. What is our responsibility to our kids in this environment? Technology is very addictive.

Yes, in the past, we could read books to our kids and connect with them, but now technology often consumes them. It can be quite addictive, and they get disconnected from the real issues of the world. Yes, at one level, spirituality transcends culture. At another level, spirituality permeates culture. Transcendence means putting aside the existing culture and focusing on our activities. For example, what we’re doing now is similar to what has been done in the bhakti tradition for a long time—we come together to discuss Krishna, the Supreme Lord, and glorify Him. So bhakti has activities that transcend culture. However, bhakti is also inclusive and can permeate culture.

I have a seminar on the internet and the three modes of material nature. Sometimes, we might think that the internet is all just distraction, but it’s not that simple. On the internet, there is also a culture of sharing and giving. People share knowledge and expertise. For example, if your computer isn’t working, you can go to a forum like the Apple or Windows forum, ask questions, and get answers. Wikipedia is another example, where knowledge is being widely distributed. So, in some ways, technology has become the language of today’s world. Within technology, just like in normal society, there are people in goodness, passion, and ignorance. Similarly, among netizens—the people who live in the digital world—there are those in goodness, passion, and ignorance.

In that sense, the digital world is more or less a reflection of the physical world, as it is human beings who have created it. The big difference, however, between the digital world and the physical world is that we can go from goodness to ignorance by just clicking one button. For example, if someone is in a library or a temple and they want to go to a bar or a gambling site, they would physically have to travel, which requires time, effort, and may even involve some public disapproval. But on the internet, you can go from a state of goodness to a state of ignorance in one moment, with just a click.

So now, what do we do? Especially considering that many of us are from multiple generations. Some of us have lived without the internet and feel that it’s not necessary—just practice bhakti. But others, who have grown up with the internet and social media, can’t imagine life without it. I was at an interfaith conference in Washington, and one of the Christian pastors mentioned that in the age group of 15 to 40, 40% of people who came to Christianity did so through online outreach—nearly half. So, people are seeking spirituality online as well. We can’t demonize the internet, but at the same time, we can’t be overly utilitarian about it either. There are dangers in it.

So essentially, it’s about what someone is doing on the internet. If we are connecting meaningfully and contributing meaningfully, that can also be a valid way of connecting. It may not be a physical connection, but it is still worthwhile. For example, if someone spends time surfing 100 sites just to stimulate themselves, that’s different from someone visiting a site to learn something, form meaningful connections, and contribute. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. That’s how people operate today, so bhakti can permeate the existing culture as well.

However, one issue is that it’s easy to shift from goodness to ignorance with just one click. The second problem is that digital connections can be good when no physical connection is available, but when digital connections are used to avoid physical ones, we lose the depth of contact that we need. I once saw a cartoon where a man said, “Yesterday evening, my Wi-Fi went down, so I spent some time with my family. They seem like nice people.”

There has to be some time when we connect with people physically as well. Sometimes, this has to start with the adults. For instance, at family meals, the adults should start by putting their phones away, saying to their kids, “Don’t keep your phone with you.” Actions speak louder than words. If kids feel that their parents are listening to them and not just judging them, they’ll be more open. As soon as we feel judged, we close the doors. Many times, people seek the digital world because they feel they can’t connect in the physical world. So we can’t just demonize technology. We also need to provide opportunities for physical connection and contribution.

If we do this, there can be a balanced way of operating. It’s not easy, but eventually, people get bored with the distraction. Initially, when someone gets a phone or discovers a new app or game, they’re infatuated, but over time, they just get bored. So, if meaningful connection and contribution are done both digitally and physically, then it won’t be so distracting.

Thank you very much.

The post Gita key verses course 8 – What is happiness? Why is it so elusive? – Gita 2.55 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 7 – What is destiny? Is everything destined? – Gita 2.47
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So here we are now discussing the concept of destiny. What happened here? Okay, I was talking about how the Bhagavad Gita’s message can be applied till now. We discussed that this verse has four propositions within it. These four propositions are as follows:

Adhikar means rights. The idea of rights is not just a modern conception, but the context in which the idea of rights is talked about is different. The Bhagavad Gita says that you have a right to do your work, but you should not think that you are entitled to the results. Do not be attached to the results—that is the second proposition. The third proposition is maa karma phala hetur bhuru. Here, karma phala means the fruit of the work, and hetu means the cause. So, do not think that you are the cause of the results of your work. Phala literally refers to the word “fruit,” but I have used the word “results” for a particular purpose, which will be discussed later in the class. The fourth proposition is maa te sangost akarmani, where akarmani means not doing the work. This implies that you should not be attached to not doing your work.

Essentially, this means: do your work, but do not think you are entitled to the results. Do not consider yourself the sole cause of the results of your work. At the same time, do not shirk the responsibility of doing your work. The first and second points are similar—the first states that you have a right to perform your work, and the fourth emphasizes that you should not avoid fulfilling your responsibilities.

In the specific context of the Bhagavad Gita, this means that Arjuna, who was reluctant to fight the war, must perform his duty as a warrior. Arjuna was hesitant, thinking, “What if all the elders in the family are killed? I don’t want to cause such terrible bloodshed.” Krishna tells Arjuna that as a warrior, it is his duty to fight the war. He has the right to perform his work, but he is not entitled to determine the results. Furthermore, Krishna explains that Arjuna should not consider himself the sole cause of the war’s outcome, as there are greater forces at play. At the same time, Arjuna cannot avoid his responsibility to fight. Krishna emphasizes the importance of introducing the concept of destiny to reconcile these points.

How can we be responsible in doing our duty while remaining detached from the results? This is a paradox because, for most of us, we perform work to achieve a result. Our motivation, inspiration, and focus often depend on the result. Many self-help teachers tell us to “begin with the end in mind” or to envision the result to inspire ourselves and work towards achieving it. That is what makes us responsible. So, how can we remain responsible while staying detached? This appears contradictory.

To understand this, we need to consider the concept of destiny. How do things produce results? There are four factors involved, which can be summarized as the four D’s: Duty, Destiny, and Duration lead to the Desired result. In Sanskrit, this is expressed as: Karma + Daiva + Kala = Phala. Duty refers to performing your part, destiny refers to factors beyond your control, and duration refers to the specific timing required for results to manifest.

For example, a farmer sows seeds and plows the land—that is their duty. Rainfall at the right time and in the right quantity depends on destiny. The harvest season, or the duration, completes the process and leads to the desired result. Similarly, when a couple decides to have a child, they unite—that is their duty. However, conception depends on destiny, and even if conception occurs, the baby does not arrive the next day. The gestation period, or duration, is necessary. Thus, duty, destiny, and duration together lead to the desired result.

The concept of destiny itself is vast, and I won’t delve into its specifics today.

To broadly understand the concept and make sense of this particular verse and the mode of working it recommends, let us explore destiny. What exactly is destiny? If we analyze it, destiny essentially refers to the factors beyond our control that shape the results of our actions. These factors, which are outside our influence, can broadly be referred to as destiny.

From a philosophical perspective, destiny is the sum total of the reactions of our past actions that have accumulated and are unfolding in our present and future. It is a cumulative outcome. This brings us to the concept of karma, which we will discuss in more detail later. Simply put, karma is the principle of actions leading to reactions—causes producing effects. Considering the earlier discussion on reincarnation, karma implies that the chain of action and reaction spans beyond a single lifetime. This means that the consequences of our actions might not manifest immediately. For example, something we do now may result in reactions after a few months, years, decades, or even lifetimes.

When we come into this life, we carry a certain baggage, which is our karma. The way this accumulated baggage unfolds in our lives is what we call destiny. While we may believe that working hard will automatically produce results, it is not always that simple. We may perform our work, but sometimes the results do not manifest. This is because while karma is necessary, if daiva (destiny) is not favorable, karma will not translate into phala (results).

However, daiva is not arbitrary. Destiny does not randomly favor or disfavor people. Rather, it is the cumulative outcome of the actions an individual has performed and the reactions they are bound to experience. Understanding this helps us make sense of Krishna’s teaching in the Bhagavad Gita: “Do not think you are the sole cause of the results.” Karma alone does not lead to phala. Instead, karma, combined with daiva (destiny) and kala (time), results in phala.

Krishna emphasizes the importance of doing one’s duty. For example, if a farmer does not sow seeds, there will be no harvest, even if destiny is favorable. Similarly, if we fail to perform our part, no results will come, no matter how favorable the circumstances may be. Conversely, even if we do our work diligently, unfavorable destiny may still prevent the results we desire. Hence, Krishna advises, “Do not think you are the cause of the fruits, and do not be attached to the fruits.”

Now, the question arises: is everything destined? The answer is no. While a lot is determined by destiny, not everything is. Destiny determines our situations, but we determine our decisions. For instance, if we are driving, destiny could be likened to the weather conditions—whether it is stormy, snowy, or clear. These external conditions are beyond our control, but how we drive in those conditions is entirely up to us.

Destiny influences not only our external situations but also our bodies. For example, we did not choose our physical features, race, or physique; these were determined by destiny. It is as if we are given a specific car to drive at the start of our life journey. Over time, we may become attached to this “car” (our body), comparing it with others’ “cars” and sometimes feeling dissatisfied. However, the responsibility lies with us to drive the car we have been given skillfully.

In this analogy, destiny determines the car and the driving conditions, but how we drive is up to us. What we have may be determined by destiny, but what we do with what we have is determined by our free will. For instance, destiny determines our facial complexion, but we determine our facial expression. A person with a less attractive complexion can still radiate charm through a cheerful expression, while someone with stunning looks may seem unapproachable if they constantly frown.

Krishna’s teaching can be understood as a distinction between what is within our control and what is not. If we imagine a circle, everything inside the circle represents what we can control, while everything outside the circle represents what we cannot control. Krishna advises us to focus on our actions—what is within the circle—and let go of attachment to outcomes, which lie outside the circle.

Stephen Covey, in his influential book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, discusses a similar concept: focusing on the circle of influence rather than the circle of concern. By concentrating on what we can control, we act responsibly and effectively, while leaving the rest to factors beyond our control, including destiny.

The first principle Stephen Covey talks about in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People is to be proactive. He introduces the concepts of the circle of control, the circle of influence, and the circle of concern. The circle of concern represents things we worry about, while the circle of influence represents things we can actively change. Covey emphasizes focusing on what we can influence rather than worrying about what we cannot. This simple yet empowering principle has inspired many.

Interestingly, the Bhagavad Gita had already taught this principle thousands of years ago, albeit in a different language and style. Krishna’s teachings, though deeply philosophical, might not initially resonate with modern audiences because they lack contemporary jargon. Words like “proactive” and “circle of influence” are relatable and visually engaging. However, the Gita’s wisdom provides a deeper, philosophical basis for living effectively.

Krishna explains that while we cannot control everything, we have a right to perform our actions (karma). In the equation of karma, deva (destiny), kala (time), and phala (results), it is karma—our actions—that is within our control. How we “drive our car” or how we express ourselves is up to us. Krishna emphasizes that we should focus on performing our duties and not become apathetic or disheartened by circumstances outside our control.

For example, even if we remain cheerful but encounter surly and uncooperative people, we must not allow their negativity to affect us. If we stop doing our work because of unfavorable external factors, we worsen the situation. Krishna advises us to stay committed to our duties, even if the immediate results are not favorable. While destiny might delay results, our actions (karma) contribute to future deva (destiny). In this way, karma never goes to waste.

Krishna’s teaching, “maa karma phala hetur bhur,” or “do not be attached to the fruits of your actions,” does not mean abandoning goals. There is a difference between results and goals. Results are what we receive after completing our work, while goals are what we set before starting. The Gita does not discourage goal-setting. Goals are essential to keep us focused and motivated.

For instance, during the Kurukshetra war, Krishna and Arjuna planned their strategies before each day’s battle, deciding which opponents to confront. This planning, especially on pivotal days like the 14th day, was critical. On the 13th day, Jayadratha had schemed to isolate Abhimanyu, Arjuna’s 16-year-old son, who was then killed in a flagrant violation of war codes. This tragedy became a turning point for the war, leading Arjuna to set a goal of defeating Jayadratha the next day.

The Bhagavad Gita’s teachings might seem uncomfortable when they address war, especially in today’s context, where violence, particularly in the name of religion, is deeply troubling. However, the violence condemned today, such as terrorism, is fundamentally different from the war codes of Kshatriyas, who followed strict rules to ensure fairness in battle. Terrorists target unarmed civilians, whereas Kshatriyas fought only against equally armed and prepared warriors.

In essence, the Bhagavad Gita offers timeless principles for navigating life’s challenges. It encourages us to act responsibly, focus on what we can control, set meaningful goals, and trust that our efforts will bear fruit, if not immediately, then eventually.

In ancient times, war was seen as a test of skills and strength. However, during the Kurukshetra war, there was a flagrant violation of Kshatriya codes when Abhimanyu was killed after being isolated by Jayadrath. In response, Arjuna vowed to kill Jayadrath before sunset the next day or enter fire if he failed. This was a clear and determined goal. Interestingly, Krishna did not reprimand Arjuna by saying he had forgotten the Bhagavad Gita’s teachings. Instead, Krishna supported him, guided him expertly, and helped him achieve his target.

This story illustrates that setting goals is not only acceptable but essential. The difference between goals and results is key here. Goals are set before an action, while results are what we receive after completing the action. The Bhagavad Gita encourages us to set goals to stay motivated, but it also teaches detachment from the results.

Detachment does not mean apathy or irresponsibility. For instance, while driving, we need a destination (goal) to stay focused. However, if we encounter traffic, we adjust our expectations rather than obsess over delays. Similarly, a student preparing for exams should study diligently with the goal of achieving high grades. If the results of one exam don’t meet their expectations, they must move on and focus on the remaining exams instead of getting distracted or demotivated.

This balance between effort and detachment helps us perform our duties more effectively. Detachment allows us to focus on what’s in our control, while irresponsibility leads to inaction. When we embrace detachment, we become more resilient and resourceful, doing our best without being burdened by the outcome.

The Bhagavad Gita also ties this concept to the soul. Understanding that we are souls, with past lives and karmic baggage, helps us accept the situations we face in life. This broader perspective on destiny prevents us from feeling that life is arbitrary or unfair. Recognizing our past and the limitations of our current circumstances allows us to focus on what is within our control—our actions.

Ultimately, this understanding empowers us to work more effectively and maintain our enthusiasm for the tasks at hand. By detaching from results and focusing on our responsibilities, we become more productive, resilient, and aligned with our true purpose.

In ancient times, war was seen as a test of skill and strength. However, during the Kurukshetra war, there was a grave violation of Kshatriya codes when Abhimanyu was killed after being isolated by Jayadrath. In response, Arjuna made a decisive vow: he would kill Jayadrath before sunset the next day or enter fire if he failed. This was a clear and focused goal. Krishna, instead of reminding Arjuna about detachment from results as taught in the Bhagavad Gita, supported him and guided him expertly throughout the day. With Krishna’s help, Arjuna achieved his goal.

This story emphasizes that setting goals is not a problem; rather, not setting goals is. Goals provide focus, motivation, and direction. However, it is crucial to distinguish between goals and results. Goals are what we set before action; results are what we receive after the action. While we hope our goals translate into results, we must remain detached from obsessing over the outcome.

The Bhagavad Gita teaches us to balance effort with detachment. For example, when driving, we set a destination (goal) to stay focused. If traffic delays us, we adapt rather than become agitated. Similarly, students preparing for exams must study diligently with a goal in mind. However, if one exam doesn’t go as expected, obsessing over it may distract them from performing well in subsequent exams. Detachment helps us move on, maintain focus, and remain effective.

Detachment is not irresponsibility. A student claiming detachment as an excuse for not studying is shirking responsibility. True detachment means doing our best and then letting go of the outcome. It empowers us to focus on what is within our control while accepting what is not.

This concept ties into the understanding of the soul. Realizing that we are souls with past lives and karmic baggage helps us make sense of our current circumstances. Without this perspective, life may seem arbitrary or unfair. Understanding the soul’s journey allows us to accept our situation and focus on what we can control—our actions. For example, regardless of the car we are given, we can still drive it effectively.

This knowledge of the soul, combined with detachment from results, makes us more resilient, resourceful, and focused on our responsibilities. By aligning our efforts with this mindset, we can move forward positively, performing our duties with enthusiasm and effectiveness.

To summarize today’s discussion, we explored the concept of detachment as explained by Krishna in Bhagavad Gita 2.47. We delved into how the knowledge of the soul can be applied not only in moments of loss but also in daily life. Krishna emphasizes four key points in this verse:

  1. You have the right to perform your duty.
  2. You are not entitled to the results.
  3. Do not think you are the cause of the results.
  4. Do not be attached to not doing your duty.

These principles guide us to balance responsibility with detachment.

Understanding Destiny and Free Will

We discussed the role of destiny, which can be understood in two ways:

  • Ordinary level: Destiny refers to factors beyond our control that influence outcomes.
  • Philosophical level: Destiny is the cumulative result of our past actions and their stored reactions, which unfold in the present and future.

Destiny can be compared to driving conditions—such as weather or the type of car we have—while free will determines how we drive. Destiny sets the range of our circumstances, but within that range, we exercise free will. For example:

  • Destiny determines our facial complexion; free will determines our facial expression.

The Bhagavad Gita presents this balance as an empowering principle. It encourages us to focus on what we can control—our decisions—while accepting what is beyond our control.

Goals vs. Results

We also differentiated between goals and results:

  • Goals: Set before action; they inspire and focus us.
  • Results: Outcomes of action; often beyond our direct control.

Setting goals is essential for motivation and direction. However, obsessing over results can distract and disempower us. Krishna supported Arjuna in setting goals during the Mahabharata war, such as his vow on the 14th day. This demonstrates that while setting goals is desirable, attachment to results is not.

Detachment means doing your part to the best of your ability and leaving the rest to destiny and divine factors. This approach makes us more effective and balanced in daily life.

Free Will and God’s Knowledge

One common philosophical question arises: If we have free will, how does Krishna know the future?
Krishna’s knowledge of the future is like our knowledge of the past—knowledge without intervention. For instance, we may know what time we woke up today, but that knowledge didn’t influence the event.

Similarly, Krishna knows all possible trajectories based on our choices. His knowledge is like Google Maps:

  • Google knows where each road leads based on our chosen path but doesn’t control our decision.
  • It offers advice, but we retain the freedom to choose.

Krishna grants us free will and allows us to make choices, while his omniscience encompasses all potential outcomes of those choices.

This balance of free will, destiny, and divine knowledge empowers us to take responsibility for our actions without being consumed by attachment to results.

Thank you!

Surrendering to Krishna and Setting Goals

The question arises: should we surrender to Krishna and not set any goals? Why bother setting goals if Krishna knows everything?

These ideas highlight two distinct but complementary aspects of surrender:

  1. Dependence on Krishna: Trusting Krishna’s will and relying on him fully.
  2. Diligence for Krishna: Using our will and efforts to serve Krishna to the best of our capacity.

Surrender is not about passivity; it’s about aligning our efforts with Krishna’s will. For instance:

  • Draupadi surrendered by raising her hands in helplessness, demonstrating dependence on Krishna.
  • Arjuna surrendered by raising his bow in readiness to fight, showing diligence for Krishna.

Thus, surrender means not only accepting Krishna’s will but also using our will and abilities to fulfill it. Bhakti doesn’t deny individuality; instead, it spiritualizes it.

Setting Goals in Bhakti

In the realm of devotion, setting goals is essential because it allows us to offer our individual best to Krishna. Devotees like Yashoda Mai or Radharani strive to cook the best meals for Krishna, setting goals to please him. Similarly, Srila Prabhupada envisioned temples worldwide, and Arjuna aimed to become the best archer, all to serve Krishna better.

Goal setting reflects diligence in service, but attachment to the outcome is undesirable. We strive to do our best and leave the results to Krishna.

Are We the Doer? Understanding Gita 3.27

The verse “Prakriteh kriyamanani gunaih karmani sarvashah” states that material nature, through the modes, is the doer of all actions, and the soul, deluded, thinks, “I am the doer.”

This doesn’t mean passivity or denial of free will. It emphasizes understanding the interplay of various factors in action. Krishna explains this balance further:

  1. At the end of the Gita (18.63), Krishna tells Arjuna: “Deliberate deeply and act as you desire.” This emphasizes that Arjuna has free will and responsibility.
  2. Arjuna responds (18.73): “Karishe vachanam tava”—“I will do your will.” Here, Arjuna exercises his free will to align with Krishna’s instructions.

Balance Between Doership and Non-Doership

Krishna elaborates in Gita 18.15–17 that action results from the interaction of five factors:

  1. The body (adhiṣṭhāna).
  2. The doer (kartā).
  3. The senses (karaṇa).
  4. The efforts (ceṣṭā).
  5. Destiny or divine will (daivam).

A balanced understanding avoids extremes:

  • It is distorted to think we are the sole doers, as many factors influence outcomes.
  • It is oversimplified to think we are not doers at all, as Krishna emphasizes deliberate action.

In conclusion, surrendering to Krishna involves both trust and effort. By setting goals and striving for excellence, we can offer our best to Krishna while remaining detached from the results. This approach harmonizes free will, destiny, and divine will, enabling us to live purposefully and spiritually.

Why is the vision distorted? Because they’re seeing only a part of the reality. There are multiple factors that contribute to the results. To think that our actions solely determine the results of the illusion is one misconception, but to think that our actions don’t determine the results at all is also an illusion. So, we are the doers, but we are not the sole doers.

And specifically, 327 prakriti kriyamanani, what does it mean? It means that Krishna is telling Arjuna, in the context of the Gita, that you are a kshatriya. Your body-mind is designed to function like a kshatriya. A kshatriya is basically a leader, a manager, a warrior. And if you try to become a renouncer, a mendicant, you won’t live long like that. That is not your nature. So, Krishna is telling you that your body is going to function in a particular way. If you think, “I am going to become a Brahman, I am going to become a teacher, a mendicant, or a sage,” well, that conception is an illusion. Your body is going to function in a particular way. All that you can do is determine the direction in which that body’s functioning goes.

As a kshatriya, you can be a virtuous kshatriya, or you can be a vicious kshatriya. According to your body, we can’t change our car. A car is what we have. We can’t get a car to move through a narrow space like a two-wheeler. We can’t get a car to fly like a plane. Once you press the buttons, the car is going to move. If you think, “I am driving,” well, if the car stops working, you can’t go anywhere. Krishna is telling Arjuna, “You have a particular kind of vehicle, and you can’t change the nature of the vehicle. But what you can do is determine the direction where the vehicle goes.” You can live virtuously, you can live dharmically, and elevate your consciousness, or you can live short-sightedly and impulsively.

If you don’t follow the principle of dharma, you won’t sustain it. If we try to get a car to go through a narrow space where only a two-wheeler can go, there will be constant difficulty. We’ll have to squeeze in, squeeze in, and eventually, we just won’t be able to move forward. If a kshatriya lives like a brahmana, they can’t do that. Sometimes, we only look at the privileges—people say that brahmanas were more respected, more honored, which is true. But at the same time, brahmanas had to follow many more rules to maintain their purity and sanctity. So in some ways, a brahmana’s life was very regulated, like moving through a very, very small space. So you can’t live like that.

Krishna, in that verse, is telling Arjuna, “Don’t think that you are the doer of your actions in the sense that you think, ‘I am a kshatriya and I’ll become a brahmana.’ No, your body is a particular way. It will impel you to act in a particular way. But you act in that way with the purpose of dharma in mind, with the direction of dharma in mind.” So, that’s the answer there.

Now, does bhakti change our destiny? Yes, Krishna can do anything. Your question is, are there any other ways to change our destiny apart from bhakti? But first, we have to understand what exactly we mean when we say destiny is fixed. Essentially, it is the quantity of good and bad that we have done in the past, and that is going to unfold in our life. So that quantity we can’t change. But does that mean that the whole unknown is something we can’t change at all? How it unfolds in our life is up to us. It’s not entirely determined by the past.

This idea of destiny being fixed shouldn’t be distorted to become lethargic or passive in our lives. For example, when we say the idea of destiny is fixed, that the quantity of suffering in our life is fixed, and the quantity of happiness is fixed— is it that simple? Any bad situation that we are in our life, we might say, “Oh, it’s destiny that this bad situation came into my life. I can’t do anything about it.” But you can certainly do something about it. You can make the bad situation worse. No matter how terrible a situation is, it never takes away our power to make that situation worse. We might be having a very terrible relationship with someone. Can we make it worse? Yes. Just for 15 minutes, say everything that is in your heart without any restraint on the tongue, and that relationship might collapse within minutes.

So, we can certainly make things worse. And if we can make things worse, we can make them better also. By responsibly acting in our present lives, we can create a better future for ourselves. Now, regarding lifespan being fixed—well, again, things are not that simple. The same Vedic tradition that talks about destiny also has a whole branch of knowledge called Ayurveda. The literal meaning of the word Ayurveda is the knowledge that enhances Ayu, that expands life. So, if our lifespan were fixed, the whole concept of Ayurveda, a whole branch of knowledge dedicated to expanding the lifespan, would be redundant. Is Ayurveda an anti-Vedic branch? No, it is integrally a Vedic branch.

So, if lifespan is fixed, how can it be increased? How can we have a whole branch of knowledge dedicated to expanding the lifespan? Of course, Ayu is not just the quantity of life; it is also the quality of life. But quantity is a part of it. So, things are not that simple.

Just as somebody can commit suicide and shorten their lifespan, or somebody can live in a healthy way. And we don’t know what our destiny is. We don’t know what our lifespan is. But we have the responsibility to choose those actions that have the maximum possibility of creating a bright future for ourselves.

Some people might say, “Okay, by your good choices, you are not changing your destiny; you’re only reordering the destiny.” Yeah, that’s fine. Reordering means, for example, if it’s stormy weather and somebody drives recklessly, they might meet with a terrible accident. But if they drive safely in the same stormy weather, they might not meet with an accident, or they might slip, but it’s only a minor accident. Now, what exactly was destined? What was not destined? It’s very difficult to know that. Even if we say that the accident is destined and you drove safely so you didn’t meet with an accident, maybe five years down the road, you will meet with an accident.

But sometimes, when a problem comes, matters a lot. Even if you can reorder some things, that matters. For example, when a whole country is shut down because of storms and we meet with an accident, the chance of getting medical relief and being rescued will be lesser. But if it’s a normal time and we meet with an accident, the chances of being rescued are much higher. In sports, such as cricket, every batsman sometimes gets unfair decisions—wrong decisions. They may be out and given not out, or they are not out and given out. Over the period of a career, these decisions may balance out. But when a player gets a wrong decision, it matters a lot. If the player’s position in the team is already shaky, or if the team is on the brink of winning, and this player alone is leading the team to win, and then the player gets a wrong decision, the consequence of this will be much more serious than if the team is in a good situation and the player’s position is stable. In this case, one wrong decision doesn’t matter as much.

So, even if we say that we can’t change destiny and we can only reorder it, reordering destiny is not a small thing. If we have three problems and then we get ten more problems, that’s much more difficult to deal with. Or if we have ten problems and then get one more problem, that’s much more difficult to deal with than if we have one problem and get one more problem. Rather than thinking that destiny is fixed and my life is like a rigged match, we should think that in every situation, we should try to act in the best way that we can. That way, we can create a better future for ourselves.

So, are others’ duties also a part of our destiny? I’m not sure what the question means. Is it that when others do their duty or don’t do their duty, is that a part of our destiny? Yes, we are surrounded by people. Some people are more responsible; some people are less responsible. Some people grow up with very caring parents. Some people grow up with parents who may not say it, but would rather have never had a child or are not really fit to be parents. Is that destiny? Yes, it’s definitely destiny. It’s tragic, but it is destiny.

Whether others around us are dutiful or not, if somebody is sick and they go to a doctor, and the doctor is negligent or irresponsible, and a simple case becomes more complicated— is that destiny? Yes, it’s destiny.

So, how is Daiva (divine will) not arbitrary? Well, it’s not arbitrary in the sense that it’s not unfairly, without any connection to our past actions, that some bad things are given to somebody and some good things to somebody else. If somebody is getting bad, it is simply a result of what they have done in the past. So, it’s not arbitrary in the sense that it’s not for no reason that good or bad things are happening to people. It is a reaction to the good and bad that they have done. Of course, the specifics of why something comes upon someone, or when something comes upon someone, may seem arbitrary from our perspective, but there is a higher plan. The ultimate purpose of karma, destiny, and this whole system is not retributive; it is restorative. It is meant to raise our consciousness to a higher level. Now, exactly how that restorative effect comes about is too complicated for us to understand.

Can bhakti sadhana make our life easier when we are going through difficult situations? We will talk elaborately in a future session about what bhakti does and how it interplays with destiny. But very succinctly, it can work at many different levels. Sometimes the external situation comes upon us, but it is not as severe as we might expect. Its severity can be significantly reduced. For example, when a devotee’s finger gets cut, maybe the neck was meant to be cut, but only a small reaction comes. That’s divine intervention—sometimes we are in danger, but the danger comes, and we are saved. For example, if somebody boards a flight and misses the flight, and that flight crashes, that’s another example of how destiny works.

So, the practice of bhakti can minimize the hurt that comes upon us. But another way bhakti can work is by strengthening us from within. When the weather conditions are very bad, if somebody starts driving recklessly, they make things worse. Similarly, when difficulties come, we may become resentful, disheartened, or apathetic. But if that happens, then we can’t make things better. Our practice of bhakti gives us strength from within. Yes, things are bad, but Krishna is still good. Even if there is a big storm, the stars still shine above the storm in the sky. Similarly, no matter how stormy our life is, above that, Krishna and His love still exist. By focusing on that, we get inner strength, and then we can become more resilient and function properly. That’s how we can deal with situations in a more respectful, proper, and effective way.

Yes, both through the externals and through the internals, our practice of bhakti sadhana can help us deal with adverse situations.

One last question. OK, there are a lot of questions here. Is Krishna looking to see how we respond when we get what we want or when we don’t get what we want? Yes, of course. Krishna is more interested in our consciousness than our particular actions and the results that we do. The whole process of spiritual growth is a process of growth in consciousness.

So, if we are grateful when we get something we want and thank Krishna, and we don’t just forget it and start enjoying, then that is positive. It helps us in our spiritual growth. If we are graceful when we don’t get what we want, and we say, “OK, this is your will. Please give me the strength to serve you in this situation also, and help me to move on in my life. Please guide me, what do you want me to do?” If we have that attitude, then Krishna will surely help us. Krishna will see and appreciate that.

So, how we respond to situations definitely contributes to the evolution of our consciousness, and Krishna is very concerned about that.

The remaining questions I will answer later in the WhatsApp group. If you don’t get an answer, please post the questions there, and we’ll answer them in due course. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

The post Gita key verses course 7 – What is destiny? Is everything destined? – Gita 2.47 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 6 – Do animals have souls? Are humans just evolved animals? – Gita 2.30
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So, today we are continuing our session on the Bhagavad Gita, and we are having the sixth session now.
In this session, till now, we have been discussing how the Bhagavad Gita’s thought flow progresses and how we are taking the concepts accordingly.
First, we talked about the concept of Dharma, then we talked about the concept of identity. After that, I talked about the results of understanding one’s identity—how the soul transmigrates, how we can see the departure of a loved one with a spiritual vision, and in the last section, we discussed how this philosophical understanding of the Bhagavad Gita relates to today’s conceptions of spirituality.
Today, I will talk about another question. Moving from spirituality specifically to the soul, today’s discussion will focus on two main questions:
Do animals have souls, and are humans just evolved animals?
We will discuss these questions sequentially, verse by verse, based on the Gita. This is Gita 2.30, where Krishna speaks about the soul being present in all living beings. He says that the embodied soul has two characteristics: one is nityam (eternal), and the other is avadhyo (indestructible). He says, “Therefore, Arjuna, for all living beings, do not lament their demise; it is inevitable at the physical level, but at the spiritual level, the soul will always continue to exist.”
So, broadly, we will discuss these two questions: Do animals have souls, and are humans just evolved animals? I will first discuss the conception of the soul (the first half), and in the second half, I will talk about humans and what distinguishes human beings.
Now, how can we know if animals have souls? One basic symptom of the soul is the presence of consciousness. Wherever the soul is, consciousness is present. Many materialistic or reductionistic attempts have been made to explain consciousness in physical terms, but none of them have been successful. Consciousness, if we consider it at a simple logical level, arises from something non-material. Matter is ultimately made up of atoms, molecules, and fundamental particles, and none of them have consciousness; a mere combination of them won’t produce consciousness.
So, consciousness must come from a non-material source—the soul. This is a reasonable inference. Wherever there is consciousness, we can infer there is a soul.
Now, how do we know if consciousness is present? Broadly speaking, we can see it through the presence of emotions. There are many aspects to consciousness, and emotions are one key aspect that is more easily perceivable. Consciousness also has intentionality: we observe something and, with conscious intention, decide to act. Consciousness also includes the capacity for higher-level abstract thinking—not just sequential thinking, which even computers and machines can do.
A symptom of the soul is the presence of consciousness, and animals also experience pain, joy, and sorrow. Perhaps the animals in which we can most clearly see this are those that are closest to us. For example, in Indian culture, it could be the cow; in American culture, it could be the dog. We can observe that these animals also have emotions.
To say that animals have consciousness is, therefore, a reasonable point to make. And if animals have consciousness, then it is also a reasonable conclusion that they have a soul.
There is a school of thought called solipsism, which claims that we cannot know if anyone else is conscious except ourselves. According to this view, other animals—and even other humans—could be like programmed machines or robots that are made to appear conscious.
At one level, this argument is absurd because we can sense and relate to people, and we can sense their emotions and consciousness. But from a rigid, scientific point of view, consciousness itself is not quantifiable. We can measure brain waves, but we cannot measure consciousness itself. Sometimes, when discussing abortion ethics, the question arises: when does the embryo become conscious? Strictly speaking, science cannot answer when an embryo becomes conscious, as there is no way to measure even the consciousness of the mother.
We do talk about a person being unconscious at times, and when we say they are unconscious, what we essentially mean is that they are not responding to us or to physical stimuli, and their brain waves are in a particular pattern. But these are essentially the results of consciousness.

So, is there any objective parameter by which we can infer the presence or absence of consciousness?
We could have another set of parameters, which would refer to looking at what happens to the body when consciousness is present. Essentially, we see that the body undergoes certain changes whenever consciousness is present, and the normal physical structure, when contrasted with a body containing a living being, shows some essential fundamental differences in how the body functions.
So, normal matter undergoes primarily three changes, whereas matter that is “ensouled” undergoes six changes.
I’m sharing the screen now so you can see this.
Matter without consciousness basically goes through three phases: creation, deterioration, and destruction. For example, if we build a house, it is created, but if it is not taken care of, it deteriorates faster; even if it is maintained, it will still eventually deteriorate and be destroyed. However, matter with consciousness exhibits three more changes.
After birth, there is growth. No matter how sophisticated a robot is, it doesn’t undergo growth. Then, in addition to growth, there is maintenance. Maintenance can be due to homeostasis or processes like clotting. If, for example, the arm of a chair breaks, it just stays cracked, but if our skin is cut, it heals itself over time; clotting happens immediately, and healing occurs gradually. So, whenever the soul is present in a body, that body has the tendency to maintain itself. The soul, as we discussed earlier, is eternal, and wherever it stays, it strives to maintain and continue existing in that body. So, maintenance is another characteristic.
One way the soul tries to continue its eternality is through reproduction. If I can’t live on, at least my progeny can. Reproduction is something that no matter how sophisticated matter is, it cannot achieve. Computers, for example, can process information much faster than humans, but we don’t have computers that reproduce themselves.
The remaining two changes are similar: there is birth, which is similar to creation; aging, which is similar to deterioration; and death, which is similar to destruction at a physical level.
So, we can consider that consciousness, and thus the soul, is present wherever these three additional changes are happening. These changes occur in animals, plants, and even microbes, and therefore we can reasonably conclude that there is a soul present in animals as well.
Now, this may raise the question: Why would the idea that souls are present only in humans come up at all? If consciousness is the symptom, then animals have consciousness.
This notion, as I said, comes from the fact that certain terms are used by all theistic traditions or spiritual traditions. For example, the word soul might be used, and the word God might also be used. However, the specific conception associated with these words may differ. The term might be the same, but the concept might vary.
In the Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—there are many differences within them, but there are also overarching similarities. One similarity is with respect to the conception of the soul.
In these traditions, especially in Christianity, the idea is largely what we can call anthropocentric. Anthropos means human, and centric means centered around. So, in Christianity, to some extent, humans are placed at the center of creation. For instance, Jesus descends to deliver humanity, and God made humans, feeling that creation was complete. Humans are considered the summit of creation.
Within this worldview, the belief is that humans alone are special and can be delivered.
I talked about how the same term may have different conceptions. The difference between humans and animals in the understanding of the Bhagavad Gita is seen as a difference in degree, not in category. In Christianity, however, especially from where the idea of the soul comes up, the belief is that the difference between humans and animals is in category, not in degree. According to this view, animals don’t have souls, and only humans have souls that can attain eternal life after being delivered.
Christianity is a very large religion with many different theological conceptions. Some Christians may differentiate between the terms spirit and soul, and some may say that animals have spirits but not souls.
When Srila Prabhupada wrote his commentary on the Bhagavad Gita, he wanted to be unambiguous and thus used the term spirit soul—the two are not separate. So, according to his understanding, animals do have souls, though they may not have the kind of soul that humans possess, the kind of soul that can attain eternal life.

So, why would they think like this?
At one level, there is a significant difference between humans and animals. I will elaborate on the difference between degree and category, but first, let’s try to understand different conceptions of the soul.

Broadly speaking, the Christian conception is that human souls are created at birth and then live forever in heaven or hell. The idea is that, with respect to the soul’s existence, there are two terms: reincarnation, which refers to the soul coming back in another body, and pre-existence, which refers to the past lives of the soul. Reincarnation applies to future lives, while pre-existence pertains to past lives. This entire process is called transmigration.

Now, I’m referring to mainstream Christianity; there may be specific Christian sub-sects with different beliefs, but broadly, their idea is that when a man and a woman unite, a soul is created. After creation, the soul is eternal, and this is why their definition of eternity is more like semi-infinity. Eternity, in their view, doesn’t mean no beginning and no end, as the Bhagavad Gita says. The Gita says, “There is no birth and no death, no beginning and no end.” But the Christian idea of eternity is that there is a beginning, but no end. So, from now onward to infinity, to eternity, to forever — it’s semi-infinity.

They also have the idea that the soul is inseparable from the body, which is connected to the concept of resurrection. Many of Jesus’ followers are said to have seen him in the same body after his crucifixion, which is the idea of resurrection. Resurrection means coming back in the same body, while reincarnation means coming back in a different body.

Christian belief is that the soul will be resurrected in the same body. Of course, they acknowledge that the body will be destroyed, even if carefully preserved in a coffin. But they believe that, by God’s arrangement, the same body will be reunited and reconstructed. So, although the terms may seem similar, the Christian view holds that the soul is created and eternal thereafter, and the soul and body are inseparable in some sense.

The point here is not to delve into specific Christian theology but to understand the origin of the idea that animals don’t have souls.

Now, let’s examine the balance between two extremes in the understanding of the soul, as per the Bhagavad Gita. Think of a pendulum, which swings between two extremes. One extreme is the Christian conception, which holds that only humans have souls, and we are entirely different from animals. The other extreme is the modern scientific or evolutionary view, which states that no living beings have souls — we are just evolved animals, mere physical creatures.

Between these extremes — that only humans have souls and that no one has souls — the Gita offers a balanced understanding. The Christian view is that humans are special because they alone have souls, while the evolutionary view claims there is nothing special about humans; we are just more evolved animals.

The Gita’s perspective is that humans are special, not because we have souls, but because our souls are more evolved than those in animals. There is a distinction between the idea that humans have souls and the understanding that living beings are souls. Although, for convention’s sake, we sometimes say we “have” souls — for example, “Put your heart and soul into your service” — this is a non-literal usage of the word soul. Similarly, when we say “the soul of America was shattered when the twin towers fell,” it is understood to mean the spirit of America.

When the Bhagavad Gita speaks literally, it refers to the soul as a distinct being, different from the body. So, technically, we don’t say we have souls; we say we are souls and we have bodies. This is important because, although non-literal usage can be understood in context, the literal use of the word refers to the soul as the true self.

Thus, the specialty of human beings is not a matter of category — it’s not that we have souls and others don’t — but a matter of degree: the souls in humans are more evolved than those in animals.

Now we move on to the second question: Are humans just evolved animals?
The idea that humans are different from animals has struck thinkers throughout history. What exactly differentiates humans from animals? From a Western intellectual perspective, Aristotle proposed that humans alone have reasoning ability, that humans consciously seek knowledge and desire to increase understanding, and that this distinguishes us from animals. Descartes went further, saying that humans not only seek knowledge but also have reasoning faculties to understand things rationally. Immanuel Kant further argued that we have free will and a moral sense; we can distinguish right from wrong and act accordingly, whereas animals merely follow their instincts.

These observations are true. We do seek knowledge, we do rationally understand things, and we do have a moral sense. A tiger, for example, sees a deer and, if hungry, pounces on it. The tiger does not think about the ethics of eating meat or whether it should control its impulses, such as fasting on Ekadashi. Animals lack this moral sense and free will, which allows us to control our impulses.

This brings us to the question: Are humans just evolved animals? Let’s now look at the broad Vedic conception of this difference, with the Gita as part of the Vedic knowledge.

A well-known verse from the Mahabharata, which appears in other Indian texts as well, states:
Ahara Nidra Bhai Maithunamcha Samanya Meetat Pashubhya Naranam
Dharmohi Tesham Adhiko Vishesho Dharmena Hina Pashubhi Samaanaha.

This verse describes four basic activities — eating, sleeping, mating, and defending — that all living beings engage in. These are biological activities that all humans, like animals, must do. However, the verse continues:
Dharmohi Tesham Adhiko Vishesho — it is Dharma (righteousness) that distinguishes humans from animals.
Dharmena Hina Pashubhi Samaanaha — without Dharma, humans are just like animals.

So what exactly is Dharma? It’s often translated as “religion,” but is it just religiosity or religious rituals? Would it mean that humans can perform religious rituals that animals cannot? If so, could a chimpanzee or a robot, trained to move an aarti plate, perform a religious activity? This would challenge the idea that religiosity is what differentiates humans from animals.

To understand Dharma, we must go to its etymological root. The word Dharma comes from Dhris, which means “to sustain.” Dharma is that which sustains our existence — that which enables us to live in harmony with the nature and purpose of our existence. It is what allows us to live harmoniously with our true nature and purpose.

For example, if we drive on the wrong side of the road, our existence will be unsustainable. Dharma, in its foundational sense, is what sustains us and helps us align with our higher purpose.

Either the cops will pull us over, or some other vehicle will hit us.
If we have to sustain ourselves while driving, we must drive properly.
We need to drive on the right side of the road, and roads are meant for driving.
If someone starts performing a dance on the road, unless they have special permission, they will not be able to sustain it.
They will be pulled off the road, or they will be knocked down.
So when we are on the road, it is meant for a particular purpose, and we need to function in harmony with the nature and purpose of the road.

Similarly, when we live in the cosmos, we must live in harmony with our nature and purpose.
That activity sustains our existence.
That is Dharma.

Now, Dharma is what sustains our existence. It involves metaphysical inquiry — first to understand the nature of life, the nature of our existence, and why we are living, followed by purposeful religious activity. I’ll explain what this means.

Dharma can refer to religious activity, but it is not just ritualism. It is done to raise one’s consciousness.
Let’s examine metaphysical inquiry.

To differentiate between humans and animals, this is the Vedic or Dharmic understanding, and I previously discussed the contemporary or Western understanding. Let’s see if these two can be reconciled.

If we observe animals, they use their intelligence to fulfill their bodily drives, and humans do the same.
We also think about where we can find good food, where we can sleep peacefully, how we can find the best mate, etc.
But then, we also ask the question: Why should we fulfill our bodily drives? Why live at all?
This “why” question is the womb of spiritual growth. Based on this “why” question, we have the capacity to delay physical gratification for higher realization.

This capacity to delay gratification for higher understanding is essential for progress in any area of life.
When Newton saw the apple fall, some say it fell in front of him, others say it fell on him, but either way, when it fell, he could have just grabbed the apple and eaten it. Instead, he asked, “What made this apple fall?”

This ability to delay gratification for greater understanding — for a deeper comprehension — is critical in all areas where humans differ from animals.

There are many other ways humans differ. Some thinkers claim that language differentiates us from animals.
We have a sophisticated system of communication using language. Although we use language commonly, it is very complex and abstract. Certain sounds are associated with meanings, which are in turn connected to visual marks. It’s a very complicated system.
The evolution of language has stymied thinkers, even reductionist scientists, for decades.

Language is another example of something that differentiates humans from animals. But language also demonstrates something else:
Learning a language requires the capacity to delay gratification for something higher.
A baby could just be eating food and playing, but to learn a language, the baby must put in effort. Parents and teachers also invest significant effort to teach the language.
When language is learned, a whole new universe opens up. This ability to delay gratification is defining for human beings.

We will discuss this topic further in the third chapter when we explore the concept of yajna (sacrifice).
But the key idea is that Dharma involves metaphysical inquiry followed by religious activity.
The underlying universal principle is that we can delay some pleasures in the present to secure a better future.
That better future could be through acquiring scientific knowledge, learning a language for communication, or creating art that, after significant effort, can bring pleasure to many.
But underlying it all is the impulse control required to achieve these goals. The critical question is: Why do we have this capacity?

That brings us to something deeper: As I said earlier, the “why” question is the womb of spiritual growth.

The soul is always attached to the body in any species. I previously mentioned that the soul in the human body has the most evolved consciousness.
What does it mean to have evolved consciousness? Is this just an anthropocentric statement, asserting that humans are better than animals simply because we are humans?
No, it’s not an anthropocentric view. It’s an obvious reality that, physically, we humans stand nowhere near animals.
There are lions, tigers, rhinos, and elephants that are much bigger than us.
In terms of speed, many animals are faster than us.
When it comes to weapons, our nails and teeth are barely functional, while many animals, like birds and cats, have sharper claws.

Physically, we are puny and powerless compared to many species, yet we rule the Earth now.
So clearly, there is something that differentiates humans from animals. It’s not just an egocentric idea of human superiority.

So, when we say that humans have more evolved consciousness, what does it mean in terms of understanding the soul?
Let’s explore various characteristics or symptoms that indicate our consciousness is more evolved. We can look at human culture — language, art, science — which testifies to our evolved consciousness.
We also observe that humans rule the Earth, despite being physically inferior, which further testifies to the evolution of our consciousness.
But what does this mean philosophically?

Consider this: The soul is attached to the body. Normally, whenever the soul enters a particular body, it becomes attached to that body and identifies with it.
This identification is present in all species. The soul functions as though it is the body.
This identification leads the soul to think that gratifying the body’s impulses is the way to pleasure.

I repeat this point because it is very important: Not only when we identify with the body — but how do we know if we’re identifying with the body or not? The key is, do we consider the body’s definitions of pleasure as our definitions of pleasure?

For example, if we consider eating, sleeping, mating, and defending as sources of pleasure, then we are identifying with the body. Even if we can philosophically explain that we are not the body, but the soul, the soul’s conception of happiness becomes equated with the gratification of the body’s drives.

However, there is a key difference: Although the soul is tied to the body, like in all species, the soul wants more pleasure than what the body can provide. This is a key difference between humans and animals. Animals and all living beings eat food, but animals are satisfied with whatever food is provided by nature. A cow, for millennia, generation after generation, will eat the same grass.

But humans want better food than what nature provides. That’s why we don’t just take what’s in nature — we cook it. And not only do we cook, we have hundreds of cuisines across the world, each with hundreds of items and delicacies.

The point here is that although humans identify with the body’s gratification as our source of pleasure, we want more than what the body provides. And that’s why we try to increase bodily gratification.

Now, this sometimes has unfortunate consequences. Generally, animals don’t suffer from obesity and the host of diseases that come with it, because they eat only when they are hungry. But we humans eat even when we are not hungry.

Animals, when the mating season arrives, the urge within them compels them to mate. But humans mate even when we don’t have the urge to reproduce. In fact, much of modern civilization and social culture separates physical union from reproduction. There is even a whole branch of science dedicated to separating the two.

The point is that we want more pleasure than the body can provide. We seek this by eating more than the body needs. We seek it by mating more than the body’s imperative. For humans, mating is not just a physical drive; it becomes a constant psychological obsession.

So, our longing for more pleasure than the body can produce or provide — this also differentiates humans from animals. It is a symptom that our consciousness is more evolved.

When we seek more pleasure, we begin to think, “How will I get this more pleasure?” One way, of course, is through scientific and technological advancement, where we try to create better arrangements for eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. But another way could be by distancing ourselves from the body and realizing our soul.

The evolved consciousness we have is provided to us so that we can inquire about spirituality and grow spiritually.

I mentioned briefly earlier the Genesis account, which is the first book of the Bible in the Old Testament, about how God created all living beings and then created humans, after which He was satisfied, saying that creation was complete. There is a similar account in the 11th canto of the Srimad Bhagavatam, but with a significant twist.

It is said that the Supreme Being created all living beings and then finally created human beings. The Bhagavatam says human beings had the capacity for philosophical inquiry and for knowing the purpose of life. After creating humans, the creator was satisfied.

So, the purpose of existence is to inquire about the purpose of existence — first to inquire, and then later to fulfill that purpose. Only humans have the capacity to inquire about the purpose of existence, and this is what differentiates us from animals.

Now I’ll discuss one more concept and then conclude this discussion.

What I’m trying to do now is answer the question: Are humans just evolved animals? To do this, I’ll integrate both the Western and contemporary understanding of the difference between humans and animals, as well as the Vedic and Gita understanding.

To explain this difference, I use an acronym, SCID, which can help us understand both contemporary terms and also guide our spiritual growth.

There are four differentiations:

  1. Self-awareness
  2. Conscience
  3. Imagination
  4. Determination

Let me explain these.

  1. Self-awareness: This means the question, “What am I doing? What am I feeling?” We can become aware of our urges. Among all living beings, we have the capacity to abstract ourselves from our body, look at ourselves, and reflect on our actions and emotions. For example, I could be sitting here, and I could visualize myself from above, asking, “What is this person doing?” We can introspect about our feelings, actions, intentions, and thoughts.
  2. Conscience: From self-awareness comes conscience. Conscience means being aware of right and wrong, but also feeling the emotional response to our actions. For example, if we do something wrong, we might feel guilty or regretful. Conscience is not just about knowing what’s right or wrong, but also the emotional reaction to it.
  3. Imagination: Imagination is the ability to visualize alternatives. For instance, I might realize that I acted poorly, and then imagine a better way to act in the future.
  4. Determination: This is the ability to act on what we visualize. It’s not just willpower, but the capacity to take the steps necessary to change or achieve our goals.

Determination is the ability to choose to act in a particular way. As I mentioned earlier, animals can’t consciously restrain their bodily urges. While they might fast due to a lack of food or water, they don’t make a conscious decision to restrain their urges for a higher purpose. But humans have the ability to do that.

Self-awareness is understanding our emotions, while conscience is a sense of right and wrong. Animals don’t usually have this sense — they simply act according to their bodily urges. They live instinctively and follow their drives without a moral evaluation of their actions.

Imagination is a huge differentiator between humans and animals. Even if something doesn’t exist, we can visualize it. For example, we can look at a pile of concrete and imagine, “I want to build a house like this.” Animals, like birds, may create nests, but they typically create the same type of nest generation after generation. While their nests might be impressive, they lack the variation and creativity that humans exhibit in their art, music, and innovations — all products of our imagination.

Then there’s determination. We humans can commit to something, set aside our urges, and act on a higher purpose. This is where the concept of Dharma comes in. Dharma is not just about going to a temple or performing religious rituals; it’s about philosophical inquiry and purposeful religious activity. We understand that there is a difference between humans and animals, and we can analyze this difference in terms of self-awareness, conscience, imagination, and determination.

For spiritual life, we must first develop self-awareness. What kind of urges and desires do we have? Only when we become self-aware can we recognize our impure desires. We also have a sense of conscience — the inner feeling that tells us what’s right and wrong. Our spiritual growth lies in sharpening this conscience, so that we can say, “I shouldn’t do this, I should do that.”

Imagination plays a crucial role in spirituality. Our imagination is sparked by hearing spiritual texts and learning about the spiritual experiences of great saints. These experiences reveal joys far greater than what the body can provide. This in turn leads to determination — the resolve to withhold certain physical pleasures in pursuit of spiritual fulfillment, ultimately leading us to spiritual realization. That’s how we grow spiritually.

To summarize what I spoke about today: I addressed the question of whether humans are simply evolved animals and whether animals have souls. We discussed how we can know if someone has a soul or not by two key characteristics: the presence of consciousness (which can be seen through emotions) and the difference between matter with and without consciousness. Animals do have souls, and we also discussed why some believe that animals do not. This belief stems from the Christian tradition, which asserts that only humans have souls that can attain eternal life.

In contrast, the Bhagavad Gita teaches that there is something special about humans, but the difference is not in category, but in degree. The human soul is more evolved. This evolution is reflected in our ability to gain knowledge, our reasoning faculties, our moral sense, and our capacity for willpower and determination.

The Mahabharata explains that Dharma is the capacity for philosophical inquiry followed by purposeful religious activity. Humans, unlike animals, seek more pleasure than the body can provide, which drives us to create art, science, language, and ultimately, to grow spiritually. We yearn for a greater kind of pleasure, which leads to spiritual growth.

By integrating the Dharmic perspective with the contemporary understanding, we can see that self-awareness, conscience, imagination, and determination are the key traits that differentiate humans from animals. These traits can be utilized systematically for our spiritual growth.

Thank you for your attention. Let’s now address any questions you may have.

Is it simply because of upbringing? Sometimes, the same parents may have one child who is very spiritual and another who is very materialistic. This can even happen with twins, even identical twins. While the material factors — like upbringing and genes — are the same, they can be radically different. Why is that?

One possible explanation is that the soul is completely unaffected by material factors, and it’s the mind that influences our behavior. As we discussed earlier, the soul, mind, and body are connected. It’s true that the impressions in the mind are carried over from one life to the next. But when we talk about the soul functioning in the material world, we are considering the soul and mind as a combined unit. The soul itself isn’t perceivable to us, and if we were to claim the soul is unaffected by anything material, we would also be saying it is inaccessible and unobservable.

So, what we are really trying to understand is whether there’s something non-physical that differentiates various species. While the physical bodies of animals and humans are different, their non-physical components — the soul and the mind — also differ. For all practical purposes, the soul and mind are tightly intertwined. The way a soul lives in a particular body shapes the impressions it carries. In this sense, a more evolved soul means the impressions surrounding it in the subtle body are more receptive, making it a better channel for spiritual inquiry.

Now, you might ask, “Do cats and dogs eat only out of instinct, or do they eat for pleasure?” Again, this isn’t a simple black-and-white matter. Animals do eat beyond their basic instinct, and they can even become obese. But animals don’t create cuisines or make complex arrangements for food. However, when animals are in human environments, they may adopt behaviors like overeating or even mimic human activities — such as smoking — if they associate with humans who engage in such habits.

The key point is that humans have a higher intelligence, which leads us to pursue pleasure beyond the instinctual needs for food or reproduction. We make complex arrangements for eating because the pleasure derived from these biological instincts is not enough for us. Animals, on the other hand, only eat as much as is necessary to sustain themselves and are guided by their instincts.

Regarding the question, “Can we understand animals’ languages? How do we know they don’t make conscious decisions?” It’s important to distinguish between perspectives. Are we analyzing this from a contemporary rational perspective, or are we approaching it from a Vedic perspective?

In a contemporary rational context, animals do not have languages like humans. While animals can produce sophisticated guttural sounds, these are not considered languages in the human sense. For example, a bird may chirp in different ways to convey messages, but language, as we understand it, involves three components: verbal sounds that convey abstract concepts, the associated meanings of these sounds, and a system of writing or physical depiction. Animals do not possess this system.

Ethologists, who study animals in their natural habitats, have observed that while animals can communicate in complex ways, they do not engage in abstract conceptualization or written language. They communicate primarily through sounds and gestures, which are tied to their immediate environment and instincts.

Animals have been studied for centuries, and there is no evidence that they possess anywhere near the sophisticated communication system that humans call language. This isn’t just about whether animals have consciousness or whether they are thinking deeply and making decisions — that’s a different matter entirely. How could we even know? The only thing we can rely on is evidence.

From the perspective of tradition, we sometimes encounter stories of talking animals, such as in the Ramayana, where monkeys talk. However, these aren’t ordinary monkeys; they are Vanaras. In the cosmic hierarchy, Vanaras are considered to be, in some ways, superior to humans, though not always. These aren’t simply monkeys as we know them; they belong to a different species.

While animals certainly have systems of communication, they lack the complex systems that characterize human language. The level of thinking animals are capable of is inferred from their actions, and as far as we observe, they do not engage in activities that display advanced consciousness, which is a characteristic of humans.

Is there a soul present in everything? The Padma Purana mentions that the soul wanders through various species, rising from aquatic life forms to more evolved species. It doesn’t suggest that stones have souls, although there may be exceptions where certain stones could contain souls. The concept of consciousness being present in all things is part of a philosophical theory called panpsychism, which proposes that consciousness exists in all of existence. While we accept that the super-soul (God) is present everywhere, we cannot say for certain that individual consciousness is present in plants, stones, or other inanimate objects. Generally, stones don’t exhibit the biological processes like reproduction, which would indicate the presence of a soul.

What about the miracles of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, where animals are said to have danced, spoken, and sung holy names? While animals did sing the holy names, whether they actually spoke is questionable. When God is present, miracles occur. Krishna lifting the Govardhan Hill is a miraculous event, but that doesn’t mean every hill can be lifted by anyone. These are exceptional cases, not the norm. In general, animals have lower levels of consciousness, while humans have more evolved consciousness.

Does this mean that animals have consciousness? The fact that oysters, for example, don’t have a higher brain doesn’t mean they lack consciousness entirely. The soul’s consciousness is expressed according to the development of the body. If the body isn’t developed in a certain way, the consciousness won’t be either. So, while we could theoretically analyze the symptoms of consciousness in different bodies, we are speaking of a general principle — that consciousness is present where there is appropriate development.

What about animals participating in chanting, as Srila Prabhupada said? It’s possible for animals to take part in chanting, but the key question is whether they are doing it intentionally. Anyone can chant, but that doesn’t mean they are doing so with conscious choice or free will. Animals may engage in activities but may not be delaying gratification or acting from a higher level of awareness.

Are monkeys and apes lower-level human beings? Yes, apes and monkeys are biologically quite similar to humans, though their brains are less sophisticated. There are cases where the line between species may be difficult to draw, especially when there are biological similarities. In those border cases, careful analysis is needed to determine the exact distinction between species.

Is learning a sign of growth? And what about robots that learn? Learning is a sign of growth, but robots’ learning is different from human learning. Robots may be able to learn, but they don’t have the awareness to understand that they are learning. They are simply following programming and algorithms. We can discuss the distinction between AI and spiritual growth in a future session when we delve deeper into science and spirituality. For now, robots may appear sophisticated, but in essence, they are performing mechanical tasks — processing numbers, like an abacus used in the past for calculations.

Imagine we create an abacus as large as a palace, with numerous knobs, and have several people operating it at incredibly fast speeds. Even then, we wouldn’t say that the abacus has become conscious. It’s simply a physical structure with beads being moved around. Similarly, no matter how sophisticated a computer becomes, at its core, it’s still just performing number crunching.

There are three key differences between normal number crunching and what a computer does:

  1. The speed — computers perform operations at incredible speeds.
  2. The methodology — computations are done according to specific codes and patterns, but even those codes are ultimately just numbers.
  3. The ability to simulate human actions — computers can simulate certain behaviors or actions, but simulation is not the same as the original action. There’s a categorical difference between them.

In the same way, animals may engage in activities that mimic human actions, but they don’t experience anything in the way humans do. This illustrates how learning in machines is fundamentally different from learning in humans.

For example, Garry Kasparov, the chess champion, was defeated by the computer Deep Blue in a famous chess match. Kasparov was devastated by the loss, but the computer itself didn’t understand that it had won. It simply functioned according to its programming. The creators of Deep Blue were thrilled with the result, but the computer had no emotion or awareness of its success. It played without knowing it was playing and learned without understanding that it was learning.

This highlights the categorical difference between the consciousness of conscious beings and the simulations of some of those conscious activities by machines.

Thank you very much. Are there any remaining questions? We will answer them in an audio podcast later. You can also post questions here or in our WhatsApp group, and we’ll try to answer them soon. Thank you again. Hare Krishna.

The post Gita key verses course 6 – Do animals have souls? Are humans just evolved animals? – Gita 2.30 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 5 – What is Spirituality? Is it a state of mind? – Gita 02.29
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna, so today we continue our discussion on the Bhagavad Gita. Today I’ll be discussing the topic of how we can understand the nature of spirituality. I’ll be sharing a PowerPoint now, and if at any time the PowerPoint is not visible while I’m speaking, please let me know through a message, and I will change it immediately. Today, I’ll be speaking on 2.29 of the Bhagavad Gita. We’ll be discussing these three questions: What is spirituality? Is it a state of mind? And why are so few people spiritually minded? What I’ll be discussing primarily is clarifying our conceptions of spirituality. We are moving more or less sequentially in terms of the Bhagavad Gita.

While going through sequentially, selecting the key verses, we are also trying to develop the concepts that are taught in the Bhagavad Gita. In the first session, we discussed what is the right thing to do. That is the defining, driving question of the Bhagavad Gita. The second session was about how the question of activity rests on the question of identity. I need to understand who I am, by which we’ll be able to move forward and decide what to do. Then I discussed the nature of the soul in transmigration and reincarnation, the scientific rationale for that, and what determines our next life. In the last session, I discussed how this applies in terms of the departure of a loved one and how we deal with grief. So today, we will talk about moving forward—how, once we decide, “Okay, there’s a soul and there is a spiritual side of life,” we can proceed. So today, also, in the world, there’s a lot that goes on in the name of spirituality. What exactly is spirituality based on logic, as well as the Bhagavad Gita?

The verse we’ll be discussing today is 2.29: “Ashcharyam, ashrayam, Anya, Isha, Chaitanyam.” Some people see the soul as astonishing, amazing. Others speak about it as amazing, and still others hear about it as amazing but still don’t understand it. This means that different people perceive the soul differently because some consider the idea of the soul illuminating, while others consider it befuddling. So, we won’t go into the specific, broad aspects of the four categories. The four categories basically talk about people with different levels of spiritual orientation. Those who have directly realized and are perceiving the soul with spiritual vision find it marvelous—they find it amazing. Then there are others who have understood it and who are speaking about it to gain greater awareness and share that awareness with others.

We look at how the soul is seen: the soul is awareness spread, the soul is understood, and the soul is not understood. All of this is amazing because the relationship people have with their own spiritual side varies from person to person. Let’s go back to the slide here, and we look at the word “spirituality” as it is used today. Based on the Bhagavad Gita, we can say that it can have three distinct meanings: one, it is a state of mind; two, it is a level of reality; and three, it is a process for attaining the state of mind and the level of reality.

Now, let’s look at this. The first meaning of spirituality is as a state of mind. Some people feel that if they go to a particular place, it makes them feel calm, joyful, self-accepting, and grateful. All this, they consider spiritual. So, anything that makes them feel this way, they call it spiritual. Now, it can be spiritual, but it is not automatically spiritual. I was talking about spirituality as a state of mind. Most people who practice or consider themselves spiritual, or who explore spirituality, are basically looking for this state of mind. Nowadays, we have had enormous technological progress, which has brought about a lot of physical comforts in the world outside. But somehow, there is still a lot of psychological discomfort. People are disturbed and distressed and need some relief. Anything that helps them feel calm and composed, they call spiritual, and they try in various ways to achieve that calmness of mind.

Well, if I’ve received a message that you can’t hear, I’m not sure whether others can. Okay, thank you. Now, why is it that this idea of spirituality has become a little confusing? What do we mean by spiritual? I would like to explain based on a diagram. So here, I hope this figure is visible to everyone. The Bhagavad Gita explains that there are three levels of reality: the physical, the mental, and the spiritual—so the body, the mind, and the soul. Among these, if we consider the Bhagavata, it holds that both the physical and the mental are actually material. The body is like the hardware, and the mind is like the software. The soul is the user. So basically, the soul, or the spiritual level of reality, is different from the mind. The mind is subtle and cannot be easily perceived, and that’s why it’s often considered to be something higher.

So here, if we consider the physical, mental, and spiritual, in a non-physical realm, beyond the physical level, there are two levels: the mental and the spiritual. For most people, the normal comforts of life address the physical level of reality, and anything that does not address the physical level of reality is considered spiritual. This is how the mental and the spiritual get conflated together. The mental and the spiritual are both considered more or less spiritual because both are non-perceivable by physical means. And because they are non-perceivable by physical means, we think, “Okay, whatever is higher, whatever is unknown, whatever is non-perceivable, that must be spiritual.” So, essentially, the mental and the spiritual are conflated together and considered to be spiritual. That’s why, when people talk about spirituality as a state of mind, they are actually not being spiritual—they are being mental.

Now, if we go to a quiet place in nature, and we feel calm, composed, and at ease with ourselves, more at peace with ourselves, that’s good, but at the same time, that is not necessarily spiritual. It could be, but it depends on what we are thinking about and what we are not thinking about. So, to go back to the slide, basically, I’ve talked about three things now. What is spirituality as a state of mind? Spirituality is a level of reality. Spirituality is the level of reality, meaning there is a material level and there is a spiritual level. Krishna has talked about this earlier in the Bhagavad Gita in 2.16, “Na sato vidyate bhavo, na bhavo vidyate satah.” He says that the material has no endurance, but the spiritual has no change. And this is further elaborated in 2.25, where those who have seen reality to its end understand these two categories—material and spiritual—and they are the seers of truth. So, there is a material level of reality and a spiritual level of reality.

We could say that if you consider a mountain, the bottom of the mountain represents material consciousness, and the top of the mountain represents spiritual consciousness. If we move from the material level to the spiritual level, whatever enables us to rise from material consciousness to spiritual consciousness is called spirituality. So, spirituality essentially has three distinct meanings: One, it is a state of mind; two, it is a level of reality; and three, it is a process for rising to a higher level of consciousness.

The Bhagavad Gita is very clear that the spiritual is another level of reality and that the soul is a concrete entity. The soul is not physical, but that doesn’t mean it is abstract. The soul is a concrete thing; it’s not a physical thing. It is something present in the region of the heart, and from there, the soul radiates out consciousness. The soul’s consciousness comes out through the mind to the body and to the outer world. At the physical level, there are many objects that agitate the consciousness. They may agitate us because they threaten us, or they may agitate us because they tempt us. Either way, when they agitate us, it makes us peaceless and restless, and we need some relief from this agitation.

Although modern society and its progress have made the physical level more comfortable in terms of providing the basic needs of life today (such as drinking water or reasonably comfortable temperatures), the physical level also brings more agitation. It is through technology that we get news of distress all over the world. Through technology, we are exposed to temptations from all over the world. This is not to blame technology; it’s simply an analysis of the consciousness of what is happening today. When it comes to the physical level, our consciousness gets agitated, and it needs some relief.

When anybody can elevate their consciousness to the level of the mind and calm it down, those people are considered to be spiritual. Now, that is fine. We all want peace of mind, but there are different ways of achieving this peace of mind. When we reduce spirituality to exploring only the mental level, essentially, what are we doing? We are still caught at the material level of consciousness. Krishna says that rising to genuine spirituality is very rare because we have material attachments. “Manushyanam sahasreshu” (Bhagavad Gita 7.3) says that thousands of people endeavor to know the spiritual reality, but very few can perceive anything beyond the material.

So now, we consider that the non-physical level has two components: the mental and the spiritual. Most of what goes on in the name of spirituality is like a painkiller—it pacifies us. Whereas when we address the spiritual level, when we practice processes that raise our consciousness to the spiritual level, that is like curative medicine. It’s not just a painkiller or an analgesic; it’s antiseptic, and it purifies us.

Let me talk a little more about these two differences: pacification and purification. Pacification means that when there is some kind of agitation within us—whether it’s anger, envy, or anxiety—we are in an uncomfortable situation. Gradually, that agitating emotion subsides, and we feel peaceful. That’s pacification. However, purification means that it’s not just about how we feel, but about what makes us feel the way we feel. We may say that the world is what makes us feel a certain way. If people speak harshly to us, we get angry, or if we see a tempting object, we start developing a craving for it.

But it’s not that simple. We consider that. Say there are two people, one of whom lives here and works here, and they pass by a road to go to work. On the road, there’s a bar. Now, one of them is a regular alcoholic, and the other is a TITO teller who’s never drunk alcohol. So, now, the alcoholic person, when they pass by, immediately the desire arises: “Oh, I want to drink. I want to drink. I want to drink.” For the other person, there is no desire. So now, the agitation hasn’t come just because there’s a bar outside. The agitation has come because there are impressions inside, because of the repeated choices of that person in the past. That desire, the craving for alcohol, is already present, and then it pops up.

So, pacification means the desire is not manifest. The cause of agitation is no longer there, and that’s why the agitation is not there—the external cause. But as soon as the external cause comes up, the agitation returns. So pacification simply means that presently the agitating emotions are not there. Purification means that the inner impurities, the inner impressions that make us vulnerable to being agitated, are removed. Much of what goes on in the name of spirituality is pacification of the mind, and it is helpful in its own way. When the mind is agitated, if we can calm it down, then that can help us function better. But that alone is not all that we need or seek, because the situations around us change. If our emotions depend on our situations—usually they do—then we will always be at the mercy of our situations. We will live very vulnerable lives, tossed about like tiny twigs in a stormy ocean. Every wave that comes will agitate us.

So, there are many agitative forces in the world today, which is why our minds are agitated. But the solution is not just trying to change what we perceive and calm ourselves down. Most of what goes on in the name of spirituality changes the object of perception. For example, some people might go to a natural retreat place and feel peaceful. Some others might just close their eyes and try to visualize a nice, natural scene. Some people offer guided meditations where individuals are told to imagine a particular place. Actually, more than 25 years ago, before I was introduced to the Bhagavad Gita and bhakti practices, I was also exploring spirituality in various ways. I attended a workshop where I was led on a guided meditation, and the teacher told us: “Relax, take deep breaths.

Sense your breath coming in and out. Slow it down. Now, imagine that you are sitting on the banks of a river. The river water is flowing in front of you. On the opposite side, you can see a giant mountain. Clouds are touching the peak of that mountain, and mist is forming around the top. A cooling breeze is blowing from that mountain across the river to you, and you can feel the breeze whistling by your ears. You can feel the freshness of the air as it touches your face. You are feeling calm. You are feeling relaxed. You are at peace with yourself.”

Now, as this was going on, we were all feeling peaceful. Suddenly, there was a loud explosion—apparently, there had been a car crash outside the meditation place, and chaos ensued. So, what happened? We were feeling peaceful, but the next moment, we started feeling agitated. At that time, I started thinking: “This is good. I was feeling peaceful.” But what was being done primarily was that when the objects of perception were agitating, through what was considered to be spiritual, the objects of perception were changed. And when we started to change them, the agitation stopped, and peace followed. Objects of perception can be what we physically see or what we visualize. By changing the objects of perception, we brought some peace.

Now, there are other methods where people are told, “Look at a candle in front of you,” or “Keep some kind of enigmatic picture or puzzle or whatever.” People can focus on different objects, and as long as that object is no longer agitating, we feel peaceful. That is pacification of the mind.

Now, why is pacification of the mind compared to a painkiller? As I mentioned here, it’s like a painkiller. Why? Because suppose somebody has an illness and is in pain. If they are given a painkiller, they feel relief—immediate relief. In fact, if they are given a curative medicine, say an antibiotic, they may not feel the same relief. The painkiller works faster, but it also works for a shorter period. And even its effect is not so much curing, but covering. The pain is still there; it’s just that the painkiller interferes with or impedes our perception of the pain, so we don’t sense it.

Similarly, what is mostly called spirituality is that the object of perception is being changed, and we feel peaceful. However, what needs to change are the impressions within us that make us tend to perceive certain objects in particular ways. So, an alcoholic may feel peaceful by staying away from a bar, and that’s fine as far as it goes. It’s not advisable for an alcoholic to live near a bar, especially if they want to become free from alcohol. But you cannot live in a world that is free from temptations. We mostly lose our peace of mind because of two things: temptation and tribulation. One is the promise of pleasure, and the other is the fear of trouble. The world is filled with both promises of pleasure and fears of trouble. If we simply change the objects of perception and think that this will make us peaceful, it may—temporarily. But what we really need is for the impressions within us, which direct our consciousness in certain ways, to change.

There is physical reality, mental reality, and spiritual reality. Purification means that we don’t just change the object of perception. When purification happens, the object goes here and there, and when that happens, normally we are perceiving material objects. But when we become spiritually minded, we start perceiving different objects, various spiritual objects, and ultimately we become attracted to them. Once we understand that the soul is not just the source of consciousness but also the object of consciousness, we start to perceive the spiritual reality. Spirituality means that our consciousness, by default, gets sheltered at the spiritual level. This is when we are truly becoming spiritual.

To repeat, becoming spiritual means that the default home of our consciousness is the spiritual level of reality. What do we mean by the home of our consciousness? Just like when we have no work to do, we return to our home, where we feel comfortable, peaceful, and safe. So, similarly, our consciousness has a home. To know where that home is, we can simply check what we think of when we have nothing to think of. As we learn to become spiritual, the default object of our thoughts becomes spiritual. Spiritual means we focus on our essential identity as souls. In future sessions, we’ll talk about how the soul is a part of God, and then we focus on the Divine and service to the Divine.

It’s important for each one of us to recognize that spirituality is not just a state of mind where we feel peaceful. It is a level of reality where our consciousness resides. There is a spiritual level of reality, and when our consciousness resides there, we are spiritual. Just as we may go out from our home for various purposes, we live in the material world and must perceive various material objects. That’s fine, but as long as our consciousness is sheltered at home in the spiritual level, that is when we are spiritual.

Spirituality is not just a state of mind; it’s a level of reality and a process by which our consciousness rises from the material level to the spiritual level. The Bhagavad Gita will outline various processes of spirituality, such as Karma Yoga, Gyan Yoga, and Bhakti Yoga. There’s also meditation, prayer, and mindfulness. In future sessions, we’ll talk about these.

But the essential point is that the metaphor of the mountain is key. If you consider this mountain, there are different ways one may go up: from the left, from the right, from the front, or from the back. Different religions, spiritual practices, and traditions are like different ways up the mountain. The important thing is not just what path we are affiliated with; the important thing is whether we are rising up. In a future session, we’ll talk about the difference between spirituality and religion. But right now, suffice it to say that any process that helps us raise our consciousness toward the spiritual level is spirituality.

So now, this brings us to the question: Why are so few people spiritually minded?

So the idea is that, as I said, most people are not interested in anything apart from the immediate. We are all innately pleasure-seeking, and if pleasure is available at the physical level, then we get consumed by that desire, and we don’t think of anything higher. And even somebody who thinks of something higher, most people who want to be spiritual basically want it as a painkiller so that they can continue to be materialistic. The pursuit of worldly pleasures often leads to anxiety and agitation, and we need relief from that. So what they consider as spirituality is often relief so that they can continue pursuing material life, and that is not a very sustainable way to practice spirituality, because what is happening over there is that our conception of life is not changing, and the level of reality where our consciousness resides is not changing. We are simply using spirituality, or what we consider as spirituality, in double quotes to continue our materialistic way of living while pacifying ourselves. Because most people are materialistic, they don’t even consider anything higher. And now, because simply the materialistic pursuit of pleasures is causing agitation, there are a lot of people who are seeking relief from that agitation, and then they practice something which they call spiritual, but that is simply some painkiller relief that will help them continue pursuing this material life again.

To genuinely want to know the spiritual level and to realize the spiritual level is tough; that requires effort, because just like climbing up a mountain, it requires effort. Similarly, not many people are interested in authentic spirituality, in understanding the soul and the spiritual level of reality, because they are more concerned with material pleasures and relief while they are pursuing material pleasures so that they can continue those pleasures. The Bhagavad Gita, by categorically differentiating between matter and spirit, enables us all to choose intelligently. Do I want to be spiritual, or do I just want some psychological relief that I consider as spiritual?

Now, before I conclude, one last point: is wanting peace of mind bad? Obviously not. We all want peace. We all want joy. We all want a sense of well-being. When we rise to the spiritual level of reality, those emotions also come, just like when somebody is sick and in pain, they want relief from pain. If they become healthy, take curative medicine, and become healthy, they will get relief from pain. So the more we become spiritual, our mind will become calm. We will feel more peaceful with ourselves, more content with life, and more connected with others, especially those who share similar values and purposes as us. But the point is that that is the end result, and what a painkiller tries to do is give relief from the pain without going through the curative process. Similarly, what so-called spirituality does is offer relief without purifying ourselves of our impurities. By impurities, we mean the things that keep our consciousness captivated at the material level, which are impurities from a spiritual perspective. Without purifying ourselves of impurities, if we seek only peace, then what we are getting is shallow spirituality. It is simply a painkiller.

Now, we can take painkillers, and we can take curative medicine also. In the process of bhakti yoga, which Krishna will eventually recommend, we will talk about how we can do things that help us become peaceful and joyful. But we don’t just do those things alone because they can also keep us restless. We focus on rising to the spiritual level of reality, and then peace and joy will automatically follow.

So I’ll summarize what I spoke today. I started by speaking on three topics: What is spirituality? Is it a state of mind? And why are so few people spiritual?

What is spirituality? I discussed three things. It can be a state of mind, a level of reality, and a process for attaining that state of mind and level of reality. I talked today about how, as more people become materially comfortable with progress, they still face anxiety and temptation. The mind is agitated, and we need relief. The constitution that comes from the spiritual soul to the mental and physical levels gets caught in various agitating stimuli. If we withdraw it or direct it toward a more peaceful object, that is what is considered spiritual. So, visualizing a peaceful place is considered a spiritual thought exercise, but it may or may not be. Anything that pacifies the mind is considered spiritual because there is a misunderstanding about the levels of reality.

The Bhagavad Gita says there are three levels of reality: physical, mental, and spiritual. The mental level is also material. So material has two aspects: physical and mental. From the physical perspective, both the mental and the spiritual are non-visible, and that’s why anything non-physical is often conflated and called spiritual. The Gita categorically says that the soul is not just some conception or metaphor. The soul is a concrete reality. There is a spiritual level of reality different from the material level.

If you consider the top and bottom of a mountain, the top is spiritual consciousness, and the bottom is material consciousness. The process that raises our consciousness from the physical to the spiritual level is called spirituality. I talked about how most people are materialistic, which is why they are not interested in spirituality. A few who seem to be interested in spirituality often seek calmness so they can continue their material pursuits, and that is shallow spirituality.

So what is real spirituality? When we understand that the spiritual level of consciousness is our home, and that’s where our consciousness defaults to when we have nothing to do, then that is when we are truly spiritual. How do we get to that spiritual level of consciousness? By purification. Pacification comes when you just change the object of perception. Purification happens when we clean ourselves of impressions that misdirect our consciousness toward agitating objects of perception. So, an ideal program should have a combination of both painkillers and curative medicine. Painkillers act faster but don’t last long, and thus are not sustainable. So, when we recognize what spirituality is based on Gita wisdom, then we can pursue the path seriously. Thank you. Now, I’ll take some questions, one at a time.

So now, in bhakti, we make Krishna our primary object of purification and object of perception to pacify our mind. Now, is that right? Well, yes and no. In bhakti, we do focus on Krishna, and there are verses like savai mana, Krishna pada, meaning we perceive Krishna with our eyes, hear Krishna with our ears, and taste Krishna with our tongue as Prasad. There are all these processes by which we bring Krishna into the tracks of perception. That is true, but that is not the only purpose. The essence of bhakti is that by repeatedly exposing ourselves to Krishna, we become attached to Krishna. Bhakti is not just about changing the objects of perception. It is about changing our attachments.

When Arjuna asks Krishna, in Chapter 7, verse 1, in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says that the purpose of the process he is going to tell Arjuna is to make the mind attached. Now, yes, the objects of perception do affect us, and if we could spiritualize the objects of perception, it’s always helpful. So in our workplace, in our homes, if we can have more spiritual stimuli around us, that can help spiritualize our consciousness. But just making our external surroundings filled with spiritual stimuli alone is not going to make us spiritual. It is a powerful first step, but ultimately, the essence of bhakti is to make our mind attached to Krishna, and that attachment will gradually, the more you become attached to Krishna, cleanse us of whatever other attachments might be there within us.

Now, there’s a question from Lekha: How do we know if our pursuit is spiritual or material? If a material pursuit is leading to selfless service, does that counter spirituality?

This is a good question. Three points, I would say, in response to this. In terms of the nature of reality, the material and the spiritual are categorically different levels of reality in terms of mode of functioning. What is spiritual? The beginning of spirituality is lack of self-consciousness. It means I’m not so obsessed with myself—how great I am, how small I am, how powerful I am, or how powerless I am. Our consciousness becomes free from ourselves, and we start living for something bigger than ourselves.

Now, the biggest such reality is God. The Bhagavata says that Surinam sarva-bhuta—Krishna is the well-wisher of everyone. So if we focus on Krishna and strive to serve Him, we become fully spiritual. And that means we are also fully selfless because Krishna is the well-wisher of everyone. When we serve Him, we serve all living beings through Him. In this, we become more compassionate, more considerate, and that is the perfection of selflessness.

In the 12th Chapter, Krishna talks about various levels of spiritual connection. So if we consider our consciousness to be caught in myself—my pleasure, my power, my position—and then our consciousness comes out of ourselves, the one that comes out of ourselves can go up to various levels. The best is if it goes to the level of Krishna. But once it comes out of myself and goes to some cause bigger than myself, depending on what that cause is, we are on the progressive spiritual path.

So Krishna says, from verses 12.8 to 12.12 in the Bhagavad Gita, there are various levels you can connect with. The first and last levels he talks about involve detaching from the fruits of our work and working for a cause higher than yourself. Krishna says this is also a progressive spiritual path. So I would say that it depends on what the particular pursuit is that you are doing, but if it is leading to selfless service, that is auspicious. Now, the more that selfless service is done in spiritual consciousness, meaning with our consciousness aware of the ultimate spiritual reality of Krishna, and with our consciousness focused on service to Krishna, the more it becomes spiritual.

Now, how are the impurities in our mind created in the first place? Is it like the formation of habit? Yes, certainly. Basically, we can say our mind is like software. Suppose, now, you attend this Bhagavad Gita class, and you like it, but say this is the first time you’ve attended, and you feel like you want to know more about it. You go on Google and type Bhagavad Gita. But suppose someone else regularly visits another site, like bollywood.com. As soon as they type B, the browser will suggest Bollywood as autocomplete. Why does that happen? It’s simply their own past choices saved as preferences, and they come up as autocomplete. Similarly, whenever we do actions, they create impressions. It’s not just the actions we create, but their effects on us.

In the past, either in this life or in previous lives, we have had impure desires, and we’ve acted on those desires. Those actions have created impressions. Habit formation works similarly. When we repeatedly do something, it becomes imprinted in our consciousness, and we end up doing it again and again. The stronger the habit, the less we think about whether we should do it or not. It’s like the computer’s autocomplete: the mind gives a suggestion based on past impressions, and we immediately accept it.

So, in a work environment, when everyone tries to pull each other down, I feel agitated. I know I shouldn’t be disturbed, but I’m not very spiritually advanced. What can I do to keep my consciousness at the spiritual level?

Yes, it’s a tough situation. The first thing is to understand that we alone are responsible for our consciousness. Agitating stimuli might be around us, but the responsibility for our consciousness is primarily ours. It is not the world’s responsibility or our surroundings’. Whatever the surroundings, we need to keep our consciousness calm enough to function and gradually orient it toward the spiritual level of reality.

One way to deal with the situation is to take breaks. Even in a competitive work environment, everyone is entitled to breaks. People gossip, go to the cafeteria, eat, and chit-chat. Instead of doing these activities, we could choose something more spiritual. For example, if you’ve attended a class and found some striking points, you can read the wisdom codes or repeat them regularly. We can do this whenever we are agitated.

The idea is first to understand that it’s our responsibility. Second, we need to be resourceful. Find what calms our mind, and do it regularly. When we have the sanity of responsibility and resourcefulness, even if disturbance comes, we won’t be shaken as much, like waves in the ocean. If we have an anchor, we won’t be shaken by the waves.

Finally, regarding the question of getting pleasure in serving the guru, it becomes difficult to do our duty at the material level. Well, that’s understandable, but we need to understand that while in analysis, the material and spiritual are separated, in application, they are integrated. Krishna tells Arjuna to be spiritual, but also to fight a war. In a war, your consciousness needs to be fully engaged, otherwise, you might be defeated.

So, we need to expand our conception of what is spiritual. Just going to the temple or doing some service given by our spiritual authorities is important, but it alone is not spirituality. In fact, it helps us progress on the path, but it is not the full essence of spiritual life. We have times when we withdraw from the world and directly connect with Krishna, and times when we indirectly connect with Krishna through our work. We need to pursue Krishna even in our family responsibilities. Ultimately, Krishna says, work is worship. Why? Because the whole world comes from Him, the situation for work comes from Him, and the abilities to work come from Him. So, if we work in a mood of devotion, we are giving back to the Lord. That’s how we can conceive our work as spiritual.

Sometimes, when we do directly spiritual activities, we may not get as much pleasure. But if we use spirituality as an escape from life’s problems, we will eventually face problems in our spiritual practices as well. At that point, we will have nowhere to go.

Now, how can we stay calm in all situations? Well, it’s not always possible. Some waves are bigger than others. When bigger waves come, it’s difficult to stay calm, but the waves will pass. If we hold onto the anchor, the magnitude of how much we are shaken will be much less.

So was the marriage prayer to Krishna at the material level? Yes, it was at the material level. But gradually, he became purified. This is why the operational principle of bhakti is Yay nakina, prataranan Krishna—whatever we do, as long as it is directed towards Krishna, it purifies us. So when he meditated and pursued the Lord, at that time, he realized that the Lord was so attractive that whatever kingdom he was seeking was no longer attractive. Yes, we can become purified by exposure to the Lord; by exposing ourselves to Him, we can soon become purified and grow spiritually.

Now, should we expect spiritual commitment to bring pleasure only intermittently? Yes, that’s understandable, because you’re not yet fully spiritual. If we are only seeking pleasure in life, we will never be able to sustain ourselves in anything. We need to be purpose-seeking, not pleasure-seeking. There will be a whole session in the future on how to live a purposeful life. When we do something purposeful and meaningful, pleasure becomes a byproduct of that. If we seek enjoyment as the primary purpose, we will not be able to sustain ourselves, even in material life.

For example, I like writing, one of my services. But it’s not that I like writing all the time. Sometimes, in the process, I don’t get the right words, my thoughts are unclear, and it’s agony. So if I wrote only for pleasure, I would not be able to write regularly. If we start living our life only for pleasure, even the things that give us pleasure will not be done regularly. So, we need to have a purpose. If our purpose is to raise our consciousness to the spiritual level, then we can pursue the spiritual path, even if at times we don’t get pleasure.

During our routine material life, there are certain things that give us pleasure, but we don’t go out of our way to seek those pleasures. We don’t deliberately avoid those pleasures either. For example, if there’s good food, we can spiritualize it by offering it to Krishna. We don’t avoid good food to become spiritual, but neither do we go out of our way to seek it. We focus on the spiritual path, and in doing so, while being purposeful, we can enjoy the pleasures that come naturally, which help sustain us as we move forward in life.

Let’s take two more questions quickly. Can I serve Krishna by doing my job well or by doing my business? Yes, of course. How can our work be made into worship? That will be a full session later on, but at this stage, broadly speaking, there are two aspects of spirituality: world-transcending and world-transforming.

World-transcending means that we raise our consciousness above the material world and focus on the spiritual. This is important—we need to do this periodically, otherwise, we get too entangled in the world. That’s why we have our spiritual practices: sadhana, Satsang, swadhyaya, meditation, mantra chanting, study of scripture, and attending classes like this. Through these practices, we are transcending the world. But that’s only one aspect of spirituality. Along with that is world-transforming, which means we focus on the spiritual in a way that helps us grow in our lives. We contribute by using the abilities Krishna has given us to make a difference in the world.

When we have this attitude, we dedicate time for spiritual practices and inner connection with Krishna. Then we can re-envision our work as an outer contribution to Krishna. Spirituality thus connects both the transcendent aspect, which involves going beyond the world, and the transforming aspect, which involves doing our part to improve the world.

Now, business can be very consuming and agitating, inundating us with a materialistic consciousness. But anything can do that in this material world. If we are cautious enough to make sure our consciousness doesn’t get too entangled in material distractions, then yes, we can work in a way that helps us grow spiritually.

There are many spiritual teachers in India. So, are they spiritual, or are they offering just peace of mind? Now, it’s difficult to go into specifics about any particular teacher, but what we will focus on is the principle. The principle is: what is the effect? Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita, and the Bhagavatam also mentions, that the result of spirituality is inner contentment and outer detachment. Bhakti parishanaya, the process of bhakti, which is a very powerful spiritual process, gives us para Ish Anubhav—the experience of transcendence. It gives us the experience of the Divine, who cannot normally be perceived because He is transcendental.

When there is para Ish Anubhav, what happens is that this experience of the Divine is so enriching, so fulfilling, that one doesn’t crave other experiences. One doesn’t crave, especially, worldly gratifications. So, if you want to know whether a particular teacher is spiritual or not, you can look at their lives and the lives of their followers. Are they becoming more attached to the spiritual reality? Are they becoming detached from worldly indulgences? If they speak a lot of good-sounding ideas but don’t actually focus on detaching from worldly pleasures, and their followers continue with their materialistic lifestyle while hearing or speaking something that sounds spiritual, then it may be questionable whether they are truly spiritual.

Having said that, it’s best for us not to be judgmental. We need to be discerning to understand what will help us and what will not. But we don’t need to condemn anyone. For example, if I am sick, I want to be cured. Am I being given just a painkiller, or am I being given a proper treatment, which may involve a combination of pain-relieving medicine and curative treatments? Similarly, we need to discern for ourselves. Discernment comes from a platform of humility, not arrogance. Judgment, on the other hand, comes from the belief that “I know the truth, and you are wrong.” We don’t want to do that, but we need to be discerning so we can progress on our spiritual journey.

Thank you very much. The remaining questions will be answered over the next week or so, and the answers will be shared in the WhatsApp group. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

The post Gita key verses course 5 – What is Spirituality? Is it a state of mind? – Gita 02.29 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 4 – Dealing with grief on losing a loved one – Gita 02.25
→ The Spiritual Scientist

So, welcome back to our Bhagavad Gita course, and today we will be discussing one practical application of the understanding that we are not the body, that we are the soul.
There are multiple aspects to this understanding, and an important aspect here is how it helps us deal with various life events. For example, whenever we go through the fear, trauma, or grief of seeing a loved one die. That was what Arjuna was also going to face.
So, our session will be based on 2.25. I’ll share the PowerPoint here.
How can we heal after the death of loved ones? Do we express or suppress our emotions?
So, we are discussing 2.25 in the Bhagavad Gita:
Avyakto yama cintyoyam avikaryoyam ucyate, asmadevam viditvayinam na nushochitum arhasee.
So, na nushochitum arhasee — “Oh Krishna, oh Arjuna, do not lament.” In fact, this is a recurrent theme in this second chapter. These verses, na nushochitum arhasee, na nushochitum arhasee, repeat the theme: “Do not lament.”
So, what is lamentation and what is grief? Is the Bhagavad Gita telling us that we should suppress our natural emotions? Is it because, say, we have spiritual knowledge? Is it that we are meant to become unfeeling? We will discuss this in today’s session.

Broadly speaking, the Bhagavad Gita must be understood in the context of the Mahabharata. We see in the Mahabharata that when Arjuna lost his son, he actually lost two of his sons. Iravan was the first son he lost, but a much more well-known and dear son, Abhimanyu, was also lost. Iravan didn’t live with Arjuna; he was the son of a Naga princess, and he lived with her as the heir and future king of that kingdom. That had been the arrangement made at the time. But Abhimanyu mostly lived with Krishna and Arjuna, and he was very dear to Arjuna.

On the 13th day when Abhimanyu was killed, Arjuna was devastated. He crumbled, he cried, and he yelled at his brothers, “Why couldn’t you protect him?”
Now, Krishna doesn’t throw these verses at him, saying, “Why are you lamenting?” Krishna does encourage him, and I’ll come back to how he pacifies, consoles, and encourages him. But the first point is that spiritual knowledge doesn’t mean the suppression of human emotions.

Broadly speaking, whenever we have emotions, we often think of two broad options for dealing with them: One is to express them, and the other is to repress them. Now, neither of them is entirely positive. So, the healthy way is to process our emotions. And what the Bhagavad Gita encourages us to do is process our emotions.
So, Arjuna is being told here, “Do not lament,” and yet in both the Mahabharata and the Bhagavatam, there is a description of how the Pandavas grieved after the war ended.

They grieved for all the relatives whom they had lost. Similarly, in the Ramayana, after Dashrath Maharaj passes away, there is a state-wide period of mourning that is ordered. And so, it’s not that they are all told to just neglect or suppress all their emotions. That is not the point.
The point that is made is that you focus on developing your own capacity to process your emotions and respond maturely.
So, what does it mean to process emotions? And how can the Bhagavad Gita’s knowledge help us process emotions? Let’s look at this.

We will talk mainly about how to heal when a loved one passes away. As part of that, I’ll also briefly talk about the wound that death causes, and the fear and pain associated with it.

Broadly speaking, philosophy — the Bhagavad Gita is giving us some philosophy. And the purpose of philosophy is primarily to do two things:

  1. To help us make sense of life — what happens in our life, why is this happening, and what is life all about?
  2. To guide us to deal with life changes.

So, when something unexpected or disorienting happens, the philosophy is meant to stabilize, anchor, and reorient us. That’s why, normally, we may not feel the need for philosophy in our lives. We just go through our daily routines, fulfilling our various roles and responsibilities. But sometimes, life throws a curveball at us. Sometimes, things start going devastatingly wrong, and that’s when we recognize the need for philosophy.

This is what happened to Arjuna as well. He was faced with a fratricidal war. And what is the point of life if all those people whom I love and venerate — I have to kill them to get a kingdom? Is the kingdom really worth it? So, he wanted to make sense of things, and then the primary question was, “What should I do?”

So, philosophy is meant to make sense of life and help us deal with life changes. When we study the Bhagavad Gita, or any philosophy for that matter, these are the two main objectives: make sense of life and help us deal with life changes.

Now, one aspect of life is that death is an inevitable reality. So, how do we make sense of death? The Bhagavad Gita explains to us that we are souls. As we discussed in the previous session, death is simply the soul moving from one body to another body. It is like leaving one rented house to go into another.

But it is not that simple because, when we are in a particular life, we are emotionally very deeply invested in the people around us, the careers we have built, and the positions we hold. And especially among these, usually, relationships are where we are most deeply emotionally invested. How do we deal with that?

So, we may understand that dying is simply leaving an old set of clothes and wearing a new set. But if we are very attached, even leaving an old piece of clothing can be painful. As far as leaving the body is concerned, we are enormously emotionally invested in it.

I’m using the term emotionally invested in a neutral and non-judgmental way. We could say that we are attached, but I’ll talk about that a little later. For now, we’ll use the term emotionally invested to describe our connection.

If we are emotionally invested in something and then we suddenly lose it, naturally, it is going to hurt us. So, how do we deal with that? That’s going to be the next part.

Broadly speaking, when there is death, how do we make sense of it? There are three main problems associated with death: one with respect to the past, one with respect to the present, and one with respect to the future.

  • With respect to the past, there is the loss of everything that is dear to us. All that we have worked for will be taken away. It is very difficult to accept that.
  • With respect to the present, we can see the body, especially if the death is sudden — it happens in just a few moments. If it’s a gradual death, still, we see the body, which we often identify with. Either we think of it as I am the body, or at least, this is my body. We see it disintegrating, sometimes in horrible ways. This is horrifying. It’s like if we had a car, and one day we went to our garage and saw that the car was completely wrecked. That itself would shock us. What then to speak of when it is our own body in which we live? If our house was devastated by a storm and was in ruins, that would shock us. What to speak of when we are inside the house and the house is wrecked? That scares us. So, to see our body getting destroyed is a terrifying experience.

So, that’s the present.

And then, the third is the future, as I mentioned here — the fear of the unknown. Oh, what’s going to happen in the future? What am I going to do?

For people who have no understanding of philosophy, one fear is: Will I cease to exist completely? And it’s actually very scary and disconcerting, at the very least. If not alarming, to think of a future in which we have no role to play, no say in things. In fact, we don’t even exist. So, that itself is alarming.

And if we have some understanding that we continue to exist beyond this, then there is the fear, the alarm: What is going to happen to me after that? Where am I going to go? And that is also painful.

Therefore, it’s important for each of us to recognize that these three broadly are the traumas associated with death. Let’s look at how spiritual knowledge helps us to deal with it.

We’ll discuss this in more detail when we practice bhakti yoga and talk about it in depth. But essentially, the whole process of spiritual life is that, while we are growing, we try to increase our attachment not just to the things of this world, but also to the being beyond the world — that is God, Krishna.

If we are devoted to Krishna, then, even though we are still invested in things of this world, while they will be taken away, we will be going toward Krishna. So, the process of bhakti yoga decreases the pain of the wrenching loss of everything dear to us.

The second point is that, when we are going through the destruction of the body, it is to the extent we have realized our identity as different from the body. To that extent, the body’s deterioration and destruction will not traumatize us.

So, death can either be a devastating thing or an inconvenient thing. If we are driving a car and the car breaks down, but the car breaking down is not the same as us getting a fracture. The car tire getting a flat is an inconvenience, which we need to deal with. We may fix the car, or we may hire an Uber or ask someone to give us a lift, and deal with the car later.

Similarly, for spiritually realized souls, the body breaking down is trouble, but it is more like an inconvenience. It is not a devastating misery, because they don’t identify with it. To the extent we grow spiritually, our consciousness is no longer primarily locked in the body. The more we practice bhakti, the more our consciousness becomes unlocked from the body. The more it is unlocked from the body, what happens to the body won’t cause us that much pain.

It’s like, suppose someone is very attached to cricket, and their consciousness is locked in cricket. If their favorite team loses a match, it will be unbearable for them. But if they are not as attached to cricket, then okay, they may not like it, but it’s not the end of the world for them.

That’s how the process of spirituality is meant to unlock our consciousness from the body.

The third fear is the fear of the future. When we understand that we are souls and are developing a relationship with Krishna, we realize that either we will go to Krishna or go closer to Krishna, or we will go to some other situation where we can continue our journey toward Krishna. That understanding can help us deal with the fear.

To make sense of things is more rational. When certain things happen, we need to be able to make sense of them — that’s at a rational level. To actually deal with it, though, the rational level is not enough. There is also the emotional level and the practical level.

So, emotionally, how do we deal with our emotions? And practically, what do we do? We just discussed how, at a practical level, death is going to happen. At a rational level, we understand the soul is eternal. But at an emotional level, how do we deal with the event?

This is with respect to our own death, and this knowledge, if we understand it in an emotionally mature way, can also help us deal with those near death.

Having said that, this is broadly how philosophy can help us make sense of death and deal with it. Now, let’s look at what happens when a loved one dies.

Actually, one of the reasons that inspired my spiritual search almost 25–30 years ago was that when I was in my 10th standard in India, studying, I was one of the toppers in my class. It was a moment of great success for me. The highest officer of the district where I was staying, in Nasik, came to my house to congratulate me. My papers came out, and my photo appeared in the newspapers and other places. So, it was a moment of great celebration for me.

The very day that this district collector came to my house, that very evening, my mother was diagnosed with terminal blood cancer. Although she was a gutsy woman and fought hard, the cancer was very advanced, and everything ended in less than a month — about 27, 28 days.

So, from the height of success, fame, and celebrity, there was a sudden fall. It was very difficult at that time to make sense of things. That’s when I started reading philosophical books, trying to make sense of what life is all about. After some time, it took almost five years for me to come to the Bhagavad Gita.

Although I knew of the Bhagavad Gita, I never thought of reading it to make sense of things. There are many, many other books, both by Eastern and Western authors. But eventually, I came to the Bhagavad Gita.

Then I felt that if I had known what the Bhagavad Gita teaches at that age, it would have been so much easier to process that whole event in a much healthier way.

We go through various ways in which we deal with death: denial, anger, distress, confusion. We experience so many emotions because we just can’t process that someone who is so dear to us, so important for us, suddenly is no longer a part of our life.

This knowledge can equip us to deal with such a situation if it arises in our lives or the lives of our loved ones.

Broadly speaking, let’s look at this now. I apologize, actually, I forgot to share the screen. I’m opening the PowerPoint, but I keep forgetting to share it.

Yes, so I think I’ve discussed what the trauma of death is. Essentially, when the death of someone happens, it is traumatizing. But how do we heal from it?

At one level, we understand that we are not the body. The soul is here, the body is here, the mind is here. So when the soul, body, and mind are there, just as we understand we are not the body, we also understand we are not the mind.

Earlier, I discussed how if the body is damaged, it inconveniences us, and we need to deal with the damage properly, like when our car gets a puncture. We treat the trauma of a sudden life change, such as the demise of a loved one, as an emotional wound.

When we think of physical healing, if someone gets a fracture, broadly speaking, there are two phases. The first is rest. If the hand is fractured, it’s put in a cast and we don’t move it much. Depending on the severity, the rest phase might last for two weeks, three weeks, or six weeks. Initially, some may wonder why they need a cast. They might feel they can continue without it. But if they don’t rest, the fracture will worsen.

Once the body gets used to resting, the healing is in progress. But when the cast comes off, moving the hand again might be painful. Initially, it hurts, but they must start moving it to prevent the limb from atrophying, because lack of use causes deterioration.

Similarly, with grief, there are two phases: first, we need rest. Rest means withdrawal. How does one give oneself emotional rest after trauma?

Different people deal with distress in different ways. Some may say, “Just leave me alone,” and retreat into seclusion. If that is the healthiest way for them to process the grief, they need that space. Other people, perhaps more extroverted, might need their loved ones around them to help them cope.

Whatever is required for a person to rest, they should be allowed to do so. Afterward, they must re-engage.

Re-engagement means that time is the greatest healer, and eventually, we need to move on with our lives. We can’t stop living just because someone is no longer with us. They have departed from this world, but life must continue.

There’s a difference between grieving and lamenting. Lamenting is staying stuck in a stage where emotions are expressed without processing them at all. It’s natural to shed tears and feel the trauma when a loved one passes. But the emotional wound needs healing.

If someone keeps resenting what happened, living in the past — asking, Why did this happen? Why did this person leave me? — this is lamentation. In grief, this is how we deal with the past in the present. We rest, re-engage, and move toward the future. But lamentation locks us in the past.

Lamentation builds a wall between us and the future. It keeps us trapped in the past, unable to process what happened. We live perpetually in misery, often making others miserable too.

This is the kind of lamentation the Bhagavatam warns against. Krishna is not saying we shouldn’t grieve. Proper grieving rituals exist. National mourning periods have their place. But what Krishna says is: Do not linger in lamentation.

As I discussed earlier, lamentation means staying locked in the past, unable to process what has happened, and living in misery as a result. If we understand that this has happened — as much as we might wish it hadn’t — we acknowledge it as a wound that needs healing. So, how do we heal from it?

This will be the remaining part of this talk. Essentially, there are three aspects to this process of grieving after a loved one has passed. There could be more, but these three broad categories are often at the core:

  1. What has happened to them?
  2. They can no longer love us.
  3. We can no longer love them.

These are the three components of grief. So, how can we deal with them?

The first aspect involves philosophical knowledge: What has happened to them? The soul is eternal, indestructible, and wherever they are, they are under the guidance of Krishna.

This might raise the question: Does Krishna’s guidance apply even to those souls who weren’t devoted to Him? Yes, it applies to everyone. Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita 5.29 that He is the well-wisher of all living beings. He doesn’t say He’s only the well-wisher of the devotees. Of course, there’s a special bond with devotees, which we’ll explore later, but Krishna cares for everyone. He resides in the hearts of all beings. Whether a person lived as a devotee or non-devotee, they are still under His care. Krishna has a plan for them, and He will guide them. The understanding that they are eternal souls under Krishna’s protection can offer us relief.

When we don’t know where someone is, it can drive us to anxiety — wondering what’s happening to them, especially when they don’t respond to our calls or messages. But when someone dies, there’s no way to contact them. Still, we can find comfort in knowing they are under Krishna’s care.

The second aspect of grief is that they can no longer love us. Here, we need to understand a more philosophical point: that all love comes from Krishna. Whatever love anyone offers us, it is Krishna who is offering that love through them.

For example, one of the most intimate acts of love is a mother breastfeeding her newborn. She’s nurtured the baby in her body for nine months, and now she’s feeding the child with the nourishment of her own body. This act of affection, protection, and care between a mother and child is deeply intimate. But if we look closely, the mother didn’t create the milk — it was provided by God, the same God who sent the child into the world.

Thus, the love expressed by the mother is, at its core, Krishna’s love being conveyed through her. All love we experience in horizontal relationships — with our parents, siblings, friends, or even in our experiences of knowledge and wealth — is ultimately Krishna’s love for us, expressed through these channels.

This understanding helps us cope with the loss of someone. While we don’t minimize the importance of the person through whom love was expressed, we recognize that ultimately it is Krishna who offers us love through them. When a channel is no longer open, it doesn’t negate the love we’ve received. Instead, we continue to develop our vertical relationship with Krishna because that connection is eternal.

Additionally, life is complex, and while the loss of someone close to us may leave a hole in our hearts, that emptiness may not remain as overwhelming as time passes. As our consciousness expands, the sense of loss may still exist, but we won’t be trapped in the pain of it. Krishna consciousness helps us to deal with the grief and trauma, teaching us to heal and continue moving forward.

Finally, the third aspect of grief is that we can no longer express our love for them. This is painful, but understanding that Krishna is the source of all love can help us navigate this part of the grief process.

I would like to do so much for them, but I haven’t been able to. What can I do?

Again, the same point applies — we have both horizontal and vertical relationships. When we consider the vertical relationship, we realize that we are connected with Krishna, and Krishna is also connected with them. If we engage in devotional activities and dedicate the fruits of those activities for them, that is a way we can do something for them at a spiritual level.

Because we are not physically present with them, we can’t offer comfort or speak emotional words to them. However, through devotional acts, we can still do something meaningful for them, offering it as a dedication to them.

Gradually, by understanding this, we can bring closure — both physical and emotional closure. Without closure, healing cannot begin. It’s like when we get an injury: if there’s a cut, it needs to be stitched. Once stitched, healing can begin. Similarly, we need closure. This is why, in many Dharmic traditions, the body is cremated — to provide a very clear, graphic sense of closure.

In some traditions, the body is buried, but in Dharmic traditions, it’s burnt. This might seem jarring to some, but if we understand that we are not the body, that the soul is eternal and has already departed, burning the body creates a sense of finality. It signals that the body is no longer of use, and the soul can now move on to its next destination.

For us, too, understanding that we are souls — separate from the body — can help us accept the burning of the body as a form of closure. Cremation, from a spiritual and emotional perspective, facilitates this closure, allowing us to move forward with our healing.

So, these are the key points I’ve discussed: while we may have to live with the pain of loss, we don’t have to live in that pain. The hole left in our heart may never be fully filled, but with time, our hearts can grow beyond the hole. This is how we heal from the wounds that life’s losses bring.

To summarize, today we discussed how we heal from the death of a loved one and how Bhagavad Gita philosophy can help us in this process. Essentially, philosophy offers two things: it helps us make sense of life’s events and gives us tools to deal with them.

First, we discussed death and why it’s such a traumatizing change. There are three aspects that make it painful: the past (everything we’ve lived for, which we will lose), the present (witnessing the deterioration of the body), and the future (not knowing where the soul is going). The wisdom of the Gita helps us understand these aspects — yes, we lose the past, but if we grow spiritually, we carry something valuable into the future. Even though we may lose the body, we are not losing Krishna, our eternal companion.

When we understand that we are not the body, the deterioration of the body becomes more of an inconvenience, like a flat tire, rather than a devastation. As for the future, we can find peace knowing that we are always under Krishna’s guidance, moving closer to Him.

Next, we explored how to deal with the trauma of losing a loved one. Simply stating “I’m not the body” is not enough. When something goes wrong with the body, we have to deal with it. Similarly, emotional wounds caused by the loss of a loved one must be addressed maturely. There’s a difference between grieving and lamenting: grieving is a process that leads to healing, while lamenting means staying stuck in the past, unable to move forward, and remaining in misery. Grieving and healing involve two stages — just like when treating a fracture.

We first rest, and then we reengage. Similarly, when it comes to emotional wounds, we need to rest first. This rest may look different for different people. Some may prefer to withdraw and be alone, while others might want to be with only their close loved ones. Each person should do what they feel they need in order to process their emotions, and they should be supported in doing so.

The second phase is reengagement. Even if someone feels they don’t want to reengage in life, it is essential for healing. If a limb is not used after a fracture, it may atrophy, even once the injury is healed. Similarly, emotionally, we can atrophy into loneliness and misery if we don’t eventually reengage with life.

So, how do we navigate these two phases? We understand the trauma of death by reflecting on what has happened. The person who passed is still under Krishna’s guidance. Even though they are no longer physically present to love us, the love they offered was actually Krishna’s love channeled through them. That love continues through Krishna, and if we connect with Him, we can continue to feel that love — not just through Krishna directly, but also through other relationships in the future.

What about not being able to love them anymore? Even though we can’t express our love to them in the physical form, we can still offer devotional acts, dedicating their fruits to Krishna. In this way, we can still do something for them.

Just as cremation provides physical closure, emotional closure is also needed. Losing a loved one is painful, but when we process it through the wisdom of the Gita, we realize that while the pain may remain, we don’t have to live in pain. The emptiness in our hearts may persist, but it won’t feel as consuming. The hole may remain, but our hearts can grow beyond it.

This is how we can navigate the disorienting changes in life, especially the loss of a loved one.

Now, let’s look at a question:

“My father went through a lot of pain before departing. He was always there to help me. I’m finding it difficult as I don’t have anyone who can give me the same support.”

Yes, it’s incredibly difficult to witness someone we care about enduring pain. But we must also try to think from their perspective. The chapter of their life is over now, even if it was painful. Would they want us to keep grieving endlessly, or would they want us to move on with our lives? One important expression of love is through service — doing things that please the person, or at least not doing things that disappoint or hurt them.

From this perspective, the best thing we can do for them now is to continue with our lives, using the lessons they taught us. The sacrifices they made for us helped us grow into who we are today. Moving forward and living a fulfilling life is a way of honoring them. In this sense, parents continue to live through their children.

We need to be resilient. In a future session, I’ll delve more deeply into resilience, but essentially, it comes from accepting what is unchangeable without falling into passivity. If a ball is thrown on the ground, it may hit hard but it will bounce back. In contrast, a glass paperweight will simply break. Our spiritual knowledge is meant to help us be more like the ball, resilient in the face of challenges. Life’s pain, including the pain of losing a loved one, will knock us down, but we can rise up.

Sometimes, the pain of losing someone can feel unbearable because they were our support system. The challenge is that, when they are gone, we may no longer have that support. But emotional maturity means understanding that no one is obligated to fulfill our needs. That doesn’t mean our needs won’t be met; it simply means we have to accept that others aren’t bound to do so. As we mature, we learn to manage our emotional needs independently.

So, if our loved ones have passed, what can we do? First, we can reflect on the valuable lessons they’ve taught us. Writing these down and revisiting them can be a great way to keep their wisdom alive and help us through challenging moments.

One way to connect with Krishna during difficult times is to engage in devotional activities that help us feel His presence. Krishna is our supreme father, and through connecting with Him, we can fill the sense of emptiness or loneliness we may feel. It’s important to keep ourselves engaged—not in an attempt to escape the emptiness, but to prevent it from overwhelming our lives. Gradually, this engagement can help our hearts heal.

Now, how can we offer the fruits of our activities to someone who has departed? It’s essentially a matter of praying to Krishna. While formal rituals are an option, it’s not about technicalities. What truly matters is the sincerity of the offering. You can continue with your regular devotional activities, but perhaps you decide to do something extra. For instance, you might choose to chant extra rounds of japa, read the Bhagavad Gita over the next month, or sponsor a sacred event or feast for devotees.

The key is to dedicate the fruits of these activities to the departed soul. In your heart, offer the activity to Krishna, saying, “I am doing this for them,” and pray for their well-being. While formal rituals can be performed, Krishna, being Bhavagraha Janardana (the one who accepts the intention of the heart), values the sentiment behind the act more than its external form.

If others in our family are grieving and it becomes hard to move on, it’s understandably difficult, but also crucial to address. In such times, it’s important to lead by example, especially if others are struggling to cope. You might not be the eldest or the most prominent member of the family, but you can still show maturity and resilience. It’s not about denying their grief, but rather showing them how to process it and move forward in a healthy way.

Sometimes, if family members remain stuck in a chronic state of grief, it might be necessary to create some emotional distance. If you’re drowning and trying to help someone who is also drowning, you may end up pulling each other down. First, ensure that you are stable, perhaps by taking a step back, and then, if possible, you can extend a hand to help them. However, if they continue to pull you down, you may need to temporarily let go and create some boundaries.

That said, in general, by setting a proper example and offering understanding, you can guide others in their own healing journey.

Regarding the soul’s journey, while we may wonder if we get what we remember at the time of death, it’s important to understand that wherever we go—whichever body, species, or place we enter—Krishna remains with us, guiding us. As Krishna says in Bhagavad Gita (18.61), “I am directing the wanderings of all living beings.” While we may go through different life cycles, Krishna’s guidance is always there, and He ultimately seeks to help us transcend the karmic cycle.

Krishna desires that our journey be an odyssey—a journey towards a glorious destination, ultimately back to Him. This is what He expresses in Bhagavad Gita, verse 18.62, where He says, “Become devoted to Me, surrender to Me, and you will come to Me.” While those who haven’t fully surrendered to Krishna may not immediately draw closer to Him, Krishna still remains with them, guiding them through their journey. Even if they don’t directly approach Krishna, He provides another shelter, helping them transition from one place to another in the spiritual realm.

A common question arises about whether we believe in angels, as in Christianity, where it’s said that when loved ones die, they become angels who watch over us. In comparison, we believe in the concept of rebirth. The afterlife and the journey of the soul are complex, and there are many details in the Vedic teachings, particularly in texts like the Garuda Purana. The 14 planetary systems offer insight, but the exact details of what happens after death, including the duration of any transition phase, are difficult to define with certainty.

In the Ramayana, after the war, when Lord Rama is victorious, Devas come to bless him. Interestingly, King Dashrath also appears to bless Rama. Dashrath, who had been devastated by Kaikeyi’s actions, expresses his pride in Rama. When Rama requests forgiveness for Kaikeyi, Dashrath, initially infuriated, agrees to recant his rejection. This suggests that Dashrath, from his position in the heavenly realms, is still watching over Rama. This concept aligns with the idea of Pitraloka, the realm where ancestors reside.

So, while we don’t fully reject the Christian idea, we see that the Vedic universe is vast, and there may be aspects of it that overlap with some beliefs, such as the idea of individuals playing roles similar to angels, at least temporarily. However, Christianity often doesn’t have a clear understanding of the soul’s nature. They consider the soul to be intricately tied to the body, and thus the resurrection involves the soul and body reuniting. This leads to the belief that bodies should be buried, not cremated. They also imagine heaven as a place of perpetual family reunion, where we will reunite with loved ones.

While this idea is emotionally appealing, it lacks a firm philosophical basis. It raises practical and logical questions. For instance, if someone knew their grandparents at 70 or 80 years old, would they remain eternally in heaven at that age? Would that be a perfect state for them? Would we relate to them as we did before? These questions illustrate some of the inconsistencies in this vision of heaven.

Christianity’s focus has largely been on the morality of life rather than offering a detailed description of the afterlife or God’s nature. Many of the ideas about heaven, angels, and the afterlife that people discuss aren’t directly grounded in biblical teachings but have been drawn from other traditions and theological interpretations. The Bible itself provides stories, lessons, and descriptions of Jesus’ life, but it doesn’t give an extensive account of what happens after death.

In summary, while some aspects of the Christian perspective on angels might hold a kernel of truth, they don’t align fully with Vedic teachings. The afterlife and spiritual guidance come with a deeper understanding in the Vedic tradition, where the journey of the soul is intricate and multifaceted.

So if Krishna has already arranged for what is best for the departing soul, then what is it meant to pray for the departing soul? What should be the mood and content for the prayer?

Well, if we start thinking from that perspective, then why should we need to pray at all for anything, for anyone, even for ourselves, when we’re going through difficulties? We can say Krishna has arranged everything for us. Why do we need to pray?

The point of praying is primarily connecting in the Bhakti tradition. In the Bhakti tradition, the understanding of prayer is significantly different from the understanding of prayer within Karma Kanda. Karma Kanda is basically material religiosity, where we do something for God so that God will do something for us on a material level. So, in some ways, praying is basically like requesting, “Oh God, do this, don’t do this, let this happen, let that not happen.”

But in the Bhakti tradition, if we consider the prayers, there are so many prayers, like say we have Brahma Samhita, we have so many other prayers, and there’s practically no request in the prayers. The prayers are primarily glorifications of the Lord. So in the Bhakti tradition, praying is primarily meant for connecting with God. And sometimes, if something is heavily burdening our heart, we speak that in prayer to God so that the burden in our heart becomes somewhat unburdened, and then we can further connect with God.

So sometimes, say if we are very burdened by something, we talk about that with someone else. Even if that person doesn’t offer any solutions to the problem, just talking with them gives us some relief, and we feel unburdened. The same applies here as well.

Now, there is not a national concern. We will feel that we may intellectually understand that God does everything for everyone’s good ultimately, but still, we have some emotions invested in that. So by praying, that emotional lock can become unlocked, and we can move forward in our life more gracefully. We can move forward without being hindered. So we primarily pray to connect with the Lord, and to also unburden ourselves of the emotions or experiences that are burdening us and preventing us from moving forward in life and from moving forward in our connection with the Lord.

So we’ll stop here. And there are—

Okay, I’ll take one last question. And one thing, if any further questions remain, which you have not answered, somehow on the Zoom chat, the questions get deleted when the class ends. So you could send them on the WhatsApp group, and I will try to answer them separately afterward. We will send you a link for the answers. And even for the previous sessions, if you send some questions that were not answered, I’ll answer them as well.

So what should be our immediate response to someone whose loved one has passed away?

Okay, basically, depending on our relationship, we should be there with a mood of helping them, assisting them. Now, how we can assist them will vary. Sometimes speaking philosophy about the soul can help them. Sometimes just being there to do something for them, showing that even if one important person has passed away, there are others who are there to care, can help. So if we have a service attitude, if we think, “What can I do for this person?” and we pray to Krishna, “Krishna, please give me the guidance on how I can help this person at this time,” then we can even speak the philosophy.

And sometimes the philosophy can give a lot of solace to people, but it should be done in a very, very sensitive and kind way. People shouldn’t feel that we are using the death of their loved one as a forum for stuffing our philosophy down their throats. If we try to start doing that, it will be very alienating. So we sensitively think, “I want to help,” and “How can I help?” One way we can help is by using philosophical wisdom. Another way we can help is by sometimes just being there with them, sometimes offering some healing, some kirtan, or some healing music. Spiritual music can have a calming, healing effect.

So if you maintain a service attitude, Krishna will guide us with the intelligence of how best we can help. So, thank you very much.

The post Gita key verses course 4 – Dealing with grief on losing a loved one – Gita 02.25 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 3 – What is death & reincarnation? Do we all have soulmates? – Gita 2.22
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Today is our third session, and after the session, I’ll be sending you a broad outline of what we will be covering in the 51 sessions. Each session will be based on one question that addresses both the philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita as well as some contemporary need or concern that we all have in our lives. And so, in today’s session, we’ll be discussing what is death, what is reincarnation, and do we have soul mates. And basically, these are the three topics we will cover. And here, this is the slideshow. These three topics I’m going to cover today. And each topic—so we will be discussing based on a verse from the Bhagavad Gita. Each topic. So today, I’m discussing from 2.22 in the Bhagavad Gita. So 2.22 is…

So the body is like a cloth, and the soul is like the wearer of that cloth. The body is like a cloth, and the soul is like the wearer of that cloth. And when the cloth becomes old and worn out, at that time, a person leaves and discards that cloth and wears another set of clothes. So similarly, it is said that the soul leaves one body and goes to another body. So death is the most undeniable of the realities of life. Sometimes you may have this question, especially in today’s world where everything has been relativized: what is real? What is? Is the world real? When people behave properly with us, are they really good people? Is their good behavior real, or does it conceal a bad heart? The government media gives us some messages, some newspaper reports. Are they for real? There’s a whole lot of fake news. So we get the question: what is real? And we might gravitate to the idea that nothing is real. But even if we deny everything else, we can’t deny the reality of death. So there’s some founding realities with which we can rationally build a worldview. And that is what we’ll be doing over the course of our sessions. So what can be rationally understood? What can be scripturally understood through revelation? And how can that be integrated with our experience? So let’s begin with death.

So death is the most undeniable reality, and yet it is the most denied reality. And if somebody doesn’t accept some reality, it means that they are in denial. So similarly, when we don’t accept the reality of death, then we are in denial. Now, what does it mean to not accept the reality of death? If anybody is asked, “Are you going to die?” Unless the person is insane, most people will never say, “I will not die, that I am immortal.” So in what sense is anyone denying death? We accept that we are going to die, but we think of death as something so remote and distant, so abstract, as if it is happening to someone else. And as if it were going to happen to someone else in the distant future.

So it’s just like, if we knew that we are working on a job and we are going to be fired from that job—there is going to be retrenchment and we’re going to lose that job—then knowledge has no meaning without action. Knowledge is not real unless we apply it. If we knew we were going to lose a job, then we would immediately start looking for another job. If we knew that we are going to lose our house, maybe we are renting and the rent period is getting over, then we would start looking for a new house. So if we similarly knew—knew in the sense that we accept it as real—that we are going to die, then we would start asking, at least ask the question: what is death? Is there anything after death? What really counts in life?

So the fact that most of us don’t seriously ask this question, and certainly we don’t ask this question as seriously as, say, “Okay, what will I do if I lose my job?” or “What will I do if I lose my house?”—the seriousness of the question is seen by how seriously we look for some alternative arrangement. Somebody might say, “Okay, what happens after death is unknowable. So why bother about it?” Well, if we are going to think of it that way, even the future itself is unknowable. If we lose our house, what kind of house we are going to get, what kind of economic condition the country is going to be in, what kind of neighbors we are going to have—we can’t predict any of that. So just because we can’t predict a thing accurately, it doesn’t mean that we don’t think about it or plan for it. So yes, that’s the way. Why do we deny death like this? Because it is so scary. At one level, it is so scary, and it seems so unknowable what is going to come after death. And that’s why it’s important that we see through the eyes of knowledge. That is spiritual knowledge, scriptural knowledge, what is given in the Bhagavad Gita. In a later session, we will be discussing more in detail about the principle of revelation and how knowledge can come to us from a higher source. But let’s look at this from a rational perspective.

So in the last session, I discussed how there are empirical pointers towards the existence of the soul, towards something that exists and goes from this body to another body. That’s how people have past life memories. So there is something spiritual within us which is indestructible. And that brings us to the question: okay, then what is death? So if the spiritual is indestructible, then that’s not going to die. So then what will death mean? Let’s look at this. So death is the departure of the soul from the body. Basically, our existence has three levels: the body, the mind, and the soul. I’ll talk about the mind more in detail in a later session. But suffice it to say at a simple level that the body is like the hardware, the mind is like the software, and the soul is the user. Now, say we are working on one particular computer.

We have a desktop at our workplace, and then we go somewhere else, get traveling, and then we reach there, and then we log into the computer over there. Now, as soon as we log into the computer, many of our details get linked with that computer. Say we buy a new computer. Once we log in, our bookmarks and our preferences all get linked with that computer. So similarly, what happens at death is that we leave one computer. The physical structure of the computer is the hardware, and that is like the body. And we, the user, are like the soul. So the soul leaves the body. The hardware is left behind.

Now, when we go to a new place, basically what happens with your computer is that we have certain memory—that is, we know our password—and suddenly we log in, then the remaining details get linked with that computer. So similarly, when the soul goes from one body to another body, along with the soul, the mind also goes, and the impressions that we have—the desires, the inclinations, the overall inspiration, and the overall kinds of actions that we have—are all impressed in the mind. And then the mind is what helps us interface with that next body. So basically, when the soul departs from one body and goes to the next body, that is death.

Now, if we look at reincarnation—now, what is reincarnation? Death is basically a departure of the soul from one body, and reincarnation is the entry of that soul into another body. And when the soul enters into the next body, what essentially is happening again? Essentially, for the soul, the body is like a tool.

So till now, I’ve talked about two distinct examples for reincarnation. One is like a dress. The second is like a computer. So if we consider it to be like a dress, one dress gets worn out, and we wear another dress. So for the soul, the body is like a dress. But the interface between the soul and the body is quite complicated. It is not as simple as simply raising our arms and slipping them through some sleeves and putting on a dress, putting on some clothes. The interface between the soul and the body is complicated. And that complicated interface is mediated through what the Bhagavad Gita calls the mind. So through the mind, the soul gets linked to the next body.

And reincarnation—the word reincarnation—literally means: karna is flesh, re is again, and ashen is to come again. So what reincarnation essentially is, is the soul comes back into the next body. So it comes into a new world, to come again in flesh. Now, reincarnation is something which is universal and unavoidable. That means the soul needs some physical interface for functioning in the world. So the soul needs some physical interface for functioning in the world. The soul is very different from the body. And just as, say, human beings, if we go to some environment which is unnatural for us—say if we go underwater—then we need a whole set of diving gear. We need some way to respire, to get oxygen. So without that gear, we cannot function in the environment which is alien to us. So if humans go into space, similarly, we need spacesuits.

So for the soul, the material environment is actually not natural. It is unnatural. And that’s why the soul basically needs some physical tool for interfacing with the material world. And that tool is the body, that tool is the material body that we have.

So reincarnation is mentioned here. Krishna talks about it again later in the 15th chapter, from 15.7 to 15.11, and there he says in 15.8, 9, 10 especially, so in 15.9, he says that the soul gets a new body. Basically, it gets a set of senses. That means the sense of hearing, the sense of seeing, the sense of touching. And these are the ways in which we interact with the outer world, basically gain knowledge from the outer world, and then we function in the outer world.

So reincarnation is something that happens to every single soul. Now, what kind of body the soul gets—that depends. That depends on what? Broadly two factors. So just as if we are having a particular dress, a particular set of clothes, and they get torn, and then we want to buy new clothes, how do we decide which clothes to buy? Basically two things: our budget and our likings. What we desire and how much we can pay. So similarly, for the soul, what body it will get in the next life depends on its desires. But not just on its desires. It also depends on the kind of karma that the soul has done.

See, our karma—if we do good actions, we get good results. If we do bad actions, we get bad results. We’ll talk more about the principle of karma in the future. But at this stage, this is going to be a simple understanding: that when we do good, we get good. When we do bad, we get bad. And some of the results of our actions come immediately, and some come gradually. So the actions that we do, they get accumulated, and they comprise our—we could say our karmic bank account, our karmic assets in the karma bank account. And depending on what kind of assets we have accumulated, what kind of actions we have done during the course of our life, we decide we get a particular body.

So that is reincarnation. Now, the concept of reincarnation is—now we are moving to the third question. So to summarize, say the body and the soul are here. This is a previous life. So this is death, meaning the soul leaves the body. And then after that, there’s another situation somewhere else, in a different place, at a different time. And then the soul enters into the body. And when the soul acquires a body, that is reincarnation. The departure from here is death. The entry over here is reincarnation. And the concept of reincarnation has been used quite a few times in today’s entertainment industry, and it has become romanticized and sensationalized.

There have been some researches on the concept of reincarnation conducted through hypnotic regression into past lives. Brian Weiss is a prominent researcher in this field, and he found that people often suffer from certain traumas, phobias, or behavioral deficiencies because these issues are carried over from a previous life.

For example, suppose someone is irrationally afraid of water—they have hydrophobia. Through hypnotic regression to a previous life, they might come to know the root cause of this fear. The therapist may guide the person backward in time by saying, “Remember when you were taking a bath… Remember when you were 10 years old… Remember when you were 5 years old… Remember when you were 1… Remember when you were 6 months… Remember when you were in your mother’s womb. What do you remember before that?” Gradually, as they are led backward, they might suddenly say, “Oh, I’m at this place,” and begin describing a very different environment. They may express vivid emotions and talk in detail about things that can often be correlated with actual historical facts.

Through such hypnotic regression, it might be discovered that the person who has hydrophobia in this life was drowned in a previous life. This realization can sometimes free them from the fear of water in the current life. Recollecting the hurts of a previous life, in this way, can help one heal from ongoing emotional or psychological pain in the present. If that happens, such a process is undoubtedly helpful.

This idea—that we may have had previous lives—is further substantiated by such findings. However, in the context of relationships, unresolved issues from past lives are often linked with the idea of reincarnation. To some extent, this notion has also been utilized by the entertainment industry. Many movies and stories portray a couple whose love was thwarted in a previous life. They die, reincarnate, long for each other, and eventually reunite in their new lives. Such people, when they meet each other, are often referred to as “soulmates.”

The concept of reincarnation has, therefore, been highly romanticized and sensationalized. Many people dream about finding their soulmate, thinking, “I wish I could find mine.” We all long for relationships and love, and this idea resonates deeply because relationships can feel like a gamble. Sometimes, we get involved with someone who turns out to be very different from what they initially seemed. Instead of joy, such relationships can bring pain. The idea of a soulmate aligns perfectly with our inherent longing for love.

In a spiritual sense, when people hear about reincarnation, they often wonder, “Do I have a soulmate? Can I find a soulmate?” However, the first thing to understand is that in discussions about the soul, spirituality, and reincarnation, the focus should be on the soul, not on the mate. This means that the priority is to understand oneself—who I am as a soul—and only then think about who to relate with.

If the focus shifts entirely to finding a mate or a partner, we risk missing the essence of spiritual knowledge. Are we truly gaining spiritual understanding, or are we simply indulging in the same desires as those who know nothing about the soul? While the longing for love and companionship is natural, it can sometimes overshadow or even sabotage our spiritual search and growth.

So, the first step is to focus on our true identity: “I am a soul.” What does this mean? The soul is connected to the body and related to it. Understanding this foundational spiritual truth is essential before thinking about relationships or external connections.

When we relate to people, say I am a soul residing in this body, and someone else is a soul residing in their body, quite often our attraction to others is based on their physical appearance. Of course, we may also be drawn to personality traits, which is perfectly fine. However, when we focus too much on the external aspects, we may mistake physical attraction for a deeper connection, believing someone to be our “soulmate.” This kind of infatuation can blind us—not only to our own spirituality but also to the spirituality of the other person—because we reduce them to their physical form rather than recognizing their essence as a soul.

This is the first point: the concept of soulmates, when misunderstood, can distract us from our spiritual growth if we allow infatuation to dominate our perspective.

Now, the question arises: are we, in our journey across multiple lives, destined to have some soulmates? The foundational idea in spiritual teachings is that the soul’s ultimate relationship is with the divine. The Bhagavad Gita (15.7) states that every living being is a part of God, and thus our eternal relationship is with Him.

In this eternal relationship with the divine (a vertical connection), we also form relationships with other souls (horizontal connections). However, these horizontal relationships are temporary because they are based on the material body. When we or those we love leave this world, those material relationships come to an end. In contrast, our relationship with the divine is eternal.

That said, it is possible for souls to meet again across different lifetimes. Some souls may journey through life, death, and rebirth, and encounter each other again. However, this is not very likely, as there are countless souls, each with its own unique karma, history, and trajectory. The destination of each soul after death is shaped by its individual karma, which may lead it to a very different path from others.

This is not to trivialize the relationships we form in this life. They are meaningful and valuable in their own ways. But we must balance this understanding with a reality check: our material relationships should not be unnecessarily sensationalized or eternalized. From a spiritual perspective, our ultimate soulmate is the Supreme Soul—God.

The purpose of transmigration (the soul’s journey through various lifetimes) is spiritual evolution. In biological evolution, living beings adapt to their environment and develop traits that help them survive. Similarly, spiritual evolution refers to the gradual improvement of our consciousness, enabling it to become more spiritual. As our consciousness evolves, we grow closer to the ultimate spiritual reality, which is Krishna (or God).

To the extent that we remain attached to the material world—its possessions, positions, and pleasures—our consciousness remains entangled and does not evolve. But when our consciousness rises above material attachments and connects with the eternal divine, we progress spiritually.

One significant barrier to spiritual evolution is the denial of death. When we deny death, we stagnate, as we fail to reflect on life’s deeper purpose or seek higher truths. Spiritual evolution requires us to expand our capacity to learn and love. This means learning what truly matters, what lasts, and directing our love toward that which is eternal.

For the soul, this eternal connection is with the divine. God resides in our hearts and accompanies us from one life to the next. While it is unpredictable whether we will meet the same souls across different lives, what is certain is that the divine always remains with us. In this sense, the divine is our ultimate soulmate, the one constant companion through all lifetimes.

Therefore, our focus should be on understanding the soul before seeking the mate. Once we understand the soul, we realize that our eternal relationship is not with another soul but with the divine. This is the connection we should strive to nurture above all else.

Developing relationships and building a connection with the ultimate reality is the essence of yoga. Specifically, bhakti-yoga is the path that helps us connect with the ultimate spiritual reality through devotion. While we’ll explore these concepts in more detail later, for now, it’s important to understand that when we begin by recognizing ourselves as souls and then reflect on the nature of relationships, the idea of a “soulmate” can inspire us to focus on spiritual evolution.

But what about our relationships in this world? It’s true that some people are more compatible with each other, and occasionally, two individuals may “click” so well that they believe they are soulmates. That’s perfectly fine. The key is to prioritize spiritual evolution. Even in the best relationships, there will be differences. Maturity lies in learning to live with and transcend those differences.

If we fixate on the horizontal level—constantly searching for the “perfect partner” or “soulmate”—our consciousness gets entangled in worldly desires, hindering our spiritual growth. On the other hand, when we focus on understanding ourselves and evolving spiritually, we become calmer, purer, and more self-aware. This clarity enables us to understand and relate to others more effectively. Consequently, our relationships can become more stable and harmonious, possibly even sweeter, as we cultivate spiritual maturity within ourselves.

We will explore relationships further in future discussions, but it is essential to address the idea of soulmates here. One last point before we move on to questions: the concept of reincarnation has often been sensationalized and romanticized. Much of what exists in popular imagination about reincarnation is shaped by movies, novels, or overly dramatized presentations of spirituality. These portrayals need careful evaluation.

For instance, some books on reincarnation sensationalize the idea by claiming, “This famous actor was this person in their past life,” or “This individual in this life resembles someone from centuries ago.” Such claims often use superficial methods, like comparing facial structures, to suggest connections between two lives. However, many people’s facial features could overlap significantly, especially when stripped down to skeletal structures. Such comparisons are not sufficient to establish evidence for reincarnation. When this kind of shallow “evidence” is debunked, people may dismiss the entire concept of reincarnation as baseless, which is unfortunate.

Serious research on reincarnation, however, has been conducted by credible scientists, yielding significant evidence. Ian Stevenson, one of the most prominent researchers in this field, has documented cases that go beyond superficial claims. However, even he does not place much credence in hypnotically induced past-life memories. For instance, in cases of hypnotic regression—where a person recalls a past life under hypnosis—it might appear that someone’s hydrophobia (fear of water) stems from drowning in a previous life. If revisiting that memory alleviates their phobia, it may seem like strong evidence for reincarnation.

While the therapeutic benefits of past-life regression are well-documented, they don’t necessarily prove the reality of past lives. It’s possible that such memories are fabricated by the mind, particularly under hypnosis, where individuals are highly suggestible. Just as the placebo effect can cause physical healing when someone believes they are receiving medication, a psychological placebo can also occur. For example, if someone imagines a past-life memory under hypnosis and that imagination leads to emotional or psychological relief, it doesn’t confirm the memory’s factual accuracy.

Serious researchers in this field take great care to avoid leading individuals under hypnosis with suggestive questions. However, even subtle or subliminal suggestions can influence a person’s recollections, making it challenging to determine the authenticity of such memories.

In conclusion, while the health benefits of practices like past-life regression can be appreciated, they should be evaluated critically. Rigorous research—like that conducted by Ian Stevenson—provides more credible insights into reincarnation, moving beyond the sensationalism and superficial claims often seen in popular media. By approaching these topics with care and discernment, we can better understand the profound spiritual truths they represent.

When we recall something during hypnotic regression, is it accurate? This question has both intriguing possibilities and significant limitations. While hypnotic regression can sometimes bring forth memories that seem to verify past lives, caution is necessary.

For example, cases of xenoglossy (speaking in a foreign language) and xenography (writing in a foreign script) during regression provide compelling evidence when verifiable facts emerge. There are documented instances where individuals, under hypnosis, recalled languages or scripts that had been extinct for centuries—languages they had no conscious knowledge of in their current life. Such tangible evidence can support the reality of past-life memories. However, not all regression cases hold up under scrutiny.

Memories accessed during regression can be influenced by the suggestibility of the individual, particularly when hypnotized. The mind, prone to imagination, can fabricate memories that feel real but are not factually accurate. Just as a placebo can produce physical or psychological benefits without actual treatment, regression can lead to emotional or psychological healing without confirming the reality of the memory itself.

Similarly, the notion of using regression to find a “soulmate” from a past life can be counterproductive. Romanticized depictions of soulmates in media often amplify our longing for idealized relationships but fail to align with spiritual truths. While such narratives might temporarily satisfy emotional cravings, they don’t guarantee actual connections to past lives.

Spiritual evolution is about understanding what is eternal and real. It focuses on connecting with the supreme spiritual reality, which offers lasting satisfaction, rather than romanticizing transient relationships. Ultimately, the culmination of reincarnation is to grow spiritually and reconnect with the divine.

Summary:

  1. Death and Reincarnation: At death, the soul leaves the body and carries impressions from the mind (akin to software) into the next body (hardware). The soul is the user, transitioning from one life to the next. Denial of death often hinders preparation for it, but inquiry into the afterlife is the first step to readiness.
  2. Horizontal and Vertical Relationships: Relationships in the material world are horizontal and temporary, while the soul’s ultimate vertical relationship with the divine is eternal. The divine, as the indwelling Supersoul, accompanies us through every life, making it our true “soulmate.” Connecting with the divine is the ultimate purpose of reincarnation.
  3. Soulmates and Reincarnation: While it’s possible for two souls to reconnect in future lives, it’s not probable due to individual karmas. Focusing on spiritual growth fosters inner stability and clarity, allowing us to form relationships based not on infatuation or neediness but on maturity and compatibility.

To evolve spiritually, we must prioritize our relationship with the divine, rather than becoming overly attached to idealized notions of past-life relationships. In doing so, we can cultivate deeper, more meaningful connections in this life and beyond.

And with whoever we are already relating, we can relate more maturely with them. Sometimes concluded by, we need to have, whenever any past life memories are touted, we need to have a little critical attitude; we can’t be completely naive about it. So, just facial matches do not point to the soul from a previous level in the next life. And even if, through hypnotic respiration, sometimes a soul, somebody’s healed of some fear—say, somebody’s healed of hydrophobia—that could be a placebo effect at a psychological level, which need not indicate the reality of the memory.

Similarly, just because we feel that we can relate strongly with someone, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are our soulmates. So, we focus on using our intelligence. And with respect to past life memories, when there are objective, evidential things, like, say, zero-glossier or zero-mammography, then the memories can be real. Similarly, we use our intelligence to make decisions about our relationships and about our life. As we evolve spiritually, we learn to raise our consciousness from the material towards the spiritual. We learn about the spiritual, and we learn to love the spiritual. That’s how our reincarnation will ultimately attain its culmination in a connection—in a reconnection with the divine.

Thank you very much. Now, we have some questions over here. So, mind is a subtle body; doesn’t the subtle body elements like mind—it is a false ego—die? No, the subtle body is not so easily destructible. It’s not physical. It’s not gross physical. See that we differentiate between the physical and the material. Physical usually refers to that which is perceivable by the physical senses. So, form, shape, and smell—all these are physical sense objects. The physical things are destroyed, but the mind, intelligence, and false ego—they are subtle. So, they are not destroyed. They go with the soul.

The soul is here; around the soul is the mind, and the soul along with the mind goes to the next body. These will be not exactly destroyed but dissolved at the time of ultimate liberation. The soul goes out of the material world to the spiritual world at the time of liberation. Then the mind, intelligence, and ego—they dissolve while the soul is going through its journey of transmigration and ultimate journey toward liberation. At that time, they dissolve, but they are not destroyed.

So, how long is the time between death and reincarnation? The time is variable. Generally, each soul has some of its own karma to process. The soul is in this body and goes to the next body. In between, the soul has to stay, and how long it has to stay depends on various factors. Just like, say, if we are at one place and we go to another place, sometimes we might do the journey, take a flight, and reach in a few hours. Sometimes we might take a car, and it might take more time. Sometimes we might go by foot, wanting to enjoy a trek. It might take a longer time.

That’s why the time a soul takes to go from one body to another body varies. Just as our karma and how much we can pay for determines whether we take a flight or hitchhike, the kind of karma the soul has done also plays a role in determining how long the soul takes to go from one body to another.

Where does the soul go in between? Broadly speaking, if the soul is in a human body, it can go to another human body, to a lower body (an animal body), or to a lower or higher level of existence. There are higher heavenly levels of existence and lower hellish levels of existence. The soul can go there. If it goes to the lower species or the lower lokas, that transition may take much more time. Where exactly the soul goes depends on karma.

In between states, the soul stays in a disembodied state. There are two different cases here. One is during the journey when the soul leaves this body and gets another body. As explained in the Garuda Purana, in between, the soul gets a temporary covering. It’s not exactly a body but a temporary covering grosser than the subtle body and subtler than the gross body. This becomes the transition body, sometimes called Preta.

Bhuta or ghost is different. A ghost exists when the soul leaves the physical body but does not get a gross body at all. For instance, when someone commits suicide, the soul may not get another body for the remaining time they were supposed to live in the original body. If they were meant to live for 70 years but commit suicide at 40, their next 30 years might be spent in a disembodied state.

In this disembodied state, the soul is there, and the mind is there, but the physical body is absent. This is called a ghostly body. Living in such a state is distressing because the soul has desires that cannot be fulfilled. For instance, the soul might desire to eat but lacks the physical tongue to do so. Sometimes, such souls, to fulfill their desires or resolve unfinished issues, try to possess someone, which is known as possession—the ghost entering into someone.

Yeah. Now, normally, when somebody dies, we say conventionally “Swargavasi” or “Narakavasi” or something similar. But that is more of a conventional saying. Where exactly the person goes will vary from person to person. I answered this earlier. Regarding this Bhoga Yoni, I discussed scientific proof for reincarnation in my previous session. Please refer to the previous session for that.

Why do other religions not talk about reincarnation? It’s not exactly true that they don’t. In my book on mysticism and reincarnation, I have discussed other religious traditions as well. I can’t go into all of them now, but Buddhism does accept reincarnation. However, since it was a heterodox tradition that emerged as a rebel tradition from Hinduism, it tried to assert its philosophical autonomy by rejecting the idea of a soul. According to the Bhagavad Gita, the soul reincarnates, but Buddhism refuses the idea of the soul while still accepting reincarnation. This raises the question: if there is no soul, what exactly reincarnates? This is something Buddhist thinkers find difficult to explain.

If we consider the original writings of Buddha, he was remarkably non-philosophical. He did not address such questions much. It can be reasonably said that he did not deny the soul, but later Buddhist thinkers rejected the idea of the soul. Nonetheless, reincarnation is still accepted in Buddhism. If reincarnation exists, something must reincarnate, and the soul is the most logical explanation.

Christianity, on the other hand, accepts the soul but rejects reincarnation. However, this rejection is not explicitly stated by Jesus. For instance, there is a famous incident where Jesus was asked about a person born blind. The disciples asked whether the person was blind due to their own deeds or their parents’ deeds. Interestingly, this was not about an adult but a newborn child born blind. If reincarnation is dismissed, what could the child have done to deserve blindness? Could they have committed some act in the womb? That makes no sense.

Jesus answered the question differently, stating that the person was born blind so that the power of grace could be demonstrated. He then performed a miracle and restored the child’s eyesight. But not everyone who is blind receives such a miracle. If Jesus had wanted to categorically deny reincarnation, this would have been the perfect opportunity to do so. The very fact that his disciples asked if the blindness was due to the person’s own deeds suggests they believed in the possibility of pre-existence, which aligns with the idea of reincarnation. Pre-existence refers to what happens before this life, while reincarnation refers to what happens after. So, accepting pre-existence implicitly means accepting reincarnation.

In the history of Christianity, the rejection of reincarnation became prominent later. Early Christian thinkers like Origen openly discussed reincarnation. St. Augustine, considered one of Christianity’s foundational theologians, also entertained questions about it. However, when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, political purposes began to dominate. Roman emperors like Constantine and Justinian wanted Christianity to ensure moral conduct among people, as morality made people more governable. To enforce morality, they promoted the idea of “one life” followed by eternal reward or punishment. This historical shift sidelined the discussion of reincarnation, even though it was never categorically denied.

For more on this topic, you can read my book Demystify Reincarnation. Devotee scholar Steven Rosen has also written a book on reincarnation in world traditions.

Now, regarding horizontal relationships, I will talk about them in my next session. Horizontal relationships are important, and I will discuss them along with other topics like dealing with bad habits in a future session. If something is unexplainable, don’t worry too much about it. Focus on learning to deal with it as best as you can. More important than where something comes from is where it is taking us. Instead of questioning why you have a particular impression, focus on how to deal with it now. Bhakti involves a process of purification, which helps us handle such issues. In the third chapter of my discussion, I will talk about past bad habits and how to overcome them.

We’ll come to it eventually.
Now, as far as performing religious rites for deceased relatives, that’s fine. If that is part of our family tradition, we can do it. It’s part of a religious obligation that we may want to follow. But the essence—see, every culture will have its own traditions. And there are spiritual principles which are cultural, and there are spiritual principles which are transcultural. So we need to primarily focus on the spiritual principles that are transcultural, that is, connecting with the divine. And certain spiritual principles that are cultural, if it’s our culture, we follow them. If it’s not our culture, we don’t follow them. That is a matter, and that is something which can be decided based on individual discretion. We’ll talk more about relationships in the future.
Okay, so I’ll keep questions about that.


So why are life’s punishments so acute?
Let’s discuss this more in a future session because we cannot—let’s stick to the philosophy here, what we discussed in the session.


Is our soulmate already determined by destiny, or is it based on our conscious soul that we pull toward us?
See, destiny should never be used as a reason for irresponsibility. That means we have been given intelligence in this life, and we have to use that intelligence to choose wisely, to choose responsibly. And we use our God-given intelligence whenever we are forming any relationship.
Now, what exactly is destined and what is not destined, that is quite difficult to say. Broadly, you could say destiny is like a weather forecast. A weather forecast means that if we are going on a drive, it’s good to know that it’s going to be rainy, stormy, dark, or misty. Similarly, destiny gives us some kind of weather forecast about what kind of situation we’re going to get in our life. And now, how well we drive—that’s up to us. That is not determined by destiny.
Similarly, for us, what we do and how we relate to people is not determined by destiny. So we need to be as responsible as possible in our relationships, in forming relationships, and growing those relationships.


So is it that our life partners are already determined?
Well, much of the romantic literature depicts that. And sometimes some people might quote something from scripture also to support that. But the broad idea is that it’s not necessary that everything is predestined. And that’s why it’s very difficult to say this.
So we, rather than thinking that there is some perfect partner out there who I need to find, we need to use our intelligence to find the best that we can in our situation.
Is it that if our consciousness is not good, then we attract someone who leaves us, or who doesn’t stay with us?
Well, it’s not that simple. It’s not that simple that our consciousness does affect our decisions, and sometimes we may take bad decisions because of that. But is it that simply bad consciousness will naturally mean that we will attract a bad person? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on context. Sometimes people may not have any spiritual consciousness, but still, they may have very good relationships at a practical, functional level, at a familial level. So relationships are complex.
The past life karma is complex, and we can’t reduce them to oversimplified statements of what is to be done and what is not to be done.
Chakras I’ll talk about in a later session.
Where is the soul living while in the transition body?
The transition body basically is around the soul, just like our physical body is around the soul. That’s how the soul is around the— that’s how the transition body is around the soul.
What is the guarantee that we will not reincarnate if we practice devotional service?
Ultimately, we have to understand what is the purpose of why we are existing in this world. God loves us, and He doesn’t want us to be in the world. If, by the time of our death, our love for God has become greater than our love for the things of this world, then there is no reason for God to keep us in this world. He will go with us to the next world. That’s how, if we consider simply from a logical perspective, we stay in this world because we desire to enjoy the world. If the desire is no longer there, then we will leave this world.
Does our love for God go with us? Yes, definitely.
Or to speak of love for God, even broad spiritual inclination also we carry from this life to the next life. Well, liberation, as a subtle body, dissolves by liberation or going back to Godhead. Both are essentially the same. The ultimate liberation is to go back to Godhead. And the subtle body dissolves when we go out of this material world and enter into the spiritual sky.
So thank you very much for your questions. And we’ll continue in our next session. I’ll be sending the topic for the next session shortly. Basically, we’re talking about how do we deal with the loss of a loved one, and does spirituality mean suppressing our emotions or sublimating our emotions? We’ll discuss this in our next session.
Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

The post Gita key verses course 3 – What is death & reincarnation? Do we all have soulmates? – Gita 2.22 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Gita key verses course 2 – Who am I? Is there any scientific evidence for the soul? – Gita 2.13
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Today, we will be discussing the second session on key verses from the Bhagavad Gita. In the first session, I started with verse 1.1, where I focused primarily on the context of the Gita and its relevance today. It addresses questions like: What is my purpose? What are we meant to do in life? The fundamental teaching of the Gita will be discussed in verse 2.13. I have prepared a list of 51 topics that we will cover, which I will share shortly after the class in the group.

Each session will focus on a particular question, whose answer we will seek. I will also be sharing my screen and sending a PowerPoint on WhatsApp, which you can use for reference. Today, we will focus on Bhagavad Gita 2.13, which states: “Dehino ‘smin yatha dehe kaumaram yauvanam jara, tatha dehantara praptir dhiras tatra na muhyati.” This verse talks about the identity of the soul. It says that just as the body goes through stages like childhood, youth, and old age, the embodied soul undergoes the transition from one body to another. A wise person, who understands this, is not bewildered by such changes.

We will discuss this in three parts: the need for spirituality, the rationale for spirituality, and the result of spirituality. When I speak of spirituality, I don’t just mean a vague feeling; I refer to the non-material side of us—our true identity, which is spiritual in nature. The Gita teaches that there is a non-material side to us, which is the actual person, and understanding this is crucial. The first step is exploring whether this non-material aspect exists, and if it does, we need to understand how rational people can accept it. Once accepted, we can explore the results of this understanding.

Just as our bodies need physical nutrition, we also need metaphysical orientation. By metaphysical orientation, I mean that we need a sense of place and purpose, which is intrinsically tied to our identity. For example, right now, I am in Mumbai with a particular purpose. My identity is tied to this place and purpose. Some of you may be software engineers, and you may be in different parts of the world. Our identity shapes what we are meant to do. Arjuna, in the Gita, faced confusion because he could not understand his purpose and what he was supposed to do.

This sense of place and purpose can be abstract. For instance, you might identify as a software engineer, but beyond that, you may identify as a young professional seeking career growth or as someone working to achieve the American dream. Our identities can also include roles like being a mother, father, son, or daughter, and our sense of purpose often comes from fulfilling these roles. Without a clear sense of place and purpose, life can become disorienting. When we join a new organization, orientation programs are designed to help us understand our place and purpose within the organization, which is essential for growth.

Metaphysical orientation is important because it gives us a deeper sense of identity. If, for example, someone loses their job or a catastrophe happens, their sense of purpose can be shaken. This is a common challenge for athletes who identify themselves with their sport, and when they can no longer perform, they face emotional distress. Similarly, Arjuna was disoriented when his purpose in life was questioned. The Bhagavad Gita, through its spiritual teachings, provided him with a lasting orientation—one that cannot be easily taken away.

Spirituality offers this orientation, which remains constant even in times of crisis. Our sense of identity is what gives us a lasting sense of place and purpose, and it is this understanding that we will explore throughout the Gita.

So, what is the place that transcends the ordinary? You are a soul inside a body, and the purpose will be mentioned in the next verses. Ultimately, spiritual evolution is about spiritual growth and, ultimately, liberation. This place and purpose can never be lost because we, as souls, will always be souls. We might not have the same professional designations or national affiliations tomorrow. We might not have the same family situations either. There are various identities we have, such as functional identities, like our family, nationality, or gender. With today’s advancements, even gender identity might change, but these are superficial identities. Beneath these, there is a fundamental identity: we are souls. The soul is on a journey, which will be discussed later—the journey of spiritual evolution.

The first points Krishna speaks about in the Bhagavad Gita concern the philosophical concept of the soul, primarily to serve Arjuna’s need for reorientation. Krishna reminds him of his fundamental identity, and the idea here is that without being properly oriented, we will not be able to function at all. Arjuna is unable to function at the start of the Gita. He is paralyzed by confusion, saying, “I can’t fight” and expressing uncertainty about whether winning or letting his relatives live is the right choice. Krishna provides Arjuna with the reorientation he needs. This is the first point.

The second point is the rationale for spirituality, which we will explore through three things: consciousness, past-life memories, and near-death experiences. These provide scientific evidence supporting the idea of the soul.

From a biological perspective, we are often identified with our bodies. We experience pain when the body suffers, and we identify ourselves through our physical appearance. However, there are certain characteristics that cannot be explained if we are simply biological machines. These defining characteristics of the soul are sat (existence), chit (consciousness), and ananda (joy). These qualities characterize our overall behavior. We desire to live forever, we seek knowledge, and we ultimately seek joy. From a biological perspective, survival and reproduction are the primary drivers of life. Biology suggests we are essentially survival and reproduction machines, focused on eating, sleeping, mating, and defending.

But there’s more to us than this. Why do we want to live forever? Nothing in nature survives forever, not even the Himalayas. Everything is subject to decay, yet we long for eternal existence. Could this longing come from something non-physical, from the spiritual core of who we are? It’s similar to how a child in a remote African village, who has never heard of Pisa, could suddenly express a desire to see the Leaning Tower of Pisa. This curiosity suggests there is something beyond physical experience at play, pointing to our spiritual nature.

Consciousness is another defining trait. We are curious by nature, not just for survival, but for the sake of knowing. Consider the curiosity behind scientific discoveries, such as how Isaac Newton developed the theory of gravity after observing an apple fall. This curiosity transcends basic survival needs. Humans also engage with art, music, literature, and philosophy, pursuits that often have abstract beginnings but lead to concrete results.

Then there’s joy. While pleasure is a natural part of life, it can also become a hindrance. If we were just biological creatures, our search for pleasure would not get in the way of survival. But in many cases, the pursuit of pleasure, such as addiction to substances like cigarettes or alcohol, harms our survival. Why do we long for joy so desperately, even at the cost of our lives? This search for joy is something animals don’t experience in the same way, pointing again to the non-physical nature of our existence.

Finally, the scientific evidence for the soul includes near-death experiences (NDEs) and past-life memories. There are cases where people, after being clinically dead, report having experiences outside their bodies. For instance, one case involved a woman who, during a surgery where her body was completely without circulation, described events that occurred while she was clinically dead. These kinds of experiences suggest that consciousness may exist separately from the body and can continue beyond physical death.

So, she saw herself lying on the operating table and noticed that she was observing herself from above. The first thing she wondered was, “What happened to my hair? Why is it cut like this?” Then she realized it was supposed to be brain surgery, but the doctors were working on her thigh area. They were preparing for a bypass, aiming to induce a heart attack to stop the heart from functioning. She recalled the conversation between the patients and the medical staff. Biologically, it’s impossible, and yet the experiences she had weren’t as uncommon as some might think; they are quite well documented. The question arises: how can we be conscious when we are unconscious? This refers to when our brain is unconscious. The most reasonable explanation for this is that when the body is here, the source of consciousness, as described in the Bhagavad Gita, is the soul. Normally, the soul’s consciousness is routed through the body, but during traumatic or disorienting events, the soul and body may temporarily separate. Some people presume that the brain generates consciousness, but it might be the transmitter, not the generator. The brain could even reduce consciousness. This means that the soul has broader consciousness, but when it’s connected to the body, it can only perceive what the body’s senses allow. The soul’s senses are like windows, and there are cases documented in the book Mind Sight that describe people with out-of-body experiences during near-death situations. For example, there are cases of people who were blind, yet during near-death or out-of-body experiences, they could see for the first time.

The most reasonable explanation is that when the body is damaged in some way, the consciousness may not function normally, but if the soul exits the body, that sensory damage no longer impacts the soul’s perception. In cases of out-of-body experiences, there are also recollections of past lives. Children sometimes mention things about their previous families, such as, “Where is my other mom?” They may give specific details about their past life, such as places, people, and even behaviors. This is documented in cases where children have memories of their past life that include recognizable details, behaviors, and even birthmarks corresponding to injuries from their previous life.

One example involves a young boy in Turkey named Kieran, who described his previous life in a town called Merson. His parents were confused because he had never been there, but he guided them to the exact house, where they met a widow who confirmed the details he had mentioned. The boy recognized her as his wife from a previous life, even describing details of a violent incident in which his past self was attacked with a knife. Remarkably, a birthmark on the boy’s body matched the location of the injury from his previous life. This has been documented in the research of Dr. Ian Stevenson, who studied past life memories and birthmarks linked to fatal wounds.

Such cases suggest that the soul may remember certain details or experiences from past lives, and this recollection is not just about recognition but also about behavior. For instance, the boy reacted angrily when he saw his former wife with another man. His behavior was more akin to that of an adult, not a six-year-old child. This phenomenon, along with birthmarks matching past-life injuries, points to the existence of a non-material aspect of consciousness—the soul—that may carry memories and experiences across different physical bodies.

If we consider the Bhagavad Gita’s explanation of the soul, Krishna says that the soul changes bodies, and these past-life memories are part of that process. This idea is supported by the findings of researchers who observe correlations between birthmarks and past-life events. In a study, the probability of a precise correlation between birthmarks and fatal wounds from a past life was found to be incredibly low, suggesting that there is something beyond coincidence at play. This aligns with the concept of the soul inhabiting different bodies across lifetimes.

Now, if spirituality is real, what is the result of practicing it? According to Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, we will become more tolerant and less disturbed by life’s ups and downs. Spirituality helps orient us in life, giving us a higher purpose beyond material pleasures. By orienting ourselves spiritually, we become less distracted by external challenges. Spiritual practices help us navigate life more peacefully, understanding that life’s struggles are temporary and that transcendence is possible.

In conclusion, the Bhagavad Gita teaches us that we are spiritual beings undergoing a journey of spiritual evolution. We must be patient with ourselves, recognizing that spiritual growth is gradual. Just as a firefighter learns to handle a fire with experience, we learn to manage the ups and downs of life through spiritual training. The soul’s consciousness is separate from the physical body, and when we experience pain or pleasure, we sometimes realize that our true identity is beyond the body. Through spiritual practices, we become aware of our non-material nature, and with time, we begin to understand our eternal existence.

This journey of understanding is not immediate; it requires patience and practice. While many distractions make life’s purpose seem unclear, if we maintain a genuine desire to understand, the answers will come. As the Bhagavad Gita states, we are not the body but the eternal soul, and our purpose is to reconnect with the divine and transcend the limitations of material existence.

In a future session, we can delve deeper into topics like the fate of the soul after death and the concept of ghosts. Thank you for your attention.

The post Gita key verses course 2 – Who am I? Is there any scientific evidence for the soul? – Gita 2.13 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Happy Holidays
Giriraj Swami

In the West, this is the holiday season, with both Christmas and Hanukkah. As Srila Prabhupada explained, the Lord comes to this world to enlighten people with transcendental knowledge. Sometimes He comes personally, and sometimes He sends His son or His prophet or His representative, but they all come with the same message. They may speak in different languages according to the circumstances and the audience, but the essence of the message is the same: God is great; we are but small parts and parcels of God, meant to serve Him with love, and we have come from God and are meant to return to Him.

One of Srila Prabhupada’s purports in the Bhagavad-gita As It Is contains a statement that relates to the holidays people in the West are about to celebrate:

“‘The avatara, or incarnation of Godhead, descends from the kingdom of God for material manifestation. And the particular form of the Personality of Godhead who so descends is called an incarnation, or avatara. Such incarnations are situated in the spiritual world, the kingdom of God. When they descend to the material creation, they assume the name avatara.’ [Cc Madhya 20.263­–264] There are various kinds of avataras, such as purusavataras, gunavataras, lilavataras, sakty-avesa avataras, manvantara-avataras, and yugavataras—all appearing on schedule all over the universe. But Lord Krsna is the primeval Lord, the fountainhead of all avataras. Lord Sri Krsna descends for the specific purpose of mitigating the anxieties of the pure devotees, who are very anxious to see Him in His original Vrndavana pastimes.” (Gita 4.8 purport)

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, Srila Prabhupada’s spiritual master, said that Jesus Christ was a saktyavesa-avatara; he accepted that Jesus Christ descended to the earth from above. That is avatara. And saktyavesa means one who carries the power of the Lord. Thus, he accepted that Jesus Christ descended to earth with the power of the Lord to preach the message of Godhead. And Jesus Christ preached more or less the same message as Lord Krishna in the Bhagavad-gita. Sometimes people would ask Srila Prabhupada about Jesus, and Srila Prabhupada would reply, “In the Bible Jesus said that he was the son of God, and in the Bhagavad-gita Lord Krishna says that He is the father of all living entities, so there is no contradiction.”

Jesus Christ filled the role of a spiritual master, or guru. The spiritual master teaches the science of Godhead, and when a disciple surrenders to a spiritual master, the spiritual master accepts the disciple’s sinful reactions. Jesus Christ performed the same functions in relation to his followers, or disciples: he taught them about God and he accepted their sinful reactions. Sometimes Christians quote Jesus as having said, “There is no way to the Father except through me.” This statement is a little controversial in learned circles—there is some question as to whether the attribution is authentic or not. But in any case, Srila Prabhupada took the truth in these words to be that one cannot approach the Lord directly; one can approach the Lord only through the Lord’s representative, the spiritual master.

As far as the idea that Jesus Christ accepted the sins, or sinful reactions, of his followers, Srila Prabhupada expressed one concern: The followers should refrain from sin. They should consider, “Oh, if I sin, my spiritual master will have to suffer!” Christians in particular may consider, “Because I have sinned, my spiritual master had to suffer, so I should not commit sin any longer.” That should be the basic sense. They should not think, “Oh, poor Jesus suffered for me, but now I can go on sinning.”

So, we accept Jesus Christ as a saktyavesa-avatara, as an incarnation of Krishna. Christmas should be a time when we remember his teachings, his mercy, the sacrifice he made for us. And we should resolve to be better followers, better servants of God and God’s representatives, and of all humankind and all living beings.

Hanukkah, in the Jewish tradition, is also an important festival celebrated at this time of year. It is a winter festival, and winter is a dark season, when the sun sets early and rises late. Hanukkah is the festival of light. Historically, the ancient temple in Jerusalem was seized and desecrated, but eventually, with great courage and sacrifice, the Jewish heroes, the Maccabees, won it back. They wanted to clean and purify the temple to make it fit for worship of the Lord, and their worship included a flame that was sustained by sanctified oil, to be maintained at all times. But when the Maccabees regained the temple, they found only one flask of the priestly oil, enough to burn for only one day. Still, they lit the great temple lamp, the menorah, and, according to the story, the oil burned for eight days, until they could get more. So, the miracle of Hanukkah is that the purified oil, which was sufficient to last only one day, by the grace of the Lord burned for eight days, time enough to obtain more.

Figuratively, the temple is the heart. Cleaning the temple means cleaning one’s heart of the many dirty things that accumulate there by material association. That dirt includes false identification with the body and material desires for the gratification of the body’s senses and mind independent of God’s sanction and God’s service. And figuratively, the light is transcendental knowledge, or consciousness of God, which illuminates the heart and dispels the darkness of ignorance.

Just as the year has its cycles, we also pass through phases. We wish we could always be fully God conscious, but practically we may find cycles in our spiritual life, periods of increased devotion to God interspersed with periods of increased preoccupation with other matters. And the Hanukkah festival, the lighting of the candle or burning of the lamp, means brightening our hearts with God consciousness, with Krishna consciousness—cleaning the temple of the heart and rekindling the light of God consciousness, devotion to God, within the heart.

But we require help with such devotional activities, because alone, in the face of the material world, in the face of maya, each of us is quite weak. We too depend on the grace of the Lord, and we need the support and help of other devotees. If one person alone had to clean the temple, he or she would have a very hard job. But when all the devotees clean the temple together, the job becomes much easier.

The most complete science of God consciousness is presented in Srimad-Bhagavatam, which nicely explains the process of cleansing the heart:

srnvatam sva-kathah krsnah
   punya-sravana-kirtanah
hrdy antah stho hy abhadrani
   vidhunoti suhrt satam

“Sri Krsna, the Personality of Godhead, who is the Paramatma [Supersoul] in everyone’s heart and the benefactor of the truthful devotee, cleanses desire for material enjoyment from the heart of the devotee who has developed the urge to hear His messages, which are in themselves virtuous when properly heard and chanted.” (SB 1.2.17)

The Bhagavatam says that hearing topics of Krishna, of God—just as we are sitting here and listening to Krishna’s message—is itself a pious activity, a form of devotional service. We have only to open our ears to the message of Godhead and we become pious (srnvatam sva-kathah krsnah punya-sravana kirtanah). Then, hrdy antah stho hy abhadrani: the inauspicious things in the heart—we could say, the dirty things in the heart, our evil thoughts and selfish desires—become cleansed. How? Vidhunoti suhrt satam: The Lord Himself helps the truthful devotee to clean the dirt, because He is already there in the heart. He is already there, but because the heart is covered by material contamination, we cannot perceive His presence; we cannot hear His voice. However, when we show our eagerness to hear the Lord’s message through our ears, the Lord within reciprocates. He helps cleanse the dirty things from the heart so that we can hear Him there, guiding us. And when we surrender to the Lord and make sacrifices for Him, He supplies unlimited fuel for maintaining our heart’s flame of devotion.

Satam means “truthful devotee.” The truthful devotee is honest in his endeavors in Krishna consciousness. One who is dishonest will make a show of piety or religiousness but behind the show will have other interests, harbor other ambitions. But the truthful devotee actually wants to understand the science of God and to serve the Lord and all living beings. Though he may be weak, if he is honest in his endeavors to listen to the messages of Godhead and apply the principles in life, even if he is incapable of executing the orders perfectly, still he is considered satam, a truthful devotee. And the Lord within the heart, who acts as the well-wishing friend of the truthful devotee, will cleanse the heart of the dirty things that have accumulated there.

Again we see the importance of association, because the process for cleansing the heart is hearing the messages of Godhead, and only in the association of devotees can we receive the messages properly. Through our hearing and then chanting and repeating what we have heard, the heart becomes cleansed by the grace of the Lord. Ceto-darpana-marjanam: When we chant the holy names of God and hear the transcendental glories of God, the heart becomes cleansed and the light of Krishna consciousness there burns more brightly. It spreads throughout the entire body and then emerges—through the skin, through the eyes, through all the different sense organs. Especially, it comes out through the mouth in the form of transcendental sound, which comes from the heart. The messages that one has received through the ears and that have entered the heart come out again through the mouth and spread light, enlightenment, throughout the world.

So, tonight we greatly appreciate the efforts of Mother Urvasi, for she works so hard to create a situation where we all can come together and speak about God, hear about God, and remember God. Holy days are special occasions when we can get together and remember the Lord’s appearance, or the appearance or disappearance of great devotees, or great events that have taken place in the service of the Lord. And when we get together and hear about the Lord and the great devotees of the Lord and the great service and miracles that have taken place in relation to the Lord, we become purified. And we become enlightened and engladdened.

Peace on earth and goodwill toward humanity actually can be achieved through God consciousness. The Bhagavad-gita explains how we can achieve peace: we must first make peace with God. If we reestablish our relationship with God and experience God’s peace and friendship, then we can have real peace and friendship amongst ourselves and help each other in our relationships with Him.

Srila Prabhupada said, “God consciousness is there. You have begun these Christmas holidays in your country. Throughout the whole month of December, you’ll observe nice festivities. Why? It began with God consciousness. Jesus Christ came to give you God consciousness, and in relation to him these festivities are going on. It may have degraded into another form, but the beginning was God consciousness. Now we may have lost it, but people cannot be happy without reviving God consciousness. It may be named differently—‘Krishna consciousness’—but that means God consciousness. That is the necessity. We want to love somebody. Our love will be perfected when we love Krishna, or God. We are teaching that. Try to love God, and if you love God, if you love Krishna, then automatically you love everybody. That is the perfection of love.”

Hare Krishna.

[Adapted from a talk by Giriraj Swami, December 17, 2000, Ojai, California]

Srila Prabhupada on Jesus
→ Ramai Swami

“Jesus Christ was such a great personality—the son of God, the representative of God. He had no fault. Still, he was crucified. He wanted to deliver God consciousness, but in return they crucified him—they were so thankless. They could not appreciate his preaching. But we appreciate him and give him all honor as the representative of God.

Of course, the message that Christ preached was just according to his particular time, place, and country, and just suited for a particular group of people. But certainly he is the representative of God. Therefore we adore Lord Jesus Christ and offer our obeisances to him.”

(Science of Self-Realization, Chapter 4)

“Who will not respect Jesus Christ? He sacrificed everything for God, even his life. So who is that rascal that he’ll not respect to Jesus Christ? What did he do wrong to the human society? He did everything for the good of the human society. Oh, I have got very, very great respect for Lord Jesus Christ. Not only… Every, I mean to say, God conscious man, he must have respect for Jesus Christ. There is no doubt about it. My Guru Mahārāja had very great respect for Muhammad, Jesus Christ…”

(Srila Prabhupada Conversation, Melbourne, June 28, 1974)

Devananda Pandit Disappearance
→ Ramai Swami

Living in Kuliya during Sri Chaitanya’s pastimes, Sri Devananda Pandit gave professional readings of Srimad Bhagavatam tainted with Mayavada philosophy. One day Shrivasa Pandit heard his Bhagavata-katha, began crying, and fell to the ground. 

Becoming disturbed by this display, the foolish disciples of Devananda threw Shrivasa out of the assembly. By silently observing this misbehaviour of his disciples Devananda committed the hati-mata aparadha, the mad elephant offence of blaspheming a pure devotee of Lord Chaitanya.

Later, by the mercy of Vakreshvara Pandit, an intimate devotee of Sri Gaura Raya, Devananda understood the divinity of Sri Krishna Chaitanya and surrendered to Him in the place known today as the aparadha-bhanjanam, or the place of amnesty. 

Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu granted forgiveness to all who gathered there and instructed them in the science of devotion. The Lord pardoned his offence and blessed him with bhakti. He serves in Krishna lila as Bhaguri Muni. 

Travel Journal#20.23: New York City and Upstate New York
→ Travel Adventures of a Krishna Monk

Diary of a Traveling Sadhaka, Vol. 20, No. 23
By Krishna Kripa Das
(December 2024, part one)
New York City and Upstate New York
(Sent from Brooklyn, New York, on December 21, 2024)

Where I Went and What I Did

The first 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.


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, hoping to do thirty hours for the month.

Sometimes I would give the Srimad-Bhagavatam class in the temple, which is recorded on the ISKCON NYC YouTube channel.

At ISKCON NYC this month I made orange coconut burfi for Radha Govinda to have on Ekadasi.

On Saturday, December 7, Rama Raya Prabhu, myself, and other devotees from NYC Harinam and ISKCON NYC went upstate to participate in the Vyasa-puja of Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami during the day and the Hudson Winter Walk harinama in the evening.

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 share a quote from Caitanya-bhagavata by Vrindavan Dasa Thakura. I also share quotes from The Delaware Diaries, a soon-to-be-published book by Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami and from his brief Vyasa-puja lecture. I also share notes on classes in New York City by Jayadvaita Swami and Smara Hari, Hansarupa, Rama Raya, Sri Prahlada, Yugala Kisora, Dharmaraja, Hari Vilasa, Param Brahma, Venu Madhurya, Aditya, and Natabara Gauranga Prabhus.

Many, many thanks to my sister, Karen, for reimbursing the cost of my flight back to Paris after my final visit to my mother early this summer. Many thanks to Devaki Devi Dasi for her donation for assisting her in proofreading her book on the vanaprastha ashrama. Thanks to Prishni for reimbursing the cost of my travel from Tallahassee to Gainesville for the January 2025 conference on evolution. Many thanks to Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu for getting me from and dropping me at the Hudson train station and for all the prasadam for my journey when I came to dress the deities of our guru upstate.

Itinerary

October 5–January 2025: NYC Harinam
– December 28: lecture on Bhagavad-gita at 26 Second Avenue

Chanting Hare Krishna in New York

Bali Prabhu, now visiting New York City along with his wife, chants Hare Krishna at Grand Central subway station (https://youtu.be/egT1UPiqPyw):


Nityananda Chandra Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center subway station (
https://youtu.be/ZpHHwEXCLeo):


While I
chanted Hare Krishna at Atlantic/Barclays some passersby danced and later returned to dance again (https://youtube.com/shorts/RdM41CV7PMA?feature=share):


Srikar chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street subway station, and ladies dance while holding books in their hands (
https://youtube.com/shorts/Rnw2ItXjrm0?feature=share):


Later, as Srikar continued to chant Hare Krishna,
a lady danced as well as several devotees (https://youtube.com/shorts/Zm7iUq1OymU):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street subway station, and a family plays shakers (
https://youtube.com/shorts/ztnr65YxnX0?feature=share):


Param Brahma Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue su
bway station (https://youtu.be/pFUMZa_LKJw):


Sushree chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue (https://youtu.be/pjValc3EHBw):


While Hadai Prana Das was chanting Hare Krishna
there at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue, a young woman waiting for the train on the platform below just had to come upstairs to see what was going on. I gave her a temple invitation and “On Chanting Hare Krishna,” and Ryan sold her a Bhagavad-gita. I pointed out to her the words to the mantra on the cover of the pamphlet, and she enjoyed following along (https://youtu.be/KwgjGJYkHkA):


During
Rama Raya Prabhu’s final Hare Krishna chant there in Jackson Heights passersby played shakers and danced with devotees (https://youtu.be/mTueA2IyO4M):


Here
Diyvangi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station (https://youtu.be/SQWGBrQoI4g):



At Times Square that day one woman who had encountered Hare Krishna in South America was attracted by hearing our kirtan while waiting for the subway, and she came to listen for some time. Ryan sold her some Spanish books.

Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station, and two guys dance, including a young man from Belgium, who came to several programs during his New York visit (https://youtu.be/eftGAeNb09E):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna to “Jingle Bells” tune at Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/xwHe26tWI2Y):


Sri Prahlada Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Sivananda Yoga Center
(https://youtu.be/3lwive8zboU):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami’
s Vyasa-puja (https://youtu.be/pbDw92mJ32c):


Meru of Ukraine, who likes to take selfies, took this video, which includes me dancing in it (https://youtube.com/shorts/48ovfjprv6g):



My guru encouraged me to dance more in kirtan forty years ago, so I always try to do that.

During his brief Vyasa-puja lecture, Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami encouraged us to distribute his books. It occurred to me that just as I distributed his books at our Alachua temple Sunday feast during the time I lived there, I could distribute his books at the Sunday feast in ISKCON NYC in Brooklyn, which I visit in the fall for three months each year.


Meru also took a selfie with Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami from a distance.


He also took a photo of Rukmavati Devi Dasi, who was married to Gitanagari Prabhu and who remembered me from Gitanagari, where I was initiated in 1983 and which I would visit for festivals occasionally.


I took a photo of Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami cutting his birthday cake.

Here Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at the Hudson Winter Walk, and a guy dances (https://youtube.com/shorts/R3KNAVa45pw?feature=share):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in a Hudson shop during the Winter Walk (https://youtube.com/shorts/seXoYP3G2qo):


Later as Rama Raya Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna, street musicians played djembes (https://youtu.be/o6K96otzq84):


Gurudasa Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at the Hudson Winter Walk, and kids play shakers and dance (https://youtube.com/shorts/HmbhiAU3RnQ?feature=share):


Later while Gurudasa Prabhu was chanting Hare Krishna, two girls played shakers and danced (https://youtube.com/shorts/t9wrggfokOc?feature=share):


Evette of Philly chants Hare Krishna at the Hudson Winter Walk, and three kids and the Grinch dance and later two more kids play shakers (https://youtube.com/shorts/kxWPUsgdUoo?feature=share):


Sachin chants Hare Krishna at Smith St. and Atlantic Ave. in Downtown Brooklyn on Sunday morning (https://youtu.be/LY-NfJGk3y8):


Narada Muni Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street subway station in Manhattan and a kid plays shakers (https://youtu.be/d_IYGOvSeCw):


Two devotees dance during Hare Krishna chant at Fulton Street.
(https://youtu.be/cmil-VQA0wo):


Natabara Gauranga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street, and devotees dance (https://youtu.be/Kmi3tWLLmxo):


Jagaddhatri Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street (https://youtu.be/YUs6NWqF2-Y):


Sevika Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street (https://youtu.be/dEQM2_2KLFk):


Premamani Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street (https://youtu.be/mDejPTn6Szk):


Natabara Gauranga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Grand Central Subway Station, and a woman dances (https://youtube.com/shorts/LM1BzJtMwvE?feature=share):


Jagaddhatri Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Grand Central (https://youtu.be/0TJcd1VlzMo):


Narada Muni Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Grand Central (https://youtu.be/H6sxL6Mw2-s):


Narada Muni Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center subway station, and kids play shakers (https://youtube.com/shorts/SozPUuWtw30):


Narayana Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center (https://youtu.be/bNzd5Vi8xdk):


 


Before dressing the Radha Govinda deities of my guru, I took a photo of how They were previously dressed by Krsna Dasi, so I could try to keep the standard of dressing Them.

I just managed to dress Them in time for Their lunch. 
I see I have to work at making the blu tack inconspicuous.

After lunch I performed arati for all the deities, chanting Gurvastakam”and “Hare Krishna.” Then I ate a quick lunch and returned to New York City so I could distribute my guru’s books at the ISKCON NYC Sunday feast.

Photos


This fall I got my senior citizen Metrocard, another reminder that I reside in a changing body!

Insights

Srila Prabhupada:

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.5.10, purport:

Lord Caitanya advised all His disciples to preach Krishna-katha all over the world without discrimination because the transcendental value of Krishna-katha can purify one and all from material contamination.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.5.13:

For one who is anxious to engage constantly in hearing such topics, Krishna-katha gradually increases his indifference towards all other things. Such constant remembrance of the lotus feet of Lord Krishna by the devotee who has achieved transcendental bliss vanquishes all his miseries without delay.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.2.11, purport:

Through the popularizing of hari-kirtana, or the sankirtana movement, the brahminical culture and ksatriya government will automatically come back, and people will be extremely happy.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.4.38, purport:

A small child, while being cared for by his mother, does not know how the needs of the body for eating, sleeping, lying down, passing water and evacuating are being fulfilled. He is simply satisfied to be on the lap of his mother. Similarly, Prahlada Maharaja was exactly like a small child, being cared for by Govinda. The necessary activities of his body were performed without his knowledge. As a father and mother care for their child, Govinda cared for Prahlada Maharaja, who remained always absorbed in thoughts of Govinda. This is Krishna consciousness. Prahlada Maharaja is the vivid example of perfection in Krishna consciousness.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.1.13, purport:

The entire world is suffering because of spiritual thirst. Every living being is Brahman, or spirit soul, and needs spiritual food to satisfy his hunger and thirst. Unfortunately, however, the world is completely unaware of the nectar of Krishna-katha. The Krishna consciousness movement is therefore a boon to philosophers, religionists and people in general. There is certainly a charming attraction in Krishna and Krishna-katha. Therefore the Absolute Truth is called Krishna, the most attractive.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Adi 17.141, purport:

The Krishna consciousness movement is not a sentimental religious movement; it is a movement for the reformation of all the anomalies of human society. If people take to it seriously, discharging this duty scientifically, as ordered by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, the world will see peace and prosperity instead of being confused and hopeless under useless governments.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila 11.102, purport:

When one’s intelligence is sharp, he can increase the interests of common men in loving Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and through Him, in loving Radha-Krishna.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila 25.265:

Krishna consciousness means understanding the truth of Krishna, the truth of devotional service, the truth of love of Godhead, the truth of emotional ecstasy, the truth of transcendental mellows and the truth of the pastimes of the Lord.”

From a lecture at a school in Montreal on August 13, 1968:

So unless we dovetail our activities with the supreme consciousness, or God consciousness, there cannot be equality, fraternity or universality as we are hankering after. It is not possible. You can go on crying in the wilderness for universal fraternity, friendship, equality, but if you keep your individuality, individual consciousness, selfish consciousness, there is no possibility of peace or tranquillity in the world.”

From a class on Brahma-samhita 5.29–30 in San Francisco on September 22, 1968:

As soon as you try to love Krishna, then you will see, ‘Oh, the cows are my brothers. Oh, the black people are my brothers, the white people are my brothers, the ants are my brothers, the dogs are my brothers, the trees are my brother, everyone my brother.’ That is universal brotherhood.”

From a room conversation with devotees in New Orleans on August 1, 1975:

Save them. If it is not possible to save everyone—as many as possible. This is human life. This is Krishna consciousness, to save others who are in the darkness.”

From a letter to Hitsaran Sharma on January 19, 1968:

This movement is the only movement which can unite all the people in the world in oneness. This is practically proven. The American boys and girls are neither Hindus nor Indians nor they have any knowledge of Sanskrit; and still they have taken this movement wholeheartedly, and that is the proof that Krishna Consciousness movement will be accepted all over the world.”

From a letter to Bhagavan on September 22, 1969:

Actually, in every town and city there are many, many devotees of Krishna; now it is our business to go around the world wherever people are congregating and pick up these sincere souls. The world is suffering for want of this knowledge of Krishna Consciousness, and we experience practically that many people will take to this spiritual line simply if we make this information available to them.”

From an interview in Pittsburgh on September 9, 1972:

Interviewer:Can you convert the world?’
Prabhupada:Yes provided you listen to me. I say that you love God. If you think that “I shall love dog” then how can I convert you? You may ask what is the difference between loving God and dog. The difference is if you love God then you can learn to love everyone, but if you love dog you simply love dog, nobody else. That is the difference.’”

From Bhavan’s journal, questionnaire 2, in New Vrindaban, June 30, 1976:

This Krishna consciousness movement is that we are presenting Krishna as the supreme guru. You take instruction from Him and be benefited.”

From a letter on Tamal Krishna Goswami on October 1, 1969:

We can, by sincere cultivation of bona fide spiritual science attain to the state of pure, unending blissful consciousness, free from anxiety in this very lifetime.”

From a class on Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.22.19 in Tehran on August 8, 1976:

Krishna consciousness movement is very scientific movement for the total benefit of the human society. If it is properly carried out, then everyone will be satisfied and happy and go back home, back to Godhead.”

From a letter to Bahulasva on November 30, 1971:

We stand on our Krishna philosophy, and because it has the full potency of Krishna Himself, there is no limit to the effect it will have upon the world if we remain sincere and convinced for spreading this philosophy purely.”

From an interview with a Newsday reporter in New York on July 14, 1976:

No, it is not surprising, it is natural. . . . just like if you do business in proper way there will be profit. Similarly, as it is enjoined in this book of knowledge, if you do like that it will expand, it will prosper. Two plus two equal to four. Mathematical calculation. If you make two plus two, it will become four. It will neither become three nor five. So here it is said, . . . ‘One who is engaged twenty-four hours in My service, so I,’ yoga-ksemam vahamy aham, ‘I supply whatever he requires, and I protect whatever he has got.’ So if you actually serve Krishna, then everything you want, it will come.”

The human intelligence is meant for understanding the spiritual identity and the goal of life and act accordingly. That is Krishna consciousness movement. It is an educational movement to enlighten the people from gross ignorance to the highest enlightenment of spiritual understanding.”

Quoted in TKG’s Diary on “Prabhupada’s Final Days”:

God is one. He is a person. He is Krishna and we have to follow what Krishna says. Then our life is successful.”

From a class on Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.1.5 in Delhi on November 8, 1973:

We are not doing any miraculous thing. People say that ‘Swamiji, you have done miracles.’ But what miracles I have done? I am simply repeating Krishnas words. That’s all. So everyone can do that.”

From a conversation and lecture at the house of Ksirodakasayi das in London on July 25, 1976:

This Krishna consciousness movement, it is not actually a so-called religious movement, but it is an educational movement to give information to the human society about God, that ‘Here is God.’ You are searching after God, and somebody, in disappointment, saying that ‘God is dead.’ God is neither dead, nor it is fictitious, but it is factual, and here is this God, Krishna.”

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 their grave responsibility for saving this fallen human society from gliding down into hell.”

From a letter to Makanlal 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 to become a sudra. Although Yamaraja is a GBC, he made a little mistake. He was punished to become a sudra. So those who are GBCs 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.”

Vrindavan Dasa Thakura:

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 10.99: 

Good birth, noble family, pious activities, and material wealth cannot award one the treasure of love of God. Only by intense desire can one achieve Krishna.”

Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami:

From The Delaware Diaries, Volume 1, “Tachycardia,” Part 1:

The holiest pinnacle is Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu sankirtana. When they chanted as the Pope passed in parade,the media registered us as ‘protestors.’
“They don’t understand.We were celebrating the holy names not in opposition to the Catholic church. All-one.”

My writing is in a slump. That’s because my life is in a slump. . . . Japa, writing, reading and walking should be enough. You’re shallow, maybe that’s the problem. Lethargic. A man of your age and experience should be mature enough to sustain bhajana.

Chant early in the morning. Chant audibly. Have trust in the holy names. That is, be confident that if you ‘just hear’ attentively, you will make immense gains.”

At least I always emphasized Prabhupada to them [my disciples] so it’s natural they will link stronger to him, and that is a good thing I gave them.”

The journal of a quiet man. He helps others by sharing Krishna consciousness. He tells his own way so they can reflect on theirs.”

On Nrsimhadeva’s appearance day in 1972 I was given sannyasa, and Prabhupada told me, ‘Preach, preach, preach.’”

Dive deep like a snorkeler. Into your spiritual heart. Keep your eyes off the billboards that jump into your vision. Same with the live women on the boardwalk.”

I said all my Krishna mantras, but not with joy.”

As the years go by, woes pile up. Tolerant fellows roll with the punches and turn to Krishna.”

My talk with Nirañjana Swami was heart-to-heart. I told him about my falldown, but he said he never read any letter or knew anything about it because he’s keeping off the internet. He said he knows me and is grateful to me, and that’s what counts. I began to cry and asked him to forgive me. He got up and came over and embraced me. He said the important thing is to bounce back from a fall, and he told how Prabhupada was so compassionate to all his disciples. I like Nirañjana Swami very much, and I’m so glad I got to talk to him.”

They also serve who only wait.”

When you’re dead, your human saga is over, and survivors soon forget the details and the essence. Some grieve. But it does the dead person no good; he’s gone to his next journey in another body, a new birth. He doesn’t remember his past life. But his present life determines the next life, karmic reaction. Those who practice devotional service get a better next life. The perfection of the next life is to transfer to the spiritual world, where life is eternal, full knowledge and bliss. If you’re not perfect but are a practicing devotee, you take your next life in a good family of devotees, with advantages for further spiritual progress. You may need more seasoning, more tapasya, more preaching. They say a pure devotee doesn’t even aspire to attain the spiritual world. All he wants is to go on serving Krishna wholeheartedly, for Krishna’s pleasure, anywhere in the universe.”

Watermelon snack: ‘Oh Lord, this material body is a lump of ignorance . . . But Krishna is very kind to us. He has given us this nice prasadam just to control the tongue. Now let us take this prasadam to our full satisfaction and glorify Their Lordships Sri Sri Radha and Krishna and in love call upon Lord Caitanya and Prabhu Nityananda to please help us.’ Then you taste the sweet red core of the watermelon. Don’t forget Sri Sri Radha and Krishna and Lord Caitanya and Prabhu Nityananda. They should be there in every bite. Not that you recite the prayer and then pig out.”

Krishna plays sports in Vraja, and is the best, but sometimes He loses and has to carry a cowherd boy on His shoulders. He could win every time if He liked, but He prefers sometimes being defeated by His beloved gopas. He’s the best kind of friend.”

The cowherd boys don’t kill the demons. When Krishna killed Dhenukasura, the ass demon, many other donkey demons joined in to attack, and Krishna’s friends joined the fight. But on their own, they wait for their hero to dispense with the wizards. They have great confidence in Him, as when they marched into the open mouth of Aghasura, knowing Krishna would save them. They are sometimes genuinely afraid of dangerous situations, as when they were trapped in the forest fire, and they called on Krishna to save them. He doesn’t fail them. He swallowed the forest fire after first asking the boys to close their eyes. (Madhava Maharaja said Krishna asked the boys to close their eyes because He didn’t want them to tell Mother Yasoda that Krishna had eaten fire, as when they told on Him when He ate dirt.)”

It is hard to explain how the faith originates, but it does so by hearing and associating with a pure soul who is in knowledge and coming in disciplic succession. It is very hard to create this faith in nonbelievers. But it happens to fortunate persons who expose themselves to chanting the holy names, hearing the scriptures (reading them and hearing them explained by realized souls). Honoring Krishna prasadam helps. Hanging around with disciples of the spiritual master is a very powerful impetus for gaining attraction and faith in Krishna consciousness. These things happened to me, and there’s no real need to analyze how it occurs. Having become fortunate, one should be very careful to protect his good fortune and not fall into misfortune again.”

In one sitting I read Rahasya Nama, by Sacinandana Swami. It’s a very good book on perfection in chanting. He draws mostly from the works of Bhaktivinoda Thakura. Some of the aspirations and techniques are beyond me, but it was good to read them and realize the prime importance of harinama. It’s a small book, and everyone ought to read it.”

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.”

One year, on the anniversary of the day Prabhupada took sannyasa, a group of ISKCON sannyasis and senior devotees went to the Kesavaji Maṭha in Mathura, where Srila Prabhupada accepted sannyasa from his Godbrother Kesava Maharaja. Narayana Maharaja was present, and each of the ISKCON devotees gave a little talk on sannyasa. True to Srila Prabhupada’s spirit, we all mentioned that sannyasa meant renunciation of material duties so that one could preach. When we were finished, Narayana Maharaja ‘corrected’ us and said sannyasa was not for preaching but for entering the rasika mood of meditation on the pastimes of Radha and Krishna. We were all shocked at his statements. Later, we crowded into his room, and he elucidated on his point: sannyasa was for raganuga bhakti. But Prabhupada said preach.”

Too much suffering to want to return to another birth in this world, but what are you doing to escape the cycle of birth and death? Too many lures by maya to stay here and enjoy.”

From Vyasa-puja:

Help distribute my books but not at the expense of Srila Prabhupada’s books.

Jayadvaita Swami has even invited his disciples to help me distribute my books, and they are very organized about it.

If my books are available, they sell on their own merit, so no one has to be a super book distributor.

Nitai has selected fifty titles that appeal to Indians. He has a web site, and he distributes those titles at the Mayapur and Vrindavan festivals.

I keep my disciples in mind when I write the books. They are for you.

Jayadvaita Swami:

The most elevated person does not see anyone’s bad qualities but only good qualities. The most degraded person just sees bad qualities, and those in between discriminate between good and bad qualities.

Being stingy is a bad quality, but for a treasurer, it is a good quality.

Vrindavan Dasa Thakura says according to the amount of goodness one has within him one is considered sadhu.

When several devotees practically demanded that one godbrother who did something really bad be expelled, Srila Prabhupada said, “If I removed people who had some fault, none of you would be here.” The devotees became humbled. Prabhupada added, “But if he is not willing to be reformed, he must leave.”

Srila Prabhupada reminds us when speaking on spiritual topics we must cite Vedic authority. Thus the Six Gosvamis searched through the Vedic literature for evidence.

Caitanya Mahaprabhu would devastate the Mayavadis’ arguments so completely that they could say nothing, and thus He made them peaceful.

We are not dry jnanis or stern vairagis. We are interested in relishing Krishna’s pastimes, yet we do have knowledge and detachment.

Srila Prabhupada was not criticized for having female disciples but for having female disciples living in the ashram. Thus they are kept as separately as possible.

We should not try to be mahajanas. We should try to follow the mahajanas.

Srila Prabhupada set the standards, and we have to follow the standards.

One definition of God is He who has no one who is equal to Him and no one who is greater than Him.

The idea that all devatas are equal is not supported by Bhagavad-gita because Krishna says here in Bg. 7.7 that nothing is superior to Him. This verse also defeats the idea that the impersonal Brahman is supreme.

It is good to know that the building is on fire, but one must act to get out of the building. Similarly, it is good to know that Krishna is God, but one must engage in His devotional service. That is the natural result of knowing that Krishna is God.

Sankaracarya says narayano paro ’vyaktat – Narayana is transcendental, and who is that Narayana? Devaki-putrah, the son of Devaki.

In one purport Srila Prabhupada was describing the impersonalist philosophy in some detail. I wrote him asking if I edited it correctly because it didn’t seem to make sense. Srila Prabhupada replied, “Yes, you edited it correctly. Yes, it does not make sense.”

Comment (by Meru at 26 Second Avenue): Thank you for coming here.
Reply: Thank you for being here. If I would be here alone, it would be really boring.

Krishna is saying, “Take shelter of Me and all other shelters will be included.” Krishna is the shelter of all of those who give shelter.

Krishna is the most affectionate person, and He knows what our problem is. He knows everyone is suffering.

Other people do not understand what we are going through, but Krishna is in everyone’s heart, and He is aware of what everyone is going through.

We are not happy because we are not our bodies, and satisfying our bodies will not satisfy us.

If we have Krishna, even if people think we are a failure, we will be a success.

We experience that our attempts to take shelter of things other than Krishna do not actually satisfy us.

Devotees of Krishna, even if they do not have this or that, are happier than the richest man or the most famous movie star.

Krishna will never die. Nor will He ever turn against us.

Q: How do you deal with doubt?
A: With knowledge. We have doubts because we don’t know. By hearing from someone who knows we become free from doubt.

Smara Hari Prabhu:

Srimad-Bhagavatam is the natural commentary on Vedanta-sutra because Vyasadeva is the author of both.

Hansarupa Prabhu:

We are hearing these pastimes Srila Prabhupada performed over 50 years ago. This is valuable because a moment’s association with a pure devotee does not mean just physical association.

The ritual death by a chaste woman entering her husband’s funeral pyre, hoping to achieve the same spiritual destination as her husband, is named after Sati, who self-immolates herself in this chapter of Srimad-Bhagavatam, because of her husband being insulted.

The sincere disciple is never confused about what to do.

Sadhana bhakti is not a Chinese restaurant where you take something from column A and something from column B.

Literally we were delivered just by sitting in Srila Prabhupada’s classes. Our doubts were dissolved without us even having to voice them.”

The hearing and chanting can never be neglected.

If one is no longer connected with the spiritual energy one becomes overwhelmed with confusion. This is obvious to the more advanced devotees.

Urjasvat as the bhakta leader would say to the new people, “If you have questions, that means you do not have answers. Because you do not have answers, why not then accept Krishna’s answers?”

Rama Raya Prabhu:

It is important to understand that an advanced devotee always sees the goodness in all aspects of the Lord’s plan.

Srimad-Bhagavatam is tailor-made for Kali-yuga.

Because Maharaja Bharata was a little inattentive he had to remain two more births in this world.

Our relatives are like actors in a movie who are temporarily put together.

At the Gaura Purnima festival of the Gaudiya Math in 1936 Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura predicted that one of his disciples, perhaps a long time in the future, would cross over the ocean and deliver the whole world.

Srila Prabhupada was so attached to Gandhi’s movement he renounced his college diploma, yet just a few words from Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura switched his allegiance.

Because there are so few practicing devotees of Krishna in society, they are very rare and very special.

As a parent whose child is abducted will come to the police station every day to learn if there is progress in the search for the child, the Lord comes to this world in every day of Brahma to recover forgetful souls.

An employee from Macmillan ordered a copy of the Happening album of the devotees chanting the Hare Krishna mantra. Srila Prabhupada suggested that Brahmananda hand deliver the record, and at the same time, mention that he had a Gita to be published. Brahmananda went there but was dismayed to find the person ordering the record was only a clerk. However, shortly after he got there, a gentleman came in the office and the clerk respectfully greeted him. The clerk told Brahmananda that the gentleman was in charge of selecting manuscripts for publication. Brahmananda Prabhu mentioned that he worked for a swami who has a Bhagavad-gita manuscript, and the man said he was looking for a Bhagavad-gita and agreed to publish it on the spot.

Comment by me:

You talked about how dishonor can be equal to death. I know three devotees who were so affected when their spouse dumped them after 20 years of marriage that they all got cancer, and two of them died.

As Sati was of two minds, to follow her husband’s advice or to go to the sacrifice as she desired, I was indecisive whether to live in the temple or continuing traveling with my friends to the West Coast. I did not remember that I was indecisive at that time, but perhaps twenty years later, Niranjana Swami, who convinced me to move in the temple said, “You were the hardest person I ever convinced to move in the temple. I had to pray to Krishna.” Thus it is helpful to have devotee well-wishers when confronted with indecision to choose the best alternative.

Sri Prahlada Prabhu:

The musicians do not make the kirtan but the sanga.

Yugala Kisora Prabhu:

The son of the king of Nepal wanted to marry an Indian girl who was also from a royal family. The mother said no. The father said we will discuss. The son got a gun and killed his parents and his sisters. When he realized what he had done, he killed himself. That is the power of anger caused by frustration of desire, which Krishna mentions in Bg. 2.62–63.

We become angry according to the degree we want to enjoy the material world.

Dharmaraja Prabhu:

Here it is mentioned that women need protection, but actually we all need protection. Children need protection. The disciple needs the protection of the guru.

Draupadi was not just a housewife. She had the keys to the kingdom. She would meet with ministers when her husbands were out protecting the kingdom.

As Sati, due to attachment, neglected to do her duty of following her dharma of service to her husband, Arjuna was inclined to ignore his duty of fighting as warrior due to attachment to his family members.

It is important for authorities to explain the wisdom behind their instructions so their subordinates are more inclined to follow them.

I know a case where the husband did not really like his wife doing devotional service but after many years of the wife acting nicely as both a wife and a devotee, he ended becoming a devotee himself.

Hari Vilasa Prabhu:

We may do so many spiritual practices, but ultimately it is the higher taste that saves us.

The official stance of the Catholic Church is that animals do not have eternal souls, just some temporary living symptoms. Therefore it is alright to kill them.

Genocide involves depersonalizing a class of people to the extent that we feel it is OK to kill them.

Param Brahma Prabhu:

It is said that the man’s body and the woman’s body are like different jackets. When we put them on, we experience all the particular features of that particular jacket.

One advanced in bhakti is always ready to offer respects to others and not to ask respect for himself.

In all the Vedic scriptures only one duty is assigned to the wife: to follow the instructions of the husband.

When the wife ignores the instructions of the husband, then calamity results for herself and for the whole family.

The Vedic society the women have natural protectors, the father, the husband, and the son, but when they step outside the bounds of these protectors then there is no one to protect them, and they get exploited.

Before saying something, if it is not good for you, for the other person, or for the people in general, then do not say it.

When we are surrounded by people who do not criticize others, it reduces our tendency to criticize others.

Gaura Govinda Maharaja was asked how to increase our tolerance. He said by increasing our sadhana.

In his previous ashram, Kadamba Kanana Swami would never criticize his wife in front of others and she would never criticize him in front of others. They would sort out their disagreements in private and focus on serving the Lord.

Comment by me, some I actually made and others I just wrote down:

When I go to a temple sometimes I am given my own room and assigned someone to cook for me, while at other temples I am asked to pay rent. Thus I can see I have to be detached from honor and dishonor!

I was engaged to a woman who once said to me, “I do not like the idea that I have to adjust my behavior to satisfy your mind.” That conception is just the opposite of chastity, and I worried what it would be like to marry someone with that mentality!

I do not make important decisions unless I have chanted sixteen rounds, gotten enough sleep, and gotten enough to eat.

You mention how grhamedhis are envious. One time when I was in my mid-twenties and I was visiting my mother, my aunt, and my cousin for Thanksgiving, they asked if I was going to get married. It occurred to me they had all been married but were now single. My mother and aunt were widowed, and my cousin was divorced. I asked them which they liked better, being married or being single. They all said they liked being single better, so I asked them why they were encouraging me to get married. A well-wisher would not encourage someone to embark on a path that he himself found problematic. That experience reminded me of the statement that grhamedhis are envious.

Venu Madhurya Prabhu:

Of all the Puranas only two have commentaries by the acaryas, Vishnu Purana and Srimad-Bhagavatam. Of these, Vishnu Purana has two commentaries and Srimad-Bhagavatam has eighty-one commentaries.

It is said Yudhisthira’s toes were burned by the radiation from the angry eyes of Gandhari who wanted to see those people who killed her sons.

Fear is there, but by guru, sadhu, and sastra we have to adjust our fear.

I was doubtful about going out on sankirtana one cold day in Ukraine. I did anyway, and one man bought three books, Bhagavad-gita, Isopanisad, and Teachings of Lord Caitanya. I thought with that nice selection of books that man could become a devotee. Five years later that man contacted me on social media and told me that he was studying Bhakti-sastra and distributing prasadam to those attending the tours he organizes.

Bhakti is based on consulting with our seniors.

Aditya Devi Dasi, vice president of ISKCON NYC:

If we do not accept the reception we are offered, the person offering it will be offended.

Sati was so disturbed that her father did not honor Lord Shiva or herself that she did not accept the reception offered by her mother and sisters.

Although people may get an invitation from a smiling devotee, the people actually come to the temple being directed by Paramatma.

People appreciate that the devotees are offering them something genuine.

A neophyte may think that he is as qualified as the other devotees because he sees he is engaging in the same activities that they are, and thus become proud.

The external things help us come to the platform of doing the internal things.

Although morality changes in human society, Vaishnava behavior has remained the same for thousands of years.

Comment by me:

Lord Caitanya said, ‘My dear Sanatana, although you are the deliverer of the entire universe and although even the demigods and great saints are purified by touching you, it is the characteristic of a devotee to observe and protect the Vaishnava etiquette. Maintenance of the Vaishnava etiquette is the ornament of a devotee.’” (Sri Caitanya-caritamria, Antya 4.129–130)

Humility means that one should not be anxious to have the satisfaction of being honored by others.” (Bhagavad-gita 13.812, purport)

Comment by Rama Raya Prabhu:

Our job is not done until the people who visit the temple come to the point of being embraced by Krishna in Goloka Vrindavana like Gopa Kumara.

By respecting senior devotees who are deeply committed to Srila Prabhupada’s mission, we are respecting Srila Prabhupada, who has empowered them to a greater or lesser degree.

Natabara Gauranga Prabhu:

Gopala Campu is like Jiva Goswami’s Krishna book, Ananta Vrindavana Campu is Kavi Karnapuri’s Krishna book, and Garga Samhita is Garga Muni’s Krishna book.

Tapovana is the place where the gopis performed their austerities to attain Krishna as their husband, known as their Katyayani vrata.

-----

A recent ISKCON NYC Bhagavatam speaker reminded us that Srila Prabhupada considered that this verse from Bhagavad-gita summarizes Krishna consciousness:

mat-karma-krn mat-paramo

mad-bhaktah sanga-varjitah
nirvairah sarva-bhutesu
yah sa mam eti pandava

My dear Arjuna, he who engages in My pure devotional service, free from the contaminations of fruitive activities and mental speculation, he who works for Me, who makes Me the supreme goal of his life, and who is friendly to every living being—he certainly comes to Me.” (Bhagavad-gita 11.55)

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura’s Disappearance Day
Giriraj Swami

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, Srila Prabhupada’s spiritual master, is my grand spiritual master, but I feel that I never really knew him very well until I read his biography Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Vaibhava, by my godbrother Bhakti Vikasa Swami. Many of the quotes and references below come from that work.

We are all here by the mercy of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and the Supreme Lord, Sri Krishna Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. There’s a line through which the mercy descends upon us, beginning with Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and passing, one teacher after the other, through parampara, disciplic succession. Five thousand years ago, Krishna came in His original form and instructed in the Bhagavad-gita (9.34, 18.65), man-mana bhava mad-bhakto: “Always think of Me and become My devotee.” Five hundred years ago, Lord Krishna came again, in the devotional form of Sri Krishna Chaitanya, to explain and personally show how to be a devotee and always think of Krishna. Lord Chaitanya quoted a verse from the Brhan-naradiya Purana (38.126):

harer nama harer nama
  harer namaiva kevalam
kalau nasty eva nasty eva
  nasty eva gatir anyatha

“One should chant the holy name, chant the holy name, chant the holy name of Hari, Krishna. There is no other way, no other way, no other way for success in the present age of Kali.” He also desired and predicted:

prthivite ache yata nagaradi grama
sarvatra pracara haibe mora nama

“In as many towns and villages as there are on the surface of the earth, My holy name will be propagated.” (Cb 3.4.126) This desire and prediction were expressed at a time when it was almost impossible to imagine or believe that it could happen.

In the 1800s, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura began the effort to spread the holy name of Krishna to countries outside India. He wrote a small book in English called Chaitanya Mahaprabhu: His Life and Precepts and dispatched copies to libraries around the world. In recent years, Srila Prabhupada’s disciples have discovered copies in libraries from Canada (McGill University) to Australia. Bhaktivinoda Thakura yearned for the day when devotees from all over the world would unite in harinama-sankirtana and wrote, “Very soon the unparalleled path of harinama-sankirtana will be propagated all over the planet. . . . Oh, for that day when the fortunate English, French, Russian, German, and American people will take up banners, mridangas, and kartals and perform kirtan through their streets and towns. When will that day come? Oh, for the day when the fair-skinned men from their side will raise up the chanting of ‘Jaya Sacinandana, jaya Sacinandana ki jaya!’ and join with the Bengali devotees. When will that day be?” (Sajjana-tosani)

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was a powerful spiritual master, an acharya. After the disappearance of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and His associates, many unscrupulous people claiming to be Mahaprabhu’s followers introduced concocted philosophies and practices—even illicit activities—to the point that if an educated Bengali heard the word Vaishnava, he would immediately think the worst. In educated circles Vaishnava had come to mean a sentimental, ignorant person of loose character who, in the guise of religion, engaged in all sorts of questionable activities. In this precarious situation, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura came forward and presented the true understanding of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, speaking strongly against the deviant groups that had distorted and perverted His pure teachings and practices.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura held a high position in the British rule of India—the highest an Indian could hold, and then only very rarely. He had important responsibilities in the government and had a large family, but his main interest was Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and the sankirtana movement. He would sleep little and rise early. He did so much—wrote books, traveled, preached, established centers—and had a tremendous effect, especially on the people of Bengal and Orissa, including the intellectual elite, who were just then coming in touch with modern ideas from the West. He revived the true mission of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, inspiring hosts of people to join him, and pushed back the deviant groups, who lost much of their influence.

Having undertaken such a tremendous task and executed it so successfully but still being surrounded by so many parties with vested interests in covering the true intention of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was at a loss as to who would carry on his mission. He prayed to Krishna to send someone—one of His own associates from the spiritual realm—to continue the work. It is understood that the appearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura was the answer to Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s prayers.

There are many incidents from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati’s early life that indicate that he was that person sent by Krishna. When Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was five months old, the Ratha-yatra cart halted in front of Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s home in Puri, and the Thakura directed his wife, Bhagavati Devi, to carry the baby to the chariot. When the infant was placed at the lotus feet of Lord Jagannatha, he extended his tiny arms to touch the Deity’s feet, and Lord Jagannatha dropped one of His garlands around him—a blessing and a confirmation of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta’s divine descent.

Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati understood his father’s mission and worked with him to fulfill it. His father initiated him into the chanting of the holy name (hari-nama), the Hare Krishna maha-mantra, but according to etiquette, a father does not give actual diksa to his son. So Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura instructed him to approach Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji, a great maha-bhagavata—a fully self-realized, liberated soul—for diksa. But Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji was a renounced bhajananandi and was not inclined to accept disciples; he preferred simply to immerse himself in chanting the holy names and hearing scripture.

When Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati approached Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji Maharaja, Babaji Maharaja told him directly that he would not accept him or anyone else as a disciple. Still, Siddhanta Sarasvati persisted, so Babaji Maharaja told him, “I will ask Mahaprabhu.” A few days later, when Siddhanta Sarasvati returned and inquired, “What was Mahaprabhu’s order?” Babaji Maharaja replied, “I forgot to ask.” And when Siddhanta Sarasvati came for the third time, Babaji Maharaja directly refused him: “Mahaprabhu has not given permission.” Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati was devastated. He stood up and quoted a line by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, addressed to the guru—karuna na hoile, kandiya kandiya, prana na rakhibo ara: “If you are not merciful to me, I will simply weep and weep and will not be able to maintain my life.” Finally, when Gaurakisora dasa Babaji Maharaja understood how sincere and serious Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati was, he accepted him as his disciple and initiated him.

Five years later, in 1905, Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati undertook a vow to chant at least three lakh holy names daily—ten million monthly—until he had chanted one billion holy names. For his disciples, Srila Prabhupada fixed the minimum number of sixteen rounds per day, which takes most devotees about two hours. Four times sixteen is sixty-four rounds, or one lakh names. And three times sixty-four rounds equal three hundred thousand names, which would take us, even at a good rate, at least sixteen hours a day. In Mayapur, Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati constructed a grass hut, where he lived very simply and chanted day and night. If rain came and leaked through the thatched roof, he would just hold up an umbrella and continue chanting: “Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare / Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare.”

To complete his vow took more than nine years, but even then, Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati would write, preach, and serve the dhama. One program he attended was especially significant. In Bengal the caste brahmans held a stranglehold on people’s religious practices. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura had spoken openly against them and their false claim, based on their supposed high birth, that they possessed exclusive rights to be gurus and perform brahminical functions. Naturally, when Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati challenged them, the brahmans reacted. An assembly of smarta-brahmanas and jata-gosanis (caste Gosvamis) came together to try to refute the arguments of the pure Vaishnavas and published a tract against them. In response, the Vaishnavas called a three-day public meeting to discuss the relative positions of brahmans and Vaishnavas. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was expected to be the main speaker, but severe rheumatism rendered him bedridden.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura himself was not born in a brahman family, and obviously, neither was his son. Now, the question may be raised that since Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was a ray of Vishnu, an eternal associate of Krishna’s sent from the spiritual realm to the material world to preach, Krishna could have arranged for him to take birth in the highest class of brahman family, with all the brahminical qualifications. But He didn’t. Why not? Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati explains that the Lord does not arrange for pure devotees to take birth only in high-class families, with all the advantages of good health, education, culture, wealth, strength, and so on, because ordinary people would feel discouraged. They would think, “Oh, I didn’t take birth in a high-class family; I didn’t have this or that advantage. What is the hope for me?” So, great souls take birth in various kinds of families to show us the example that anyone in any condition—even if not born in a brahman family—can become Krishna conscious, and to give us hope that we too can be Krishna conscious.

So, after the publication of the caste brahmans’ tract, on the eve of the public meeting to be convened by the Vaishnavas, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was incapacitated, and he cried out in desperation, “Is there no one in the Vaishnava world who can reply to these people and, by presenting scriptural evidence and logic, put a stop to their base activities?” Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati took up the challenge, wrote an essay called “Conclusion Regarding the Comparison of Brahmans and Vaishnavas,” and went to attend the meeting.

Many caste brahmans, although not invited, also went to the meeting. Understanding that Bhaktivinoda Thakura was indisposed and unable to attend, they swaggered about, confident that they would easily triumph over the Vaishnavas.

Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati was the first speaker. He began by quoting various statements from scripture about the exalted position of brahmans, and the caste brahmans in the audience were delighted. He was so brilliant that he could speak better about the high position of brahmans than the brahmans themselves. But then he began quoting verses from scripture about the position of Vaishnavas, establishing that Vaishnavas were higher than even brahmans and that irrespective of one’s birth, if one accepted the Vaishnava principles, he would attain a position more exalted than that of a brahman. The brahmans in the audience were completely overwhelmed. Seeing no way to counter Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati’s arguments, the smarta-brahmanas and jata-gosanis slinked away.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura felt assured that his mission was in capable hands, that Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati was a worthy successor to carry on his cause. And Sri Siddhanta Sarasvati began to preach far and wide. He was fearless and open in his criticism of anything false. And his example and instructions remain relevant to us today.

Srila Sarasvati Thakura was a prodigious writer and speaker on various topics, including how to present the message of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. He noted that there were people who thought that you should say only positive—not negative—things. I experienced that when I was in Madras. I was preaching as I had heard Srila Prabhupada preach, and people reacted. Even friends, people who were hosting me and supporting me, advised me, “Don’t criticize others. Just say what you want about your philosophy and activities.” Srila Sarasvati Thakura averred that it was imperative not only to elucidate the truth but also to criticize anything false, because in Kali-yuga there is so much false propaganda that we have to be very clear; there cannot be any ambiguity in our message:

“The positive method by itself is not the most effective method of propaganda in a controversial age like the present. The negative method, which seeks to differentiate the truth from non-truth in all its forms, is even better calculated to convey the directly inconceivable significance of the Absolute. It is a necessity which cannot be conscientiously avoided by the dedicated preacher of the truth if he wants to be a loyal servant of Godhead. The method is sure to create an atmosphere of controversy in which it is quite easy to lose one’s balance of judgment. But the ways of the deluding energy are so intricate that unless their mischievous nature is fully exposed, it is not possible for the soul in the conditioned state to avoid the snares spread by the enchantress [Maya] for encompassing the ruin of her only too willing victims. It is a duty which shall be sacred to all who have been enabled to attain even a distant glimpse of the Absolute.”

Srila Prabhupada also demonstrated this approach. He had a friend named Dr. Patel, who would accompany him on his morning walks on Juhu Beach. Dr. Patel was highly literate, he knew Sanskrit, and he was quite sharp. So, one morning, Dr. Patel started praising a revered popular religious figure of India, and Srila Prabhupada, in turn, began to criticize the figure. Dr. Patel protested, “You cannot criticize like this.” But Srila Prabhupada replied, “I am not saying; Krishna is saying—na mam duskrtino mudhah prapadyante naradhamah, mayayapahrta-jnana asuram bhavam asritah: If you are not surrendered to Krishna, you are a miscreant in one of these categories—fool, rascal, demon.”

Dr. Patel became agitated and raised his voice, and Srila Prabhupada raised his. The whole situation became both tense and intense. Finally, Dr. Patel’s friends dragged him away. It was like in a boxing ring when the bell rings to signal the end of the fight and the two opponents just keep going at each other and the referee has to tear them apart.

For the first time, Dr. Patel stopped coming for the morning walks, and Srila Prabhupada also said, “Now no more discussion; we will only read Krsna book.” But after a couple of days, Dr. Patel was walking in one direction on the beach and Prabhupada was walking in the other, and, as Dr. Patel described it, something in his heart just drew him to Srila Prabhupada’s lotus feet. He offered obeisance and said, “Prabhupada, I am sorry, but we are trained to respect all the accredited saints of India.” And Srila Prabhupada replied, “Yes, and our business is to point out who is not a saint.” He had learned from his guru maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, that we not only tell who is a saint; we also explain who is not a saint. And that is the mercy of the Vaishnava, so people know clearly what is what. Otherwise, they can be misled and, as a result, suffer.

Srila Sarasvati Thakura was a tremendously powerful and successful preacher who fearlessly spoke the truth. And his pure preaching inspired hundreds of thousands of people to follow. But he also had enemies. He was the enemy of falsehood, and consequently, people who were thriving on falsehood sometimes became his enemies. Once, when he and his party were performing navadvipa-parikrama, the caste brahmans hired goondas, thugs, who let loose with a volley of stones and boulders on the party, aiming to take Srila Sarasvati Thakura’s life. (There were attempts on other occasions as well.) But one of his disciples cleverly exchanged his white dress for Sarasvati Thakura’s saffron robes, so Sarasvati Thakura emerged disguised and escaped. But it was a terrible scene. It looked like a massacre, with the streets of Navadvipa stained with the blood of the Vaishnavas. Some devotees suffered gashes and fractures, but by Krishna’s grace none were killed.

It was a dark moment, but when it came to light that the attack had been perpetrated by the caste Gosvamis, the public sided with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and the Gaudiya Matha, and the caste Gosvamis’ opposition to him lost whatever credibility it had. As news of the event spread, those in learned circles protested in newspapers and magazines. The chief police inspector in Navadvipa was sacked, and the parikrama continued under full police protection. Later, when urged to press charges against the culprits, Srila Sarasvati Thakura declined, saying that the goondas had done a yeoman’s service—otherwise how could the Gaudiya Matha have been featured on the front pages of all the newspapers? Srila Sarasvati Thakura was the enemy of falsehood, but he was the well-wisher of everyone, even of people who were inimical to him.

Although Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati was so austere and rigid, so strict with himself, when it came to preaching he was ready to spend any amount of money and do anything. When I was first serving in India, in 1970, only affluent people could afford cars, mainly the locally manufactured Fiats and Ambassadors. But Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura had a limousine—back in the 1930s. And he dressed nicely. He would typically wear a dhoti, but on occasion, as required, he would don a double-breasted coat, stockings, and shoes. He had fine furniture for receiving special guests. Thus, referring to the elite, he said, “We are preaching by approaching the people of the world dressed even somewhat better than they, showing knowledge even somewhat greater than theirs, being even somewhat more stylish than they—without which they would think us worthless and not listen to our hari-katha. . . . I have to go to various places for propagating hari-katha, so I must present myself as a learned and decent gentleman; otherwise nondevotees will not give me their time.”

He used all means to broadcast the message of Krishna. Employing the latest technologies, he directed the construction of dioramas and other exhibits and staged huge theistic exhibitions. He built a grand marble temple on the bank of the Ganges at Bag-bazar in Calcutta. The procession that brought the Deities on a beautiful ratha, chariot, from the matha at Ultadangi to the new temple was enormous. Millions of people lined the streets along the two-mile route, which took four hours to traverse, and twenty-five thousand men, divided into forty-three groups, accompanied the Deities with loud harinama-sankirtana. For its work, the Gaudiya Matha owned four cars, a horse and buggy, an elephant, and a camel. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati would treat prominent guests to excursions on the Ganges in one of the Matha’s launches and expound hari-katha to them.

In January of 1935 the governor of Bengal, Sir John Anderson, visited Mayapur. This was a major event, because the Britishers were the rulers, and Srila Sarasvati Thakura was one of their subjects, their vassals. But the governor, accompanied by many other dignitaries, came all the way to Mayapur to meet Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and see his work.

Despite Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati’s tremendous purity and potency and success as a preacher, however, within his own institution there were disconcerting signs that some of his leading disciples were becoming materially infected. With so much opulence, fame, and respect, some of them had become distracted. Instead of realizing that all the facility was meant for the service of the Lord, to bring people to the Lord’s unalloyed service, they were enjoying it, and all the adulation. In an effort to reform his followers, Srila Sarasvati Thakura spoke strongly, and he restricted the use of certain facilities—only for service, only for preaching—to curb the devotees’ materialistic tendencies. (Of course, he also had many sincere disciples, who did not become materially affected.) At the same time, Srila Sarasvati Thakura continued his propaganda activities—writing, publishing, traveling, and preaching—and was successful wherever he went. Still, he was disturbed that some of his disciples had become so mundane.

When he reached the age of sixty-two, Srila Sarasvati Thakura experienced a decline in health, and he made statements indicating that he would soon be leaving. In late October 1936 he traveled to Puri, a holy place that was also warmer than Calcutta, but in December, though he was in a weakened condition, he wanted to return to Calcutta, and the disciples arranged for his travel by train.

In Calcutta Srila Sarasvati Thakura’s disciples called in some of the city’s most renowned physicians. When one advised him, “You have to rest more. You can’t speak so much,” Sarasvati Thakura proceeded to preach for hours about the purpose of human life—that the physical body was temporary and that the soul’s absolute necessity was to serve the Lord. He felt that if he couldn’t speak about Krishna, what would be the use of living?

On December 23 he instructed the devotees gathered at his bedside: “I have upset many persons’ minds. Many might have considered me their enemy, because I was obliged to speak the plain truth of service and devotion towards the Absolute Godhead. I have given them all those troubles only so they might turn their face toward the Personality of Godhead without any desire for gain and with unalloyed devotion. Surely some day they will be able to understand that.

“I advise all to preach the teachings of Rupa-Raghunatha [two of the Six Gosvamis, direct disciples of Lord Chaitanya] with all energy and resources. Our ultimate goal shall be to become the dust of the lotus feet of Sri Sri Rupa and Raghunatha Gosvamis. You should all work conjointly under the guidance of your spiritual master with a view to serve the Absolute Knowledge, the Personality of Godhead. You should live somehow or other without any quarrel in this mortal world only for the service of Godhead. Do not, please, give up the service of Godhead, in spite of all dangers, all criticisms, and all discomforts. Do not be disappointed, for most people in the world do not serve the Personality of Godhead; do not give up your own service, which is your everything and all, neither reject the process of chanting and hearing of the transcendental holy name of Godhead. You should always chant the transcendental name of Godhead with patience and forbearance like a tree and humbleness like a straw . . . There are many amongst you who are well qualified and able workers. We have no other desire whatsoever.”

After midnight on December 31, Srila Sarasvati Thakura left this world. His disciples took his body to Mayapur and established his samadhi there.

News of his departure was broadcast on All-India Radio, and an official day of mourning was observed in Bengal. The Corporation of Calcutta held a special meeting in tribute to his memory and issued a resolution expressing its members’ deep sorrow. The mayor addressed the assembly:

“I rise to condole the passing away of His Divine Grace Paramahamsa Srimad Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaja, the president-acharya of the Gaudiya Matha of Calcutta and the great leader of the Gaudiya movement throughout the world. This melancholy event happened on the first day of this New Year.

“Born in 1874, he dedicated his whole life to religious pursuits and dissemination of the cultural wealth of this great and ancient land of ours. An intellectual giant, he elicited the admiration of all for his unique scholarship, high and varied attainments, original thinking, and wonderful exposition of many difficult branches of knowledge.

“With invaluable contributions, he enriched many journals. He was the author of some devotional literature of repute. He was one of the most powerful and brightest exponents of the cult of Vaishnavism, his utterances and writings displaying a deep study of comparative philosophy and theology. Catholicity of his views, soundness of his teachings, and, above all, his dynamic personality and the irresistible force of the pure and simple life, had attracted thousands of followers of his message of love and service to the Absolute as propagated by Sri Krishna Chaitanya.

“He was the founder and guiding spirit of the Sri Chaitanya Matha at Sri Mayapur (Nadia) and the Gaudiya Matha of Calcutta. The Gaudiya movement, to which his contribution is no small one, has received a setback at the passing away of such a great soul. His departure has created a void in the spiritual horizon of India, which is difficult to be filled up.”

That void was a big one—Srila Sarasvati Thakura was a monumental personality, and there was no one else like him. Practically, there had never been anyone like him before, and nobody could imagine anyone like him coming afterwards.

But in 1965, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta’s humble servant, a grihastha disciple named Abhay Caranaravinda dasa, who after his guru maharaja’s disappearance had been awarded sannyasa and the name “A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami” by Sripada Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja, boarded a steamer from Calcutta, traveled to New York, and began the Krishna consciousness movement, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, in the West. Bhaktivedanta Swami—Srila Prabhupada, as he became known—embodied the spirit and teachings and potency of his guru maharaja and fulfilled the desire and prediction of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, and Srila Sarasvati Thakura that the holy names of Sri Krishna, of Sri Krishna Chaitanya, would be propagated in every town and village of the world.

Srila Prabhupada made adjustments, because he had his own audience and particular circumstances. Like his guru maharaja, he was ready to use anything and everything in the service of the mission. He engaged modern technology—tape recorders, Dictaphones, electric typewriters, printing presses, computers, airplanes—in the service of the Lord. He sent disciples to Bengal to learn the traditional art of doll making and also used modern technology to create diorama exhibits illustrating the principles of Krishna consciousness and the pastimes of the Lord. Adopting Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati’s idea of theistic exhibitions, he created the FATE (First American Theistic Exhibition) museum in Los Angeles.

So, the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura is continuing, by his divine grace.

But it is not easy to preach in Kali-yuga. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati had many enemies, and Srila Prabhupada did too. As Srila Prabhupada said, “Big preaching means big enemies.” If we just stay at home, or tell people, “I’m okay, you’re okay—everything is okay,” we’re not going to make many enemies, but neither are we going to have much effect. In fact, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati sarcastically remarked, mein bhi chup, tum bhi chup: “I’ll be quiet, you be quiet,” meaning, “I won’t disturb you, you don’t disturb me.” But that was not his mood, and that was not Srila Prabhupada’s mood, and that should not be our mood either.

And of course, the holy name: the essence of everything is the chanting of the holy name. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati advised, “Krishna and krsna-nama are not two entities. Krishna is His holy name, and the holy name is Krishna. Krsna-nama is the son of Nanda, Shyamasundara. Our only devotional service and duty is sri-krsna-nama-sankirtana. This understanding is auspicious.”

And to one disciple, he wrote, “I am overjoyed to hear that your enthusiasm for chanting is increasing. As our contaminations are removed by chanting, the Lord’s form, qualities, and pastimes will be revealed to us in the holy name. There is no point in making a separate effort to artificially remember the Lord’s form, qualities, and pastimes. The Lord and His name are one and the same. This will be understood clearly when the coverings in your heart are removed. By chanting without offenses you will personally realize that all perfections come from the holy name. Through chanting, the distinction that exists between the self, and the gross and subtle bodies, is gradually effaced and one realizes one’s own spiritual form. Once aware of the spiritual body, as one continues to chant, one sees the transcendental nature of the Lord’s form. Only the holy name reveals the spiritual form of the living being and then causes him to be attracted to Krishna’s form. Only the holy name reveals the spiritual qualities of the living being and then causes him to be attracted to Krishna’s qualities. Only the holy name reveals the spiritual activities of the living being and then causes him to be attracted to Krishna’s pastimes. By service to the holy name we do not mean only the chanting of the holy name; it also includes the other duties of the chanter. If we serve the holy name with the body, mind, and soul, then the direction of that service spontaneously manifests like the sun in the clear sky of the chanter’s heart. What is the nature of the holy name? Eventually all these understandings spontaneously appear in the heart of one who chants the holy name. The true nature of hari-nama is revealed by listening to, reading, and studying the scriptures. It is unnecessary to write anything further on this subject. All these things will be revealed to you through chanting.”

So, let us all chant: Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare / Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare.

Thank you very much.

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura ki jaya!
Srila Prabhupada ki jaya!

[A talk by Giriraj Swami on Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura’s disappearance day, December 24, 2010, Ventura, California]

HH KRISHNA KSHETRA SWAMI
→ Dandavats

DECEMBER 18: THE APPEARANCE DAY OF HH KRISHNA KSHETRA SWAMI His Holiness Krishna Kshetra Swami was born on December 18, 1950, in New York as Kenneth Russell Valpey. In 1969, he became a student at the Architecture Department of the University of California, Berkeley. This was during the Vietnam War, a time when numerous anti-war
Read More...

Chasing a rhino on Gita Jayanti in France
→ Dandavats

GITA JAYANTI DISTRIBUTION IN FRANCE By Jayananda Swami “The main thing is to distribute books more and more. Letter to: Balavanta — Vrindaban 4 October, 1976 “The more you distribute books, the more you are blessed. There is no “more” or “less.” Everyone is blessed. [laughter] There is no such discrimination. But still, there is
Read More...

Monthly Summary Report for ISKCON Russian-Speaking Yatra in London for the Month of November
→ Dandavats

We are delighted to share the highlights and accomplishments of the Russian-speaking yatra in London over the past month. By the mercy of Sri Guru and Gauranga, our devotees have been engaged in various devotional activities, spreading Krishna consciousness and deepening their spiritual practices. 1. Cooking the Sunday Love Feast at the Temple Our dedicated
Read More...

Approximate transcript – Rama-Sita wedding How their eternal love can guide our earthly love
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna. I’m grateful to be here with all of you today. Thank you for joining. If at any time you’re not able to hear me, please let me know.

Today, we are assembled on the occasion of the festival commemorating the sacred union of Sita and Ram. I will talk about this from three different perspectives, broadly. I’ll talk about the philosophical perspective in terms of what is actually happening. Then, we’ll talk about the historical perspective of how the event happened. And finally, I’ll talk about the human perspective—what it means for us when we celebrate such festivals.

From the philosophical perspective, to give a broader context of what is happening, there are broadly two extremes in approaching God. One is to consider God to be so great, so sacred, and so sublime that God becomes almost inaccessible, in the sense of being too otherworldly. The other extreme is… so, when we talk about the conception of God, one extreme would be too divine to be humanly acceptable. Here, we focus on the principle of divinity so much that the personhood of divinity is lost.

Sri Prabhupada gives the example of how, if we consider God to be great, the sky is great. The sky extends as far as our eyes can see, and just beholding the sky can fill us with a sense of awe and insignificance about our own existence. But how do we really surrender to the sky? How do we develop a personal relationship with the sky? It doesn’t happen very easily.

So that’s why, if we perceive God as too divine, then God becomes reduced in the very attempt to make Him so great. In emphasizing God’s greatness, we end up making God inaccessible and unrelatable.

The other extreme is to make Him too human to be divine. That means, if we focus only on the personhood of God and start thinking of God as just another person like us—just a little more powerful than us or maybe much more powerful—then that’s all there is to it.

Here, there is the danger of sahajiyaism. When we make God too divine, there is the danger of impersonalism. Even if we don’t accept the impersonal philosophy, we may end up having a very formal, almost impersonal relationship with God. On the other extreme, we can have sahajiyaism, wherein we connect with God but take Him very cheaply. That is a challenge.

So, we want to avoid both these challenges. In between lies the understanding where there is both God’s greatness—His Aishwarya—and His sweetness—His Madhurya.

Now, generally, the words Aishwarya and Madhurya are used frequently in relationship with Krishna, but they apply to all manifestations of divinity. Especially in the Bhagavata Amrita, the Sanatana Goswami explains that there is a greater manifestation of intimacy in Ram and Narasimha avatars as compared to other manifestations of divinity.

And thus, there is the greatness that arises from remembering that God is not just a person—He is a principle. And the sweetness arises from remembering that He is a person.

When the Lord descends to this world, there is a higher spiritual level of reality and there is our material level of reality. Intermittently throughout history, the Lord descends to this world. He stays here for some time, and then He departs. His descent is the avatar.

When the Lord descends as an avatar, what happens is that His descent is, at one level, like a trailer. A trailer of a movie is meant to trigger desire within people. If this trailer is so good, we want to watch the full movie. In the trailer, the Lord reveals a beautiful, exquisite, mesmerizing form of His pastimes. Through that panoramic revelation, He inspires our heart to move towards it.

But that is not all the avatar, especially the avatar and leela, does. The second is that it sets up a dream. The Lord doesn’t just give us a glimpse, but He also tells us: “Okay, this is what you can do to come to Me.” Just like when a movie trailer comes, after it, there is information that says when and where it will be released—on an OTT platform, in theaters, in a country, or so on. Similarly, the Lord gives us much more than just information. The Lord outlines a path by which we can come toward Him.

This trailer is what is described in Bhagavad Gita 4.7 and 4.8. Krishna says that “I come and I perform; I establish dharma.” Those who become attracted to His pastimes can actually attain Him.

In one sense, the trailer is displayed for everyone. But, say, a trailer is released to the public—that doesn’t necessarily mean everybody is going to go and watch the movie. Relatively, a very small number of people will go and watch the movie. So, the trailer is for the select. Not everybody who hears about Krishna will necessarily want to become His devotee.

Still, Krishna gives that path to everyone.

Now, when the Lord descends to this world, one of the fascinating aspects of the avatar is the mysterious nature of the very concept of His descent. The Lord is infinite, and an infinite Lord comes into the finite domain. How does He manifest?

The Lord is unlimited, and this world is limited. The mystery of the avatar lies in how the unlimited manifests in the limited. How can the Lord, who transcends space and time—indeed, the Lord from whom space and time come, the Lord within whom space and time exist—how does that Lord, who is the container of space and time, who is the source of space and time, the source of everything, and the sustainer of everything… how does that Lord become contained within space and time, appearing to be just like another human being?

That is the mystery of the avatar, and that’s how the Lord descends to fill our hearts with wonder and spiritual desire.

Among the various pastimes that He performs, there are some pastimes that are clearly divine, and there are some pastimes that are almost like human ones. He is always divine in the sense that He is the Supreme Lord, but He sometimes acts divine and sometimes acts human.

That means when Ram is chasing after Maricha in the form of a deer, at that time, He doesn’t act divine. If He were divine everywhere—in hands and legs—He could just extend His arm unlimitedly and catch the deer. But He does not do that. At that time, He is just a human.

However, there are moments when He acts divine. For example, when the ocean does not give Him a way, even after He acts as a human and performs austerities diligently, the Lord becomes angry. He starts glancing with anger at the sea, and the vast ocean begins churning and burning because of the heat. The Lord of the ocean immediately rushes out, seeking Lord Ram’s mercy.

So, there are times when the Lord acts human, and there are times when the Lord acts divine. There are pastimes in which, at different phases, He manifests both these abilities—both these sides. For instance, He acts human while chasing Maricha, as I mentioned. But then, He acts divine when He scorches the ocean.

Let’s now see how this human-divine dynamic within the avatar manifests in the pastime we are going to discuss: His first encounter with Sita, His subsequent winning of her hand, and His marriage to her.

In the manifest leela of the Lord, He appears to Dashrath as the son of Dashrath in Ayodhya. He lives in Ayodhya until He is about 14 years old. He hasn’t even reached the age of 16—16 or 18 generally being considered the age of adulthood. Nowadays, the legal age of adulthood is 18.

This is one of the reasons Dashrath gives when objecting to sending Ram to fight demons. Dashrath argues that Ram is too young and cannot fight demons. He offers to accompany Ram with his army if demons need to be fought. But Vishwamitra insists that he wants Ram, and since Lakshman has never been separated from Ram, Lakshman also goes along.

So, Ram and Lakshman leave Ayodhya and, for a brief while, they stay in the forest at Vishwamitra’s ashram. It is here that we first witness Ram’s phenomenal promise. Before this, Vishwamitra blesses them with celestial weapons. He teaches them the mantras by which they can invoke the higher powers within the universe and be blessed with weapons from those higher beings.

Thus equipped, Ram exhibits extraordinary valor in protecting Vishwamitra’s sacrificial arena. The sacrificial arena is primarily meant to bring auspiciousness. It is said that when we perform Sankirtan Yajna, it brings auspiciousness into the world. Similarly, sages perform sacrifices to bring auspiciousness, but demons try to prevent such auspiciousness. That is why they desecrate and even attempt to devastate the sacrifices.

And here, Lord Ram takes the responsibility of protecting the sacrifice.

And thus, he manifests how he is the protector of dharma. Vishwamitra is pleased, as he has a particular plan for him.

Until this point in his childhood, Ram has shown extraordinary virtue and skills, but he has never had such phenomenal feats of promise. Krishna, right from his childhood in Vrindavan, faced demons attacking him, which he playfully dismissed. In the case of Ram, there is no description of demons coming to Ayodhya and attacking. Ayodhya itself, by name, indicates a place that was unconquerable (Ayodhya). It was a formidable and powerful kingdom. Therefore, there were no such dangers, and Ram did not face any threats as a child.

But now, through a series of heroic activities, one after another, Lord Ram displays his valor. He destroys those demons who have been terrorizing the earth and desecrating the hermitages of the sages. At this point, Vishwamitra says, “I have something else for you to do.”

Now, princesses often live in luxury, being constantly served by others. Yet, they know that their lives are also meant to be lives of service. Sometimes, we may find ourselves in roles where we receive service. And yes, sometimes it may even be our service to receive service. But that should never make us forget that, at our core, we are still servitors.

Sometimes, we may need to perform a particular service in a specific way. And to do that service, others may offer us some service in turn. But we remain servants. The princesses, accustomed to being served, suddenly find themselves plunged into a life of austerity. There are no servants accompanying them.

Vishwamitra insists that he only wants Ram and Lakshman for this mission. In truth, he wants only Ram, but since Ram and Lakshman are inseparable, they go together. There are no guards, no servants accompanying them. They are all alone. Not only do they take care of themselves, but after the sacrificial ceremony is completed and everyone celebrates and rests, Ram and Lakshman wake up the next morning, offer their respects to Vishwamitra, and ask him, “What service can we do for you today?”

Vishwamitra replies, “The King of Janaka is performing a great sacrifice. I would like you to come with me there.”

Service can sometimes mean to give service, and at other times, to receive service. But even receiving service can contribute to a greater service. Here, Ram and Lakshman are not taking on the roles of princes but of servitors of the sages. As servitors of the sages, they agree to the mission.

Vishwamitra then leads them. They cross the Son River, come to the Ganga River, and follow the Ganga until they finally reach Mithila.

Mithila purajanmoha kara, videhi maana saranjakarama.
In the Ramayana, it is described how, when they arrive in Mithila, the emperor is captivated. Vishwamitra is a well-known sage, a celebrity in that region.

It is fascinating to note that although Ram and Lakshman are princes and, by worldly standards, might be considered far more illustrious and famous than sages, the culture at that time revered the sages. We might imagine a wealthy, influential person being constantly in the media, with their children also gaining fame by association. On the other hand, sages, unless they were actively involved in societal affairs, might not have been as well-known.

Yet here, Vishwamitra is a celebrity. The culture of the time placed brahmanas and sages as role models. In our lives, there are different kinds of role models. Some inspire us, while others provide us with a pathway. Inspiration comes from seeing something great and respecting it. But not everyone who inspires us is someone we can immediately follow.

Like we cannot always follow the great austerities of Vrindavan, or at least not at the same level as the sages or great spiritual personalities. We need role models who are similar to us—people who have careers, families, and social lives, but who are still very serious about their spiritual lives.

In those times, sages were like celebrities high up in the sky. Not everyone could become like them, but they were respected immensely. Unlike today, where social media makes everyone’s face and identity easily recognizable, that was not the case back then. Painters were also not very common. Unless someone had personally seen another, it was difficult to recognize them.

This is how, during the Pandavas’ Ajnaatvas (period of incognito exile) in the palace of Virata, no one could recognize them. Normally, we think that if someone is a celebrity, their face is known to everyone, making them instantly recognizable. But that wasn’t true in those times.

When Ram and Lakshman arrived in Mithila with Vishwamitra, the citizens were curious and began speculating. Visitors entering the city caught their attention. The people lined up, peering at the young men accompanying Vishwamitra.

Vishwamitra had not brought many of his disciples or followers; he came alone with Ram and Lakshman. The princes offered their respects to Vishwamitra, and the citizens began whispering among themselves, wondering who these two were.

“They look like princes, but they aren’t dressed in royal opulence. Yet, they look so illustrious. Could they be the princes of Ayodhya?”

When the news spread that the great sage Vishwamitra had arrived, King Janaka personally came to greet him. He fell at Vishwamitra’s feet, offered his respects, and invited him into his palace. After washing the sage’s feet, he allowed him to rest, served him a sumptuous feast, and ensured he was refreshed.

Once Vishwamitra had rested and eaten, King Janaka approached him with great reverence.

“O blessed sage, it is an honor that you have come to my kingdom. Please instruct me—how may I serve you? What is your desire?”

He then asked, “Who are these two powerful and majestic young princes?”

Janaka was already impressed by their physical strength and personal beauty. Vishwamitra replied, “These are the princes of Ayodhya. They have come to see the special bow of Lord Shiva that you have.”

Just hearing this filled King Janaka’s heart with excitement and anticipation. Could they string the mighty bow? Could one of them become his son-in-law?

Janaka looked at Ram with fresh eyes. He had heard of Dasharath’s son Ram before—Dasharath was a close friend of his—but now seeing Ram grown into such a majestic and regal figure, Janaka was filled with admiration.

With great joy, Janaka said, “Rest today, and tomorrow, I will fulfill all your desires. I will take you to see the bow of Lord Shiva and honor your request.”

Now, to provide some context, Janaka is a dynastic title. Just as we refer to a pharaoh in Egypt or an emperor in Rome, the king of Mithila was referred to as Janaka. This title was passed down through the dynasty. The particular Janaka in this context was named Siradhvaja.

Siradhvaja had a brother named Kusadhvaja, and he had two daughters: Yonija and Ayonija. Yonija means “one who is born from a womb,” i.e., born naturally. Ayonija refers to someone not born in the usual way. Sita, the divine princess, was Ayonija.

Sita’s birth was miraculous. While Siradhvaja was performing a royal sacrifice, the plow being used in the ritual struck something hard beneath the earth. Stopping the ritual, he looked down and saw a beautiful baby girl emerging from the earth. This baby was Sita.

Sita’s name comes from a Sanskrit term related to her miraculous origin. Sita means “furrow,” as she was discovered during the plowing ritual. It is also derived from the Sanskrit phrase Sheela Jata, where Sheela means “stone” or the hard earth from which she emerged.

The origins of the name Sita have many interpretations, but the central idea is that she was not born in the usual way. She was Ayonija, not born from a womb, but discovered during King Siradhvaja’s sacred plowing ritual. His other daughter, Urmila, was born naturally through his wife.

Now, in this dynasty, there was a great legacy inherited from the gods—a divine artifact known as the Shiva Chapa. Chapa means “bow.” This bow carried a fascinating history connected to Lord Shiva.

Among the devatas (celestial beings), Lord Shiva is quite an outlier. Unlike Indra and other devatas who live in regal majesty and partake in elaborate ceremonies, Shiva lives a more austere and unconventional life on Mount Kailash. He is indifferent to the social and ceremonial norms that other devatas observe. This unconventional nature of Shiva is one reason why Daksha Prajapati disapproved of his daughter Sati marrying Shiva.

At one point, the devatas, thinking Shiva was not fully one of them, neglected to offer him a portion of the sacrificial offerings during a yajna (sacrifice). Lord Shiva was deeply displeased by this offense, not merely for personal reasons, but because it indicated the devatas’ pride and their disregard for the universal order. Such arrogance, Shiva knew, could lead to their downfall.

In his anger, Lord Shiva appeared before the devatas wielding a formidable bow. He chastised them, saying, “You impudent devatas! Do you understand the offense you have committed? With this bow, I will destroy all of you. If any among you has the courage, stand and fight!”

The devatas, terrified and humbled by Lord Shiva’s fury, realized they could neither confront him nor escape his wrath. They fell at his feet and begged for forgiveness. True to his nature as Ashutosh (the easily pleased), Lord Shiva was quickly pacified by their remorse.

It’s interesting to note that while Shiva is often referred to as Yogiraj (the great yogi), embodying qualities like equanimity and detachment, his personality also reflects volatility. He can get angry very quickly but is also easily pacified. However, this apparent contradiction is part of how Lord Shiva serves the Supreme Lord—acting as both a protector and a purifier in the universal order.

After forgiving the devatas, Shiva, in his satisfaction, gifted them his personal bow as a symbol of his mercy. Later, this bow came into the possession of King Devarata, an ancestor in the dynasty of Janaka. Devarata had performed great sacrifices to please the gods, and as a result, he was entrusted with the Shiva Chapa.

This divine bow was not an ordinary weapon. Its size, power, and celestial origin made it practically unusable by any human being. It became a symbol of divine legacy, kept not for practical use but as a sacred relic representing immense power.

When King Janaka came into possession of this bow, he had already been told by Narada Muni about the divine identity of Sita. Narada informed him, “The daughter who has appeared to you mystically is the eternal consort of Lord Vishnu. In the future, she will marry Vishnu.”

Taking this to heart, Janaka decided that Sita’s hand in marriage would only be granted to someone who could fulfill an extraordinary task—a feat that only Lord Vishnu could accomplish. The challenge he set was to lift and string the Shiva Chapa. This ensured that only the Supreme Lord, in his human form as Lord Ram, would be able to claim Sita as his consort.

This extraordinary condition had been set. So in this way, it’s almost like, while the Lord is performing His pastime, the stage is being set for Him to manifest His divinity. Now, in some later retellings of the Ramayan, there are descriptions of Ram doing some wonderful and even miraculous activities in His childhood, but in the main retellings of the Ramayan, that is not so much the case. Ram’s killing of Tataka and Subahu is extraordinary. At the same time, that’s a feat of heroism. That’s not necessarily a feat that establishes His divinity. There could be kings who were extremely valorous and skilled, and they could achieve extraordinary things. Arjuna was a spectacular warrior. Arjuna had defeated all the devatas combined together, and that made him extraordinary, but that didn’t still mean that he was divine. So this is one of the first incidents in which Lord Ram’s divinity will become manifest, and as we move forward, there are more such incidents.

Janak Maharaj, sorry, King Janaka tells the sage, as well as especially the princess. He knows that the sage already knows, but still, they are going to see something wonderful. If we have some guests coming, we have a grand temple, and when we show them the temple, we like to give them some background. We explain, “This temple was built in this way, it has this kind of stone, this kind of marble.” You want to give them the context, explain the glory of what is going to be seen. Similarly, Janaka is giving this context, and then they come into a part of the palace where the Shiva Chapa is kept. It’s bedecked with jewels, and several hundred people are required just to move that trunk itself into visibility for everyone to see. Then that trunk is opened, and both the princes, Ram and Lakshman, gasp with admiration. As I told before, it is a massive bow, bedecked with gems and bells around it. This is more of a ceremonial bow rather than a practical bow for fighting.

Holding it, Ram turns toward Vishwamitra with inquiry on His face, and a smile gently spreads across Vishwamitra’s face. He nods; he knows what Ram is going to do, and he is eager for Ram to display His divinity. He knows that he has a role to play in Ram’s pastimes, and this is going to be the most significant thing he will do. Vishwamitra has the role of being a king who renounces his kingdom to become a sage, but now, as a sage, he has been given the role to reveal the divinity of one who has manifested in royalty.

So first, this divinity is displayed, and now, again, it’s heroism, but heroism of such a superlative nature that it amounts to almost divinity. Ram then comes forward and nonchalantly places His hand on the bow. Before Him, many of the greatest kings of the earth had come, and they had to lift this bow. They hadn’t even been able to shrink it out of the casket, let alone lift it, much less bend it so they could string it. Each of these acts required great strength—first lifting, then moving it, and even after lifting it, they had to bend the bow. When you string a bow, the string has to be tight enough, so the tension in the string allows the arrow to fly properly. The bow has to be firm enough so that it is not easy to bend, and once bent, it needs a substantial amount of tension.

Most of the kings hadn’t been able to lift the bow, let alone bend it or string it. But Lord Ram just nonchalantly picked up the bow, bent it silently, and everyone watched in anticipation, wondering what He would do. Lord Ram kept one end of the bow on the ground. It was a huge bow, and as He bent the bow downward, He was going to string it, but the force with which He bent the bow caused it to break. When it broke, the sound was like the crash of thunder falling on the palace. It felt as if the whole earth was shaking, as if in an earthquake. Everyone who was beholding it was stunned and became temporarily senseless and speechless. Just this was what had happened. Their sense of peace was diminished, and then erupted celebrations and glorifications. They all started cheering and praising the spectacular feat of Lord Ram. The celestials assembled overhead, cheering for Lord Ram and showering flowers upon Him.

All this had been happening in a part of the palace, and there was a terrace nearby. In that upper floor, Sita was watching. She was very devout. From her childhood, she had an innate attraction toward Lord Vishnu and had prayed that, “May Lord Vishnu be my husband.” Until then, many great kings had come to seek her hand, but none of them had charmed her heart. She found them too arrogant, too boastful. But when she saw Ram move forward toward the bow, her heart suddenly filled with excitement, joy, and affection. When Ram broke the bow, she became so elated that she was almost bursting with happiness. But due to chastity and feminine shyness, she restrained her emotions and waited.

Then Janak Maharaj looked at her, took a step forward, and she came down the stairway. At the time when Lord Ram beheld her, and both of them beheld each other, their hearts filled with love for each other. Sita came forward and offered the garland to Lord Ram. This matrimonial garland was offered by Sita. Now, this itself was not the wedding ceremony; it was her accepting or congratulating the person who had won the contest, the person who had stood up to match the target, the criteria that had been set.

And then Janak Maharaj turned to Vishwamitra and said, “You will see Ram and Sita’s wedding to be held as soon as possible.” He said, “For such a wedding to happen, naturally Ram’s parents must be informed, they must give their consent, and they need to come immediately. Send the messengers immediately.” He sent the messengers—though not just messengers, he sent his ministers. They rushed from Mithila to Ayodhya, and it took them three days to reach there. When they arrived, there was anxiety; Dashrath was concerned, “My son has gone out, and I don’t know what is happening. Where is he? Has the battle with the asuras been going on for such a long time?” But then, after he was informed, he calmed. When he heard that messengers from Mithila had come, he wondered, “Why are they here?” Though there was some anxiety in his heart, he welcomed them with a benign expression. Janak was his great friend, and when he heard the news, it brought him joy. Not only had Ram been saved, not only had he been victorious in killing the demons and fulfilling Vishwamitra’s desires, but beyond that, he had broken the bow—the Shiva bow—that no one could move, and he had won the hand of Sita. In great joy, Dashrath immediately planned to go to Janak Maharaj’s kingdom. Janak Maharaj welcomed him, and Dashrath came with his entire family.

Then Janak Maharaj said, “Let there be a bond between our families that runs across many individuals.” Lakshmana had also come there, so Janak said, “Let Lakshmana marry Urmila.” “Thus,” he continued, “both my daughters will be married to your sons.” He also said, “Ushant Vajay has two daughters; let them be present as well.” In this way, four marriages were performed. Now, Janak had his royal priest, Shatananda, and Vishwamitra, and Dashrath had his priest, Vashistha. The two priests conferred and decided that the next day itself was an auspicious day for the marriage ceremony. Normally, these ceremonies take weeks or months of planning, especially if royalty is involved, and kings from other lands need to be invited, with many arrangements to be made. But Janak Maharaj had been so eager for the wedding of Sita that he had already made arrangements. He had already set up the pandal and was waiting for a suitor who met the criteria. A standing invitation had been issued: when news came that the bow had been broken, the wedding would happen soon.

Many kings had already gathered out of respect for Janak Maharaj and their eagerness to witness the majestic event—the wedding of Janak’s daughter, Sita, with the person who had broken that phenomenal bow. Under the supervision of Vashistha Muni and in the presence of Vishwamitra, the wedding ceremony took place. Then Janak came and brought the princes, who were already sitting around the fire, and he placed his daughter next to Ram. Janak placed Sita’s hand in Ram’s hand, and together they offered the offerings to the fire. They circumambulated the fire and sought the blessings of the elders. This way, after the wedding of Ram and Sita was performed, the weddings of his brothers were also performed with the sisters and cousins of Sita. All four young couples would be married and return together to Ayodhya. Of course, while they were returning to Ayodhya, they met Parashuram.

Parashuram had become quite proud of his Brahminical promise, and he realized that now his time was over, except for his official discount. So, this event of the wedding, in one sense, is the trajectory through which Ram demonstrates His heroism and, indeed, His divinity. While His divinity is manifested by His breaking of the Shiva bow, it becomes even more evident when Parashuram tries to attack Him. Lord Ram doesn’t want to attack Parashuram because he is a Brahmin, but through His mystic powers, He disarms Parashuram. Parashuram is unable to shoot his arrows, and he understands that Ram is the Supreme Lord.

So, this trajectory is extraordinarily manifested, with divinity coming forth in the union with His eternal consort, Sita. Now, what can we learn from this? Probably three distinct things. First, I started by talking about how the Lord may not be easily relatable to us if we focus only on the principle.

There are certain events of great significance in our lives. For example, when we get married, it is a time of great significance—one of the most consequential decisions we will make. Traditionally, in India, when a couple would get married, there would always be comparisons such as, “Oh, the couple looks like Sita and Ram,” or “They look like Parvati and Shiva,” or “Lakshmi and Narayan.” The idea is that two things are being reflected here: one is that the Lord, when He descends and goes through the ceremonies of life—the typical rites of passage—demonstrates how we seem to go through them. The Lord gives us sacred memories through these rituals.

When we say, “The couple looks like Sita and Ram,” this does not mean that our relationship should mirror theirs in every way. Ideally, by being reminded of that divine love, we are encouraged to recognize that, although love in this world is temporary, it can point toward the eternal. The temporary can be an ear toward the eternal. As Prabhupada said, one of the purposes of the scriptures is to bring all people closer to each other and closer to Krishna, the supreme entity. So when we form a bond here on earth, we should remember how the Lord descended and formed a bond. It is not that we look at the Lord’s wedding and simply remember our own wedding day, or participate in the ceremony for our own enjoyment. We remember that this relationship is not just for us to come together and enjoy, but to come closer to the Lord through this relationship. We come together so that we can strengthen our eternal relationship with Him. This is the eternal enjoyment.

When the eternal Lord manifests as earthly love, particularly when He and His consort get married, it is a spiritual stimulus for us to enhance our remembrance of the Lord. The Lord’s wedding, or Sita Kalyanam, can serve as a reminder for us—whether it is our own wedding or someone else’s. At that time, instead of just focusing on the two people involved, we can see it as a spiritual reminder. Krishna tells us in the Bhagavad Gita (10.41) that everything in this world can become a stimulus for us to remember Him.

The second point is that when the Lord descends into this world, as I mentioned earlier, it’s like a trailer. The beauty, sweetness, potency, and majesty of the Lord, by which He wins the heart of Sita, are not just about the criteria He meets to win her hand. It is by His personality, His nature, and His sweet, loving disposition that He wins Sita’s heart. So much so that Sita insists on going with Ram, and she is excited when He is excited. Even though He doesn’t have to go, she insists on accompanying Him. This shows how the Lord exhibits extraordinary virtues.

Then, some of His extraordinary virtues are manifested. His promise, however, does not lead Him to pride. Even when He wins the hand of Sita, He does so under the guidance of His elders. Vishwamitra asked Him to break the bow, and He does it. But even then, He doesn’t rush into marriage; He waits for His parents’ approval. It is only when His father gives His blessing that He proceeds with the marriage. So, the power that Lord Ram has is accompanied by respect. His individual power doesn’t go to His head; He maintains His respect for the elders.

The final point is that through the loving union between Ram and Sita, and in this particular instance, the eternal love between them is manifested in this world. They are the ultimate “power couple”—Sita-Ram, Lakshmi-Narayan, Radha-Krishna. All the power in this world comes from them. They are the divine couple, but when they manifest and develop their relationship, it’s not just a demonstration of the sweetness of divine love; it’s also a model for how relationships in this world should be formed—with humility, respect, and a gradual opening of the heart.

Lord Ram is Maryada Purushottam—He always respects the boundaries (Maryada), follows dharma, and maintains the proper etiquette. His life is a model of respect and Maryada.

Finally, Lord Ram unites with Sita. This union is an example of true love and devotion. Ram’s heart is conquered by Sita to such an extent that He vows never to marry again and remains in pati-vrata (faithful to one wife). Though it was common for kings to have many queens, Sita completely conquers His heart. Their bond becomes sealed, and what is eternal is manifested and fulfilled in this world.

For us, the relationship between us and Krishna is different from relationships in the material world. But the principles of relationship-building are the same. In any relationship, there must be virtue and valor on both sides for a glorious relationship to form. Sita and Ram each had their set of virtues, and from these virtues, a beautiful relationship was born. What was eternal in them was manifested on earth.

Just as Ram and Sita had their virtues, their example inspires us to develop similar virtues so that we can form deep, fulfilling relationships in this world. By doing so, we move toward our eternal relationship with the Lord, which is more hidden in this world but will be revealed and fulfilled in its fullest in the Lord’s eternal love.

To summarize what we discussed today:

  1. Philosophical Perspective of the Lord: Our conception of the Lord should not be overly focused on His divinity to the point where He becomes depersonalized, nor should it be reduced to just human characteristics. There needs to be a balance of appreciating both His greatness (Aishwarya) and sweetness (Madhuriya). The Lord’s avatar lila is like a trailer for those who want to follow Him, guiding them toward higher pastimes.
  2. Lord Ram’s Glory: Through incidents like killing demons, breaking the bow, and confronting Parashuram’s pride, Lord Ram’s heroism and divinity are revealed. His glory is manifested not only through human actions but through the divine powers He possesses. In defeating Parashuram, His divinity is made evident.
  3. Lessons for Us: We can see the Lord’s wedding ceremony as a reminder to cultivate our remembrance of Him. Any wedding we are a part of can serve as a spiritual stimulus, encouraging us to recall the divine wedding of Ram and Sita. The relationship between Ram and Sita was built on virtues, and their example teaches us how to form relationships with respect, valor, and humility. Ram’s power did not make Him arrogant; He remained humble and respectful of His elders. Similarly, relationships in this world should be based not just on physical attraction but on virtues. The ultimate purpose of any relationship is to come closer to Krishna and to each other.

In conclusion, the way Ram and Sita manifested their eternal relationship in this world provides us with inspiration for developing fulfilling relationships in our lives. By cultivating virtues and devotion, we can draw closer to Krishna and experience deeper, more meaningful connections with those around us.

Thank you very much.

The post Approximate transcript – Rama-Sita wedding How their eternal love can guide our earthly love appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Disappearance
→ Ramai Swami

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, the guru of Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, appeared in Sri Ksetra Dhama.(Jagannatha Puri) on 6 February 1874 as the son of Srila Sacidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakura.

In his childhood he quickly mastered the Vedas, memorized the Bhdgavad-gita, and relished his father’s philosophical works. He became known as “The Living Encyclopaedia” for his vast knowledge.

He preached convincingly against casteism and philosophical deviations from Gaudiya Vaisnavism. He tried to unite the four Vaisnava sampradayas by publishing their teachings. Srila Sarasvati Thakura earned the title Nrsimha Guru for his fearless and powerful delivery of the Vaisnava siddhanta.

Besides being a courageous preacher, he was ornamented with all divine qualities and full of ecstatic love of God. He established 64 Gaudiya Math temples in India and centers in Burma, England, Germany.

Following Srila Thakura Bhaktivinoda’s footsteps, he preached daivi varnashrama to harmonize society and provide spiritual fulfillment for all. Advocating the teachings of Sri Rupa and Sri Raghunatha Dasa Goswamis, he taught the science of devotional service, and showed thousands how to attain pure love for Sri-Sri Gandharvika-Giridhari (Radha-Krishna). 

When Srila Prabhupada was asked to describe his spiritual master Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, he said, “What can I say? He was a Vaikuntha man.”

In Radha-Govinda’s eternal pastimes in Goloka Vrndavana, Srila Sarasvati Thakura serves as Nayana-mani manjari. His pushpa samadhis are at Radha-kunda and Radha Damodara.



Male Suicide Due to Domestic Violence? A Multidimensional Analysis
→ The Spiritual Scientist

The suicide of a 34-year-old techie Atul Subhash in Bangalore at his home has alarmed and angered the entire country. It is shocking that a man would feel so persecuted, tormented, and hopeless due to the actions of his ex-spouse, which, if allegations are to be believed, involve domestic violence. However, without delving into specifics or blaming anyone prematurely without a proper investigation, let us examine this incident from four perspectives to better understand what happened and how such tragedies can be prevented. These perspectives are psychological, historical, legal, and philosophical.

From a psychological perspective, what stands out about this suicide is the meticulous planning that went into it. Suicide, in general, is an act that stems from feelings of despair and defeat. Such emotions are often impulsive and overwhelming, leading to a rash decision to end one’s life. However, in this case, there was considerable contemplation and preparation, as evidenced by the elaborate checklists, a 24-page suicide note, and an hour long video uploaded by the individual.

It appears that he viewed his act not just as a means to escape personal torment but also as a way to free his family from the distress they were enduring. Believing that justice could not be achieved through the current legal framework, he saw his actions as a form of sacrifice to highlight his cause. Although his act was steeped in hopelessness, he seemed to ascribe to it a higher purpose.

This can be analyzed through the lens of the three modes of material nature described in philosophical traditions: sattvic (goodness), rajasic (passion), and tamasic (ignorance). The motivations and consciousness behind an action determine its nature. For example, even an activity like performing austerities, generally seen as positive, can become tamasic if done with a destructive intent. Conversely, an act like fasting to death, under certain circumstances, may be considered a graceful and purposeful way to end one’s life.

Through this incident, and the calm, calculated contemplation that preceded it, we can see that the suicide was not merely an act of impulsive frustration. Instead, it seems to have been a deliberate sacrifice for what the individual perceived as a failed cause for himself but a potentially meaningful cause for others in the future.

From a historical perspective, the prevailing narrative in the West—and increasingly adopted in India—is that the history of humanity is largely a history of patriarchy, where men systematically dominated, exploited, and abused women. This narrative asserts that with the rise of feminism and successive waves of feminist movements, these historical wrongs are now being corrected, granting women their rights and enabling them to assert themselves. However, this understanding of history is a significant oversimplification.

If we examine history, particularly in pre-modern times, life was extremely challenging. Without the technological supports we have today, mere survival required immense effort. Men and women collaborated as families to confront life’s challenges, build a home, and pass on the legacy of life to future generations. Life was too harsh for one gender to systematically exploit the other. Exploitation, when it occurred, was more often by those with power—such as royalty, aristocracy, or landlords—over those without power, regardless of gender.

For example, men were often the victims of exploitation by other men. Historical accounts reveal the harsh conditions faced by farmers, miners, and factory workers, where men were subjected to grueling labor. This observation does not diminish the reality of domestic violence or other gender-based issues but challenges the overly simplistic narrative of historical male exploitation of women.

Moreover, in the past, it was not the case that men had autonomy while women lacked it. Societies were far more rigidly structured than today, and the concept of upward mobility was almost non-existent. A person’s birth determined their role in life. Women were often confined to domestic roles, while men had professional roles, but even those roles were usually dictated by birth.

For example, a person born into aristocracy remained an aristocrat, regardless of their abilities, while a person born a peasant was confined to that role, no matter their potential. Men, too, lacked autonomy in many aspects of life, including marriage. Most marriages were arranged, and men had little choice but to accept their partners due to practical necessities, political alliances, or other considerations.

It was only after the Industrial Revolution, with the subsequent migration and restructuring of society, that men began to gain significant autonomy. Within two or three centuries, women also started experiencing greater autonomy. The key point here is that, historically, life has been tough for everyone. The notion that women have always been exploited by men is itself a historical misconception that requires correction. Unfortunately, this very idea is being perpetuated in the name of addressing a historical wrong.

Reducing history to a simplistic power struggle between men and women, without considering the complex dynamics of society, reflects what the Bhagavad Gita describes as knowledge in the mode of ignorance. Such reductionism, where one aspect is taken as the whole, not only misrepresents the past but can also lead to harmful or even toxic consequences in the present, as seen in the structure of modern laws.

Such a reductionistic vision of history is not merely an idle or harmless misconception about the past; it can have harmful, even toxic, consequences today. This is evident in the structure of laws increasingly enacted in modern times. This brings us to the third point: the legal dimension.

In the past, society was structured in ways that reflected existing patriarchal norms. Women subjected to problems or violence at home often lacked legal recourse. The reality of domestic violence, both past and present, should neither be denied nor downplayed. However, two things can simultaneously be true: addressing historical injustices and redressing power imbalances should not lead to a new imbalance in the legal framework. Unfortunately, this has occurred in some cases.

For example, in India, the law for protection against domestic violence explicitly defines domestic violence as violence against women. Within the legal framework, there is no provision for men to seek redress when they are victims of domestic violence. While it may be argued that men are generally stronger and more likely to threaten or harm women, this does not mean that men cannot be victims of abuse.

The Bhagavad Gita explains in its 16th chapter that all humans have both divine and demonic qualities, existing on a spectrum within each individual. The chapter emphasizes that no one is immune to corruption. Whoever gains power also gains the temptation and opportunity to abuse it.

In the current legal framework, the pendulum has swung to an extreme where, practically speaking, men are often presumed guilty unless proven innocent. While the presumption of innocence is upheld legally, the mere accusation can have severe and sometimes devastating consequences for a man. Individuals with exploitative, manipulative, or abusive tendencies—regardless of their gender—are likely to cynically exploit these imbalances for personal gain.

The same patriarchal norms that once inhibited women or subjected them to domestic violence now also make it difficult for men to come forward as victims. Men are socially conditioned to be perceived as tough, and admitting to being victims of abuse might lead to their being seen as weak or inadequate. This stigma compounds the challenges faced by male victims in reporting violence against them.

As the patriarchal structures of society loosen in some parts of the world, statistics about male victims of domestic violence are becoming increasingly documented. These figures are concerning, if not alarming. For instance, in the United States, the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (2016–2017) reported that nearly 44% of men had been victims of intimate partner violence at least once in their lifetime. Of those, 1 in 13 reported sexual violence, 2 in 5 reported physical violence, and 1 in 20 reported being stalked by an intimate partner.

Even in Finland, a country regularly ranked as the happiest country in the world, significant instances of male victimization are documented. A survey conducted from 2010 to 2022 found 11,819 cases of domestic violence, of which 3,669—roughly 31%—involved male victims. This is far from an insignificant percentage.

Given these realities, the law must be balanced. Both male-to-female violence and female-to-male violence are significant issues. Measures to address female-to-male violence should not be viewed as diminishing the rights or protections of women. Instead, we must understand that this is not a gendered conflict but a human struggle against our lower nature.

Society must support everyone by helping individuals rise above their lower nature through culture and discipline and by protecting them from the harmful actions of others through laws and appropriate legal structures.

This brings us to the legal perspective. In the past, society was structured in ways that reflected existing patriarchal norms. Women who faced problems or violence at home often lacked legal recourse. This reality of domestic violence, both past and present, should neither be denied nor downplayed. However, two things can be true simultaneously: efforts to address female-to-male violence do not inherently undermine the importance of protecting women’s rights.

The issue is not about a gendered battle between men and women. It is about humanity’s collective struggle against our lower nature. Society must support everyone in two ways: first, by helping individuals rise above their lower nature through culture and discipline, and second, by protecting individuals from the harmful actions of others through laws and an appropriate legal framework.

Finally, from a philosophical perspective, wisdom is not measured by the amount of information we accumulate or the number of practical skills we possess. As explained in Bhagavad Gita 13.8–12, true wisdom is recognized through the virtues we cultivate in our lives.

In the case of the legal system, legal wisdom cannot be achieved merely by implementing laws. There is a need to cultivate an ethos that prioritizes justice. This means moving beyond framing issues as gender battles or ideological conflicts between liberal (left) and conservative (right) perspectives. Instead, if we collectively value justice, we can recognize that unnecessary and unfair violence and pain inflicted on anyone should be avoided.

For this to happen, our legal professionals—lawyers, judges, and individuals—must develop a culture of valuing justice rather than relying solely on the protective power of laws. Laws are indeed important, but it is virtuous individuals who enforce them in ways that are constructive and just. Without this ethos, opportunistic and malicious individuals will continue to exploit the very laws designed to ensure fairness, thereby defying justice and perpetuating unfairness.

The Bhagavad Gita offers a comprehensive vision of life where knowledge and wisdom are rooted in virtues. By adopting a virtue-based approach to life, wisdom, and law, we can hope to effectively counter tragic incidents of domestic violence—whether perpetrated by males against females or females against males.

To summarize:

1. From a psychological perspective, this tragic incident seems to have stemmed not from impulsive frustration but from a mood of sacrifice aimed at highlighting a perceived injustice.

2. From a historical perspective, interpreting the entire history of humanity as a narrative of men exploiting women is reductionistic to the point of being erroneous.

3. From a legal perspective, the current legal structure has gone too far in protecting women, often leaving men vulnerable, and this imbalance needs to be addressed.

4. From a philosophical perspective, solutions require more than just new laws. They demand the infusion of virtues and the cultivation of an ethos of justice, ensuring that the exploitative, regardless of gender, are held accountable.

The post Male Suicide Due to Domestic Violence? A Multidimensional Analysis appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Pentagon study hints at reincarnation being real after finding consciousness ‘never dies’
→ Dandavats

The article found here was published 6 December 2024 on a famous international site and has garnered 640 comments so far, with even some celebrities engaging in the discussion. Below find summary of the content and the comments. In 1983, a U.S. Army intelligence report, later declassified by the CIA, explored the groundbreaking concept that
Read More...

Celebrating Gita Jayanti
Giriraj Swami

Gita Jayanti is the day on which Lord Krishna spoke the Bhagavad-gita to Arjuna.The Gita is also known as the Gitopanisad and is considered one of the Upanishads. The title Bhagavad-gita is sometimes translated as “The Song of God.” Gita means “song.” God, Krishna, is so sublime that whatever He speaks is music and poetry. The word bhagavan has been analyzed by Vedic authorities. Bhaga means “opulence” and is related to the word bhagya: “good fortune.” And van means “one who possesses.” So bhagavan means “He who possesses all opulence in full.”

aisvaryasya samagrasya
  viryasya yasasah sriyah
jnana-vairagyayos caiva
  sannam bhaga itingana

“Full wealth, strength, fame, beauty, knowledge, and renunciation—these are the six opulences of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.” (Vishnu Purana 6.5.47)

All of us possess some wealth. I may have ten dollars, but if I look further, I will find someone who has a hundred dollars. And if I look still further, I will find someone who has a thousand dollars, and a million, and a billion. But no one can say that he has all the wealth in all creation, that no one is equal to him or greater than him in wealth. When we come to that person who has all wealth—no one is equal to or greater than him—that is Bhagavan, Krishna.

The Bhagavad-gita was spoken by Krishna to Arjuna on the battlefield of Kurukshetra. But, as stated in the Gita (4.1),

   sri-bhagavan uvaca
imam vivasvate yogam
  proktavan aham avyayam
vivasvan manave praha
  manuriksvakave ’bravit

“The Personality of Godhead, Sri Krishna, said: I instructed this imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, Vivasvan, and Vivasvan instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to Iksvaku.” Lord Krishna originally spoke the Gita to Vivasvan, the sun-god, who spoke it to his son Manu, who in turn spoke it to Iksvaku. In this way the knowledge was passed on through disciplic succession from one to the next to the next. But in the course of time, that chain became broken.

evam parampara-praptam
  imam rajarsayo viduh
sa kaleneha mahata
  yogo nastah parantapa

“This supreme science was thus received through the chain of disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in course of time the succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to be lost.” (Gita 4.2) Nasta means “spoiled.” You may have a nice plate of prasada, but if you leave it aside and it becomes old and contaminated, it becomes nasta, spoiled. It is food, but you don’t get the benefit. And to get the real benefit of the Bhagavad-gita, one must receive it through parampara (evam parampara-praptam imam rajarsayo viduh).

Five thousand years ago, Lord Krishna detected that the chain was broken and that, consequently, the knowledge had been lost. So He came again and spoke the Bhagavad-gita again, to Arjuna: “Now, Arjuna, you become the first recipient of this knowledge in the new chain, so that the knowledge is received and presented as it is.” Srila Prabhupada called his translation of the Gita the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. “As it is” means as Krishna spoke it and as Arjuna understood it—five thousand years ago.

How did Arjuna understand it? First, he accepted Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead:

          arjuna uvaca
param brahma param dhama
  pavitram paramam bhavan
purusam sasvatam divyam
  adi-devam ajam vibhum

“Arjuna said: You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest.” (Gita 10.12)

He accepted everything that Krishna said as true: sarvam etad rtam manye yan mam vadasi kesava—“Krishna, I totally accept as truth all that You have told me.” (Gita 10.14) “I accept whatever You say, in toto.” He did not discriminate that he liked some parts of the Gita but not other parts. Sarvam etad rtam manye: “I accept in toto everything that You have said.”

If we begin to discriminate, “I like this portion, but I don’t like that one,” we become implicated in ardha-kukkuti-nyaya, “half-hen” logic. A farmer had a hen that was laying eggs. But the farmer thought that only the hind portion was valuable, because that part was giving eggs—that the neck portion was simply troublesome, because it just ate food. He concluded, “I will cut the neck portion, which is just a botheration, and keep the hind portion, which gives eggs.” And when he did, of course, the hen died and there were no more eggs.

One verse in the Bhagavad-gita that is very popular among some people states, karmany evadhikaras te: “You are entitled to do your duty.” They think, “I can do my duty. I can go to work. I can make and spend money. I can take care of my family, live with my family, enjoy with my family and friends.

That is a precious instruction.” But when they come to sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja—give up all varieties of religiousness and surrender to Krishna—that is a little troublesome, and they want to cut that part: “We don’t really need it. We’ll just keep the really valuable part: I can do my duty.”

In order to get the full benefit of the Bhagavad-gita, it is essential to accept it as it is. Devotees who have accepted it as it is and applied its principles in their lives have undergone extraordinary transformations. This knowledge can really help people. And any genuine person who gets something good will naturally want to share it with others. Anyone who has imbibed the nectar of the Bhagavad-gita, gotten the benefit of the Bhagavad-gita, will want to share the knowledge with others. It is natural. If you are eating a nice plate of prasada and taste something really good, it is natural to say, “You should try this; it’s really good.” Or, “You should try this with this; it’s a really good combination.” Anyone—any child—will do that. So, when you actually experience the benefit of the Bhagavad-gita in your life, you will naturally want to share the knowledge with others so that they too can benefit and become happy.

Now, why did Krishna choose Arjuna to be the first student of the Bhagavad-gita? Arjuna was not a sannyasi; he was a married man. And he was not a brahman; he was a warrior. Why Arjuna? Krishna explains,

sa evayam maya te ’dya
  yogah proktah puratanah
bhakto ’si me sakha ceti
  rahasyam hy etad uttamam

“That very ancient science of the relationship with the Supreme is today told by Me to you because you are My devotee as well as My friend and can therefore understand the transcendental mystery of this science.” (Gita 4.3) The main qualification for understanding the Gita is bhakto ’si me, to be Lord Krishna’s devotee. And later Krishna says that one should hear the Gita with faith and without envy (sraddhavan anasuyas ca srnuyad api yo narah). (Gita 18.71) This is a most important point: to get the true benefit of the Gita, one must be a devotee.

What does it mean to be a devotee? Sometimes the word devotee is used quite broadly. To begin, let us understand devotee in contrast to karmi, jnani, and yogi. These are all technical (as well as general) terms. A karmi engages in fruitive work. He works for personal gain: “I have worked and earned. Now I have the right to enjoy the fruit.” That is 90 percent of the world. People work, and they feel, “I have earned the money, so I have the right to spend it—on myself, on my family, on my community, on my country” (or whatever limited or extended concept of sense gratification they have). But the Gita says no. Karmany evadhikaras te ma phalesu kadacana: “You have a right to perform your prescribed duty, but you are not entitled to the fruits of action.” (Gita 2.47) The fruits belong to Krishna.

If you invite a carpenter to your house and give him wood and nails and glue—everything he needs—and say, “I want you to build me a cabinet,” in the end, to whom does the cabinet belong—to the carpenter or to you? It belongs to the proprietor, not to the worker. The worker has assembled the ingredients supplied by the proprietor, but that doesn’t make him the owner.

This entire material creation, this entire cosmic manifestation—the elements are provided by Krishna. The earth we tread; the water we drink; the air we breathe; the fire, or electricity, we use—everything belongs to Him, and we cannot rightly claim any of it for ourselves. We may assemble the elements in different ways, but it all belongs to Him and is meant to be used for His purposes.

A karmi engages in work and wants to keep the fruits for himself. A karma-yogi engages in work but gives the fruits to Krishna. A man may grow a tree that produces fruit. A karmi will keep the fruit for himself, whereas a karma-yogi will give the fruit, or some of the fruit, to Krishna. The sakama-karma-yogi has selfish desires, but he still gives something to Krishna. If the tree produces a hundred mangoes, he may give one or two or ten or twenty to Krishna. And as he becomes purified, as he develops more faith and becomes more attached to Krishna, he will give more to Krishna. And eventually he may give all one hundred mangoes to Krishna, without any selfish desire (niskama-karma-yoga). But he will not be the loser. Krishna will give him His prasada, His mercy.

The jnanis and often the yogis are impersonalists; they believe that God is ultimately impersonal—nameless, formless, without qualities, without activities. They may even go so far as to think that Krishna’s form is material, that just as we have a physical body made of flesh and bones and blood, so does Krishna. And according to them, if Krishna is material, then His name, form, qualities, and activities are also all material. People may chant His name, but ultimately they have to go beyond that. People may worship His form, but they have to go beyond that. People may talk about His qualities and activities, but they have to go beyond that. Ultimately, according to impersonalists, we have to go beyond all these illusory forms and names and come to the all-pervading impersonal light and merge and become one with it. Then there is no you, no me, no Krishna—nothing. Just oneness.In theory, that is also a possibility. But it is very rare to achieve that state, and very difficult. Lord Krishna explains in the Bhagavad-gita (12.2–7):

mayy avesya mano ye mam
  nitya-yukta upasate
sraddhaya parayopetas
  te me yuktatama matah

“Those who fix their minds on My personal form and are always engaged in worshiping Me with great and transcendental faith are considered by Me to be most perfect.

ye tv aksaram anirdesyam
  avyaktam paryupasate
sarvatra-gam acintyam ca
  kuta-stham acalam dhruvam

sanniyamyendriya-gramam
  sarvatra sama-buddhayah
te prapnuvanti mam eva
  sarva-bhuta-hite ratah

“But those who fully worship the unmanifested, that which lies beyond the perception of the senses, the all-pervading, inconceivable, unchanging, fixed and immovable—the impersonal conception of the Absolute Truth—by controlling the various senses and being equally disposed to everyone, such persons, engaged in the welfare of all, at last achieve Me.

kleso ’dhikataras tesam
  avyaktasakta-cetasam
avyakta hi gatir duhkham
  dehavadbhir avapyate

“For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.

ye tu sarvani karmani
  mayi sannyasya mat-parah
ananyenaiva yogena
  mam dhyayanta upasate

tesam aham samuddharta
  mrtyu-samsara-sagarat
bhavami na cirat partha
  mayy avesita-cetasam

“But those who worship Me, giving up all their activities unto Me and being devoted to Me without deviation, engaged in devotional service and always meditating upon Me, having fixed their minds upon Me, O son of Prtha—for them I am the swift deliverer from the ocean of birth and death.”

Not only is the impersonal path difficult; the result is also not very satisfying, because ultimately everyone wants happiness and love. The two most basic human needs are to love and be loved. We want friends, we want family, and we want community, and we are not happy without them. I

f you were a billionaire but could never see another living being, would you be happy? No. You would be so desperate for company, for relationship, that you would say, “I don’t want this wealth. I just want to be with people I love and who love me.” In a way, this was Arjuna’s thinking at the beginning of the Bhagavad-gita. He considered, “What is the use of winning a kingdom if in the course of the battle all my friends and family die? What’s the use? With whom will I enjoy my kingdom?” The thought of being without family and friends so overwhelmed Arjuna that he said to Krishna,

na hi prapasyami mamapanudyad
  yac chokam ucchosanam indriyanam
avapya bhumav asapatnam rddham
  rajyam suranam api cadhipatyam

“I can find no means to drive away this grief which is drying up my senses. I will not be able to dispel it even if I win a prosperous, unrivaled kingdom on earth with sovereignty like that of the demigods in heaven.” (Gita 2.8)

There is much truth to what Arjuna said at the beginning of the Gita, but that truth is on a lower level. By the mercy of Lord Krishna, after hearing the Bhagavad-gita, Arjuna was elevated to a higher, better understanding. He realized that perfect happiness and love were to be realized in relation to Krishna, and so Arjuna surrendered unto Him.

Krishna gave Arjuna the choice. Krishna did not force him, because true surrender, or true love, is voluntary. Krishna gave Arjuna the freedom to deliberate and then decide:

iti te jnanam akhyatam
  guhyad guhyataram maya
vimrsyaitadas asena
  yathecchasi tatha kuru

“Thus I have explained to you knowledge still more confidential. Deliberate on this fully, and then do what you wish to do.” (Gita 18.63) Yathecchasi tatha kuru—“You can do whatever you like.” We all have free will, given to us by God. But after hearing the Bhagavadgita, Arjuna immediately responded, karisye vacanam tava: “I will do whatever You say.” That is the position of the surrendered devotee.

          arjuna uvaca
nasto mohah smrtir labdha
  tvat-prasadan mayacyuta
sthito ’smi gata-sandehah
  karisye vacanam tava

“Arjuna said: My dear Krsna, O infallible one, my illusion is now gone. I have regained my memory by Your mercy. I am now firm and free from doubt and am prepared to act according to Your instructions.” (Gita 18.73)

Now we may be a little worried. We are back to that troublesome sloka, sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja: “Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me.” And we may wonder, “What are the implications of karisye vacanam tava: ‘I am prepared to act according to Your instructions’? What if Krishna tells me to give up my wife, my children, my business, my home? Then what?” This is a problematic question, and some people may not want to pursue the course of surrender to Krishna, because they are afraid of the consequences.

But there is some leniency here, some considerateness. Lord Krishna gives us a gradual process to come to the stage of surrender, because surrender is based on faith. When we have faith in someone or something, we can surrender. And if we don’t have faith, we won’t surrender. In this present Age of Kali, faith is very rare. It is very difficult to come by genuine faith. The society is materialistic, and everyone is cultured in the idea that they are independent, free to think and do whatever they like, without restriction. In fact, they are envious. Material life means envy—first of Krishna. People think, “Why should I surrender to Him? I am also intelligent. I also know things. I can also speak and argue. Why should I surrender?” And people find fault with Krishna: “Why did He tell Arjuna to fight? Why did He cause so many people to die?” In particular, people who are envious find fault with Krishna. They can never understand the Bhagavad-gita. Therefore Lord Krishna says,

idam te natapaskaya
  nabhaktaya kadacana
na casusrusave vacyam
  na ca mam yo ’bhyasuyati

“This confidential knowledge may never be explained to those who are not austere, or devoted, or engaged in devotional service, nor to one who is envious of Me.” (Gita 18.67) One must be a devotee, a bhakta. Only devotees are without envy.

Still, like a loving father, Krishna wants to bring all His sons and daughters to the highest perfection, even though He knows that it may take some time. A parent will want his child to grow to be strong and healthy and happy and intelligent and competent, and to take over the family’s business. A genuine, loving parent will want to give everything to the child, but the parent first wants to see that the child is responsible enough.

As I grew up, my father gave me a weekly allowance. My first allowance was five or ten cents. I was just a child, and he wasn’t sure how I would use the money. Eventually he raised my allowance to twenty-five cents. And I felt so proud: “My father really trusts me.” Twenty-five cents was quite a good amount for me then.

So, parents want to give to their children, but they also want to see that their children are responsible enough to take care of what they give them. In a similar way, Krishna wants to give us everything—even Himself—but He wants to see that we are qualified.

Another analogy is a teacher in a classroom. The study of math begins with one plus one equals two. There is much more, but the students proceed step by step: addition, then subtraction, then multiplication, then division—so many processes they have to learn.

In the Bhagavad-gita, the first instruction is that you are not the body but the soul within the body. Aham brahmasmi. That is the beginning, and if we understand even one line of the Bhagavad-gita, from the very beginning, our lives will change.

dehino ’smin yatha dehe
  kaumaram yauvanam jara
tatha dehantara-praptir
  dhiras tatra na muhyati

“As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.” (Gita 2.13) If we just understand that we are not the body but are the atma, the jivatma, within the body, that alone is enough to change our whole life. We will no longer act on the basis of the body, for sense gratification, but on the basis of the soul, for self-realization. In today’s materialistic society one’s whole endeavor is to get things for the body—my body, my wife’s body, my children’s bodies, my parents’ bodies—to make the body comfortable. But the body is just like a dress for the soul. Now, which is more important—the clothes or the person inside the clothes? The person, of course. The body itself is just a dress, which changes. The real person is the soul, who exists always.

vasamsi jirnani yatha vihaya
  navani grhnati naro ’parani
tatha sarirani vihaya jirnany
  anyani samyati navani dehi

“As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones.” (Gita 2.22)

If we understand just this one point from early in Krishna’s teaching in the Bhagavad-gita, our entire life will change. We will work for the benefit of the soul, which is our actual self and is part and parcel of the Supreme Self, God, Krishna, knowing that our real relationship is with Him, not with the body. And then, gradually, step by step, we will come to the conclusion of the Bhagavad-gita:

man-mana bhava mad-bhakto
  mad-yaji mam namaskuru
mam evaisyasi satyam te
  pratijane priyo ’si me

“Always think of Me, become My devotee, worship Me, and offer your homage unto Me. Thus you will come to Me without fail. I promise you this because you are My very dear friend.” (Gita 18.65)

sarva-dharman parityajya
  mam ekam saranam vraja
aham tvam sarva-papebhyo
  moksayisyami ma sucah

“Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.” (Gita 18.66)

Man-mana—always think of Krishna. If you do that, you will naturally become a devotee of Krishna (mad-bhakto). You will worship Him (mad-yaji) and offer obeisance unto Him (mam namaskuru). It is so simple.

The critical point is man-mana, to always think of Krishna. And how can we always think of Him? In the ninth chapter of the Gita Krishna says,

satatam kirtayanto mam
  yatantas ca drdha-vratah
namasyantas ca mam bhaktya
  nitya-yukta upasate

“Always chanting My glories, endeavoring with great determination, bowing down before Me, these great souls perpetually worship Me with devotion.” (Gita 9.14) Satatam kirtayanto mam—if we always (satatam) engage in glorifying Krishna, chanting His holy name (kirtana), we will always think of Him.

We are Hare Krishna devotees, and we are speaking about the Bhagavad-gita. What is the connection? The chanting of Hare Krishna is the real way to follow the instructions of Lord Krishna in the Bhagavad-gita. Sri Krishna Chaitanya, the incarnation of Krishna for the present Age of Kali, who inaugurated the Hare Krishna movement five hundred years ago, taught, kirtaniyah sada harih: “Always chant the holy name of Hari [Krishna].” And in the Bhagavad-gita, Sri Krishna gives the same instruction: satatam kirtayanto mam—always engage in kirtan, chanting the holy name of Krishna. So, the chanting of Hare Krishna is really the fulfillment of Lord Krishna’s ultimate instruction in the Bhagavad-gita: man-mana—always think of Krishna. And chanting is the best—and easiest—way to think of Him.

Of course, we think of Krishna when we hear about Him from the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, but for that we need a book or a reader. We think of Krishna when we see His deity form, His murti, but for that we need a temple, a mandir, with a murti. There are so many ways of thinking of Krishna, but the beauty of chanting, either kirtan or japa, is that we need only our tongue and ears. In the Bhagavad-gita (10.25) Lord Krishna recommends, yajnanam japa-yajno ’smi: “Of sacrifices I am the chanting of the holy names [japa].” This, anyone can do. Young or old, black or white, man or woman, educated or uneducated—anyone and everyone can chant Hare Krishna and fulfill Krishna’s instruction in the Bhagavad-gita.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, the authorized biography of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, relates an instructive story. While touring South India, Sri Chaitanya came to the holy place of Sri Ranga-kshetra, where, in front of the temple, He saw a brahman holding the Bhagavad-gita and crying, surrounded by people who were laughing and criticizing him. Sri Chaitanya asked him, “Why are these people laughing?” And the brahman replied, “I am holding the Bhagavad-gita, but I am more or less illiterate. I don’t know how to pronounce the words properly, and I do not know what they mean. But my guru ordered me to read the Gita, and so I read all eighteen chapters every day.” Chaitanya Mahaprabhu inquired, “Why are you crying?” And the brahman replied, “When I hold the Bhagavad-gita, I see before me Krishna and Arjuna on the chariot. Krishna is acting as Arjuna’s chariot driver. Taking the reins in His hands, He appears very beautiful. While seeing Lord Krishna instructing Arjuna, I weep in ecstatic happiness.” Then Lord Chaitanya told the brahman, “You are the true authority in the reading of the Bhagavad-gita. You know the real purport of the Bhagavad-gita.” And He embraced him.

Proud people may think, “Oh, these Hare Krishna people can’t understand much. They don’t know Sanskrit. They don’t have the samskaras. Let them chant. It is good.” But actually, by chanting the holy name of Krishna, one awakens one’s love for Him, which is the real purport of the Bhagavad-gita. By chanting, one fulfills the Lord’s instructions in the Bhagavad-gita to always think of Him and sing His glories. Although some who chant may not be very learned or knowledgeable in a certain sense, if they are genuine devotees of Krishna, they are fulfilling the real purport of the Bhagavad-gita.

aho bata sva-paco ’to gariyan
  yaj-jihvagre vartate nama tubhyam
tepus tapas te juhuvuh sasnur arya
  brahmanucur nama grnanti ye te

“Oh, how glorious are they whose tongues are chanting Your holy name! Even if born in the families of dog-eaters, such persons are worshipable. Persons who chant the holy name of Your Lordship must have executed all kinds of austerities and fire sacrifices and achieved all the good manners of the Aryans. To be chanting the holy name of Your Lordship, they must have bathed at holy places of pilgrimage, studied the Vedas, and fulfilled everything required.” (SB 3.33.7)

 

 

rjuna to fight? Why did He cause so many people to die?” In particular, people who are envious find fault with Krishna. They can never understand the Bhagavad-gita. Therefore Lord Krishna says,

der. In this present Age of Kali, faith is very rare. It is very difficult to come by genuine faith. The society is materialistic, and everyone is cultured in the idea that they are independent, free to think and do whatever they like, without restriction. In fact, they are envious. Material life means envy—first of Krishna. People think, “Why should I surrender to Him? I am also intelligent. I also know things. I can also speak and argue. Why should I surrender?” And people find fault with Krishna: “Why did He tell A

idam te natapaskaya
  nabhaktaya kadacana
na casusrusave vacyam
  na ca mam yo ’bhyasuyati

“Thisconfidential knowledge may never be explained to those who are not austere, or devoted, or engaged in devotional service, nor to one who is envious of Me.” (Gita 18.67) One must be a devotee, a bhakta. Only devotees are without envy.

Still, like a loving father, Krishna wants to bring all His sons and daughters to the highest perfection, even though He knows that it may take some time. A parent will want his child to grow to be strong and healthy and happy and intelligent and competent, and to take over the family’s business. A genuine, loving parent will want to give everything to the child, but the parent first wants to see that the child is responsible enough.

As I grew up, my father gave me a weekly allowance. My first allowance was five or ten cents. I was just a child, and he wasn’t sure how I would use the money. Eventually he raised my allowance to twenty-five cents. And I felt so proud: “My father really trusts me.” Twenty-five cents was quite a good amount for me then.

So, parents want to give to their children, but they also want to see that their children are responsible enough to take care of what they give them. In a similar way, Krishna wants to give us everything—even Himself—but He wants to see that we are qualified.

Another analogy is a teacher in a classroom. The study of math begins with one plus one equals two. There is much more, but the students proceed step by step: addition, then subtraction, then multiplication, then division—so many processes they have to learn.

In the Bhagavad-gita, the first instruction is that you are not the body but the soul within the body. Aham brahmasmi. That is the beginning, and if we understand even one line of the Bhagavad-gita, from the very beginning, our lives will change.

dehino ’smin yatha dehe
  kaumaram yauvanam jara
tatha dehantara-praptir
  dhiras tatra na muhyati

“As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.” (Gita 2.13) If we just understand that we are not the body but are the atma, the jivatma, within the body, that alone is enough to change our whole life. We will no longer act on the basis of the body, for sense gratification, but on the basis of the soul, for self-realization. In today’s materialistic society one’s whole endeavor is to get things for the body—my body, my wife’s body, my children’s bodies, my parents’ bodies—to make the body comfortable. But the body is just like a dress for the soul. Now, which is more important—the clothes or the person inside the clothes? The person, of course. The body itself is just a dress, which changes. The real person is the soul, who exists always.

vasamsi jirnani yatha vihaya
  navani grhnati naro ’parani
tatha sarirani vihaya jirnany
  anyani samyati navani dehi

“As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones.” (Gita 2.22)

If we understand just this one point from early in Krishna’s teaching in the Bhagavad-gita, our entire life will change. We will work for the benefit of the soul, which is our actual self and is part and parcel of the Supreme Self, God, Krishna, knowing that our real relationship is with Him, not with the body. And then, gradually, step by step, we will come to the conclusion of the Bhagavad-gita:

man-mana bhava mad-bhakto
  mad-yaji mam namaskuru
mam evaisyasi satyam te
  pratijane priyo ’si me

“Always think of Me, become My devotee, worship Me, and offer your homage unto Me. Thus you will come to Me without fail. I promise you this because you are My very dear friend.” (Gita 18.65)

sarva-dharman parityajya
  mam ekam saranam vraja
aham tvam sarva-papebhyo
  moksayisyami ma sucah

“Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.” (Gita 18.66)

Man-mana—always think of Krishna. If you do that, you will naturally become a devotee of Krishna (mad-bhakto). You will worship Him (mad-yaji) and offer obeisance unto Him (mam namaskuru). It is so simple.

The critical point is man-mana, to always think of Krishna. And how can we always think of Him? In the ninth chapter of the Gita Krishna says,

satatam kirtayanto mam
  yatantas ca drdha-vratah
namasyantas ca mam bhaktya
  nitya-yukta upasate

“Always chanting My glories, endeavoring with great determination, bowing down before Me, these great souls perpetually worship Me with devotion.” (Gita 9.14) Satatam kirtayanto mam—if we always (satatam) engage in glorifying Krishna, chanting His holy name (kirtana), we will always think of Him.

We are Hare Krishna devotees, and we are speaking about the Bhagavad-gita. What is the connection? The chanting of Hare Krishna is the real way to follow the instructions of Lord Krishna in the Bhagavad-gita. Sri Krishna Chaitanya, the incarnation of Krishna for the present Age of Kali, who inaugurated the Hare Krishna movement five hundred years ago, taught, kirtaniyah sada harih: “Always chant the holy name of Hari [Krishna].”

And in the Bhagavad-gita, Sri Krishna gives the same instruction: satatam kirtayanto mam—always engage in kirtan, chanting the holy name of Krishna. So, the chanting of Hare Krishna is really the fulfillment of Lord Krishna’s ultimate instruction in the Bhagavad-gita: man-mana—always think of Krishna. And chanting is the best—and easiest—way to think of Him.

Of course, we think of Krishna when we hear about Him from the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, but for that we need a book or a reader. We think of Krishna when we see His deity form, His murti, but for that we need a temple, a mandir, with a murti. There are so many ways of thinking of Krishna, but the beauty of chanting, either kirtan or japa, is that we need only our tongue and ears. In the Bhagavad-gita (10.25) Lord Krishna recommends, yajnanam japa-yajno ’smi: “Of sacrifices I am the chanting of the holy names [japa].” This, anyone can do. Young or old, black or white, man or woman, educated or uneducated—anyone and everyone can chant Hare Krishna and fulfill Krishna’s instruction in the Bhagavad-gita.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, the authorized biography of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, relates an instructive story. While touring South India, Sri Chaitanya came to the holy place of Sri Ranga-kshetra, where, in front of the temple, He saw a brahman holding the Bhagavad-gita and crying, surrounded by people who were laughing and criticizing him. Sri Chaitanya asked him, “Why are these people laughing?” And the brahman replied, “I am holding the Bhagavad-gita, but I am more or less illiterate. I don’t know how to pronounce the words properly, and I do not know what they mean. But my guru ordered me to read the Gita, and so I read all eighteen chapters every day.” Chaitanya Mahaprabhu inquired, “Why are you crying?” And the brahman replied, “When I hold the Bhagavad-gita, I see before me Krishna and Arjuna on the chariot. Krishna is acting as Arjuna’s chariot driver. Taking the reins in His hands, He appears very beautiful. While seeing Lord Krishna instructing Arjuna, I weep in ecstatic happiness.” Then Lord Chaitanya told the brahman, “You are the true authority in the reading of the Bhagavad-gita. You know the real purport of the Bhagavad-gita.” And He embraced him.

Proud people may think, “Oh, these Hare Krishna people can’t understand much. They don’t know Sanskrit. They don’t have the samskaras. Let them chant. It is good.” But actually, by chanting the holy name of Krishna, one awakens one’s love for Him, which is the real purport of the Bhagavad-gita. By chanting, one fulfills the Lord’s instructions in the Bhagavad-gita to always think of Him and sing His glories. Although some who chant may not be very learned or knowledgeable in a certain sense, if they are genuine devotees of Krishna, they are fulfilling the real purport of the Bhagavad-gita.

aho bata sva-paco ’to gariyan
  yaj-jihvagre vartate nama tubhyam
tepus tapas te juhuvuh sasnur arya
  brahmanucur nama grnanti ye te

“Oh, how glorious are they whose tongues are chanting Your holy name! Even if born in the families of dog-eaters, such persons are worshipable. Persons who chant the holy name of Your Lordship must have executed all kinds of austerities and fire sacrifices and achieved all the good manners of the Aryans. To be chanting the holy name of Your Lordship, they must have bathed at holy places of pilgrimage, studied the Vedas, and fulfilled everything required.” (SB 3.33.7)

The International Society for Krishna Consciousness not only presents the knowledge of the Bhagavad-gita; it also gives the practical means by which one can fulfill its purport—to become a devotee of Krishna, to always think of Him, to worship Him, to offer homage to Him, and to preach His message. After personally surrendering to Krishna (sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja), one can go further and teach this knowledge. This is Lord Krishna’s last instruction:

ya idam paramam guhyam
  mad-bhaktesv abhidhasyati
bhaktim mayi param krtva
  mam evaisyaty asamsayah

“For one who explains this supreme secret to the devotees, pure devotional service is guaranteed, and at the end he will come back to Me.

na ca tasman manusyesu
  kascin me priya-krttamah
bhavita na ca me tasmad
  anyah priyataro bhuvi

“There is no servant in this world more dear to Me than he, nor will there ever be one more dear.” (Gita 18.68–69) The real conclusion of the Bhagavad-gita, built upon one’s full surrender to Krishna, is to spread this message and thus become most dear to Krishna.

This is the opportunity we all have. On Gita Jayanti we think of Krishna, recite the Gita, and perform the yajna, but the real essence of the celebration is to bring more people to Krishna, to the wisdom of the Gita. As devotees, we want to bring others to Krishna, and when we do, Krishna is even more pleased. And that is what Gita Jayanti is really meant to do: to please Krishna, to bring the Bhagavad-gita to more people and bring more people to Krishna—and make us dear to Krishna.

It is a wonderful, wonderful opportunity. I have been chanting Hare Krishna and reading the Bhagavad-gita for forty years, and it is ever-fresh. Once, Srila Prabhupada told a New York Times interviewer, “Every day your employer is printing so many newspapers. On Sunday especially the paper is so big that one can hardly carry it. But after reading it for an hour, people throw it away. Here is this book—the Bhagavad-gita—and people keep it and read it for a lifetime, and in this way it has been read for the past five thousand years. Give people such literature that will be taken and kept forever.” And the reporter laughed—and agreed.

I am very grateful to all of you for having come this evening, after what was probably a long, hard day at work, braving the rush-hour traffic. I am grateful that you came and spared your valuable time. And I look forward to working together with all of you on this wonderful project, which will be so beneficial to so many people. Srila Prabhupada’s guru instructed him to preach the message of the Bhagavad-gita in English all over the world, telling him, “This will do much good for you as well as your audience.” So, it is win-win-win: it will be beneficial for you, it will be beneficial for the people in general, and ultimately Krishna will be pleased. And that is our goal—that is what bhakti means—to please Krishna. When Krishna is pleased, our life is successful and we are naturally satisfied and happy.

Thank you very much.

Hare Krishna.

[An address by Giriraj Swami to leaders of Hindu organizations, October 23, 2009, Houston]

 

 

Bhagavad-gita Jayanti
→ Ramai Swami

Gita Jayanti is the auspicious day of the advent of Srimad Bhagavad-gita. This is the day on which Lord Krishna imparted the essence of Vedic knowledge to Arjuna over 5000 years ago and enlightened him about the ultimate goal of life.

The Bhagavad Gita is the essence of Vedic wisdom given by Lord Sri Krishna. His message holds the key to ending all of life’s misgivings and the secret to a life of happiness, satisfaction, fulfilment and self-discovery. Srila Prabhupada, the Founder-Acharya of ISKCON, has presented the Bhagavad Gita As It Is in a scholarly yet simple language. This is the best–selling version of the Gita in the world.

Bhagavad Gita Overview Chapter 18
→ The Spiritual Scientist

My dear Lord Krishna, please guide us so that we can understand the depth of your wisdom and, most importantly, the depth of the love of your infinite heart, which is revealed to us in the concluding chapter of your immortal song. Today we come to the conclusion of the journey of the Gita. And here, in the 17th chapter and its ending, Krishna has described how one can understand the level of a person’s faith by looking at the actions they do, the kind of food they take, and the type of yajña, dana, and tapa they perform. He then says that the om tatsat—the ultimate—has to be invoked if any activity is to have enduring meaning.

At this point, Arjuna asks a question. On one level, this question seems similar to what he has asked earlier, but he phrases it differently. Earlier, Arjuna, in one sense, asked the same question in the starting question itself. So, 2.7 asks, “What is dharma?” 3.1 asks, “Which is better, action or renunciation?” 5.1 is also similar. Now, we have 18.1. This question is basically about the difference between renunciation (sannyasa) and detachment. He is using the word renunciation, generally speaking, in the sense of the renounced order. Basically, he wants to clearly understand the difference between external and internal renunciation.

At the start, we had discussed the theme of how being engaged does not mean being attached, and being disengaged does not mean being detached. If we consider the renounced order of life, it does not necessarily mean giving up work and going to the forest. That is not true renunciation; that is a practice of bhakti. There is also detachment. So, Arjuna wants to know the relationship between these two—are they completely identical, or are they separate? This is his essential question.

The question, of course, is related to his battlefield context: Should I fight, or should I not fight? Fighting is not just a physical activity. We generally reach the point of fighting only when we are emotionally invested in something. It’s very difficult to be detached while fighting, as fighting is a matter of life or death. One either loses one’s life or takes someone else’s life. Or, at the very least, if it doesn’t result in death, the fighting won’t stop unless one person is severely beaten or injured. So fighting involves external aggression, but at the very least, it involves strong internal emotion. Without this emotional investment, fighting is very difficult. So, what would detachment mean in the context of fighting?

Of course, someone may fight for money, considering it just a job. They don’t necessarily hate the other person, but they must have some attachment to money. After all, there are many ways to earn money. But even in such cases, a strong emotional attachment to money is required.

Let’s now look at the words Krishna uses. It’s interesting that throughout the Gita, it is generally Krishna who refers to Arjuna as “Mahabhava.” Here, however, Arjuna is returning the favor, offering Krishna a compliment. “You are also mighty-armed,” he says. He is acknowledging Krishna’s power to dissipate his illusions. Mahabhava is a general glorifying epithet for describing warriors. The word tatva has been used repeatedly in the Bhagavad Gita to refer to the essence or truth. “Those who know me in truth”—tatva, the truth of it. “I desire to know it,” says Arjuna.

So, he says: “Sannyasasya mahabaho tatvamicchami veditum.” Then he says, “Not only do I want to understand this tatva, but I also want to understand tyagasya (renunciation).” Tyaga is similar to sannyasa, but it is also something different. He is using the two words in different contexts. Sannyasa here refers to the renounced order, while tyaga refers to detachment. Arjuna does not fully specify what he means by these words, but he is using them to point out the differences between external renunciation and internal detachment.

At the start of the Gita, Arjuna’s senses were going wild; he was unable to hold on to the bow. He said, “O Lord, you can bring my senses under control.” Here, he says, “O Krishna, help me understand the difference between these two.” Tyagasya cha Rishikesha—the renunciation of actions performed for desires. Pruthak Kaishinishudhana—”You are the killer of the Kaishin demon; please destroy my misconception.”

This is the only verse in the Gita where three epithets are used to address Krishna. Pruthak Kaishinishudhana—”O destroyer of the Kaishin demon.” Krishna sometimes uses two epithets but rarely three. So here, Arjuna is asking about the difference between these two concepts, seeking to understand how he can fight with detachment. He has more or less understood that Krishna does not want him to renounce the world but to engage in it with detachment.

Now, Krishna’s answer unfolds in several steps. But before we go there, let’s recite the verse together:
“Sannyasya sya maha baho, tatvamicchami veditum, tyagasya cha rishikesha, pruthak kaishinishudhana.”

The Gita’s approach generally avoids getting into technicalities of terms, even while discussing many levels of practice. Krishna does not delve into a hair-splitting definition of each term. Instead, he focuses on the essential principles and purposes. In the 8th chapter, for example, Arjuna asks about the meanings of Adi Uda, Adi Daiva, and in the 13th chapter, he asks about Kshetrak Kshetrakya. Krishna doesn’t get bogged down in technicalities but gives concise replies. In this case, Krishna says: “Kamyanam karmanam nyasam, sannyasam kavayovidhu.” This means: “When one gives up work performed to fulfill desires, that is called sannyasa.”

Generally speaking, when someone is in the householder stage, they need material things—necessities or wants—and may work to obtain them. Even sannyasis cannot give up all work; they must perform their prayers, sadhana, and so on.

So, when one gives up kamyanam karma, that is sannyasa.
Sannyasam kavayovidhu.
Then Krishna says, sarva karma falatyagam. On one side, when someone gives up a certain category of work or a major category of work, that is sannyasa. That is sannyasa.
Whereas, in all work, if one gives up attachment to the fruits of the work, prahus tyagam vichakshana. This, Arjuna, is called tyaga.
Sarva karma falatyagam. Prahus tyagam vichakshana.

Now, when Krishna answers Arjuna’s question, we discussed earlier how the same question asked repeatedly should not be given the same answer repeatedly. So, one answer can come from different perspectives. This is a good approach, and Krishna has done that before in the fifth chapter. But another expert way to answer is when the same question is asked, say for example, “Why is there tension between India and Pakistan?”
At the start of a history course, somebody might say, “Okay, because there are religious differences, because there is regional conflict, because one country feels insecure,” and so on. We might use these reasons.
Now, if someone takes a history course for three months, six months, and then the question comes again, “Why is there tension between India and Pakistan?” The answer now includes everything learned in that course. So, the answer doesn’t just come from another perspective, but rather integrates the new knowledge.

Similarly, Krishna will answer the question of the difference between tyaga and sannyasa, renounced action and the mood of renunciation. The precise difference is that sannyasa is renunciation of work, while tyaga is renunciation in work. We are still working, but renunciation is there within our work. Krishna will answer this difference by integrating something he taught in the previous chapters: the modes of nature.

The modes are a concept Krishna specifically elaborated on in the 14th chapter and also uses in the 17th chapter. So now, Krishna will answer Arjuna’s question using the idea of the modes. This not only illuminates the answer further, but also integrates the new concept of the modes.
In 5.1, there is an answer. Then, in chapter 14, we learn about the modes. And now, in 18.1, the answer is given using the modes.

The first thing Krishna says is that when we talk about renunciation, the action of renouncing is there. You can also talk about the action of renunciation, when we renounce something. The underlying motivation—what conception, with what understanding—is what will determine whether the renunciation falls in sattva, rajas, or tamas. If renunciation is in the mode of ignorance, it is of no use. Similarly, in the mode of passion (rajas), it is not really of great use either.

Let’s quickly look at what Krishna says because there is a lot of territory to cover in this chapter. But I don’t want to just answer the question; I also want to outline the chapter. Krishna says:
“Our karma should never be given up, but if one does, when they are in illusion and without proper understanding, and renounce it, that is in the mode of ignorance.”
Krishna does not elaborate much on ignorance, because ignorance is so harmful that it is not even an option for Arjuna. The elaboration on ignorance is ignored by Krishna, always. It’s like if somebody wants to buy gold and mistakes some other metal, polished to look like gold, for gold. We must tell the person, “Look for this, this, and this,” but when somebody is asking for gold, we don’t have to tell them not to buy potatoes. Ignorance is so different from knowledge that if someone mistakes a potato for gold, it indicates they have a lack of understanding.

Now, Krishna moves on to rajasic renunciation:
“This is so troublesome, so I won’t do it.”
“Kaya” means body, “klesha” means distress, “bhaya” means fear. The idea is that the only consideration for renunciation is that it is troublesome, difficult, or fearful. Should this be one consideration? Of course. But if the only consideration is avoiding trouble, that’s not the right basis.

If life decisions are based only on which path will cause the least trouble, we miss the point of life. We are not meant to seek a problem-free life; we want a purposeful life. For the sake of a higher purpose, we may even be willing to face difficulties.

Anything worthwhile in life involves challenges. We want our lives to be problem-free, but we must ask ourselves: Should being problem-free be the sole basis for decision-making? Krishna says, no, we should live with purpose.

It’s like asking, “Do we want to be pain-free?” Yes, of course, we want to be pain-free, but is that the purpose of life? No, many times, for a greater purpose, such as getting fitter, people go to the gym, lift weights, and endure some pain. If someone’s purpose is only to avoid pain, they won’t get fitter.

So Krishna says that if renunciation is simply because “this is too difficult,” it’s not going to work. If someone thinks they will become a brahmachari because “this material world is too complicated,” they are mistaken. The brahmachari ashram is still in the material world.

If we run away from the world because it has problems, and then join the renounced order, expecting there won’t be problems there, where will we go? If we want to renounce the world, there must be a higher purpose, such as serving Guru and Krishna, sharing Krishna’s message, focusing on Krishna, and absorbing ourselves in him. But the primary focus must not be simply avoiding problems.

Krishna says, detachment is not just about avoiding difficulties; it must come from a higher purpose. The mode of rajas leads us to avoid things just because they are troublesome, but it doesn’t lead to true renunciation.

So, Krishna says, why should we be detached from the results?
Because multiple factors are involved in the action that leads to a result.
This is where Krishna talks about the five factors of action.
We tend to think that we do an action and we get the result, and it’s that simple.
But Krishna says, it’s not that simple. So, he explains the five factors of action.

Krishna analyzes karma and emphasizes that we must understand how karma works.
Let me recite the verse and explain:

Panchaitani Mahabhaha. Panchaitani means five.
Karanani Nibodhame. Arjuna, understand this properly.
Sankhye Krutan Te Toktani. By Sankhya, this I talk about.
Siddhaye Sarvakarmana. For the success of work, these five factors are involved.

Let’s break down these five factors. The 14th verse outlines:

  • Adhishthanam – the place where we are at work, the venue of action.
  • Tatha Karta – the doer.
  • Karanam – the senses, the instruments with which we do our action.
  • Karanam Chaprutha Vidham – there are various kinds of senses that may be involved at different times.
  • Vividhash Chaprutha Cheshta – the different kinds of endeavors required.
  • Daivam – the fifth factor, destiny.

Let’s recite this together:
Adhishthanam Tatha Karta.
Karanam Chaprutha Vidham.
Vividhash Chaprutha Cheshta.
Daivam Chayvatra Panchamam.

Now, to understand this, think of action on one side and result on the other.
Between them is a bridge with five planks. These planks are the five factors Krishna mentions.
Let’s look at these five planks. You know the meaning of the word planks? They are logs of wood that link together. In this analogy, the five factors are the planks in the bridge that connect action to result.

The first factor is self-evident: the Karta (the soul).
If someone is a great musician but is dead, they cannot perform music. So the doer must be there for the action to happen. If someone is asleep, they cannot act. The doer has to be present.

Next, we have Karanam, which refers to not just the physical senses, but something more.
Consider that right now we are having a session on the Bhagavad Gita. I, as the speaker, need to be here, and you, as the hearers, need to be present. All of us are Kartas.

For me to give the class, my throat needs to be functional. If I’m sick and can’t speak, the action of teaching cannot happen. Each activity requires a particular set of senses. If one of you has hearing issues, you won’t be able to hear the class properly, and the action of learning will be incomplete.

But it’s not just about senses; skills are also involved.
Everybody speaks, but not everyone speaks fluently or attractively. There is the voice itself, the vocabulary, the delivery method—all of these are important. For example, in cricket, everyone has hands and legs, but a batsman or bowler needs strong muscles to hit or throw the ball properly. So, senses must be associated with the right skills.

The next factor is Adhishthanam, the place where the action takes place.
If we are in a crowded vegetable market, it will be hard to have a focused session on the Bhagavad Gita. The right place is crucial for the action to unfold. In cricket, you need a proper ground with the right dimensions, and a pitch that is suitable for the game. So, Adhishthanam refers to a venue that is suitable for the action.

Then comes Cheshta, which refers to effort or endeavor.
Once we have the right place, the right venue, we need to put in the right effort. This is where practice, discipline, and dedication come in. A musician, for instance, might practice hours daily to improve their skills. The more effort you put into refining your abilities, the more successful the action will be.

Finally, there is Daiva—destiny or luck.
Sometimes, even with all the right effort, things may not work out. A sports player may be in top form, in a good venue, and prepared, but something beyond their control can affect the outcome. For example, a spectacular catch by a fielder might end their innings, or a match might be canceled due to unforeseen events like a pandemic.

This is the aspect of destiny or luck. While we can control some factors, destiny plays a role, too. People may call this “luck,” but it’s more about forces beyond our control.

If we look at these five factors when something doesn’t go right, we can analyze why it happened.
If you are studying engineering and not achieving your desired results, or if I’m teaching and not having the desired impact, we can look at these factors.

Destiny is something we cannot control, but we can control other factors, like practice, discipline, and effort. If we simply blame destiny every time something doesn’t work, we are being irresponsible. We must take action, practice, and continue striving.

This segment delves into the factors that influence success and failure, emphasizing the importance of effort, compatibility, and external conditions. Here’s a simplified explanation:

Krishna discusses the five factors of action—Karta (the doer), Karanam (the instruments or senses), Adhishthanam (the place or environment), Cheshta (endeavor or effort), and Daiva (destiny or divine will)—to explain that success depends on more than just the individual. Each factor plays a role in determining the outcome of an action.

Key Points:

  1. Talent and Practice: Arjuna is an example of someone with great natural talent who also practiced tirelessly. His diligence was essential in developing his skills. This shows that talent alone is not enough—dedicated effort and practice are also crucial.
  2. Reasons for Lack of Success: There are three main reasons why someone might not achieve success:
    • Incompatibility of Work: The work may not align with the person’s natural abilities or skills. For example, someone with a musical talent trying to become a businessperson might struggle if they focus too much on the commercial side and neglect their talent.
    • Inhospitable Place: Success can be hindered if one is in the wrong environment. For instance, someone interested in cricket in a place where no one knows the sport may not have the opportunity to develop their talent.
    • Insufficient Endeavor: Even in the right environment with the right skills, a person might not succeed if they don’t put in enough effort.
  3. Srila Prabhupada’s Example: Srila Prabhupada, a renowned spiritual leader, faced many challenges in his life. Despite having the right skills, his initial attempts to spread his teachings in India were unsuccessful due to factors like the political climate and the general focus on materialism. However, when he moved to America, his persistence paid off as he found an audience that was receptive to his message.
  4. The Role of Daiva (Destiny): Sometimes, despite all efforts, things don’t go as planned due to factors beyond our control. These include external circumstances or “luck” that can affect the outcome. For example, a talented author may die unknown, only for their work to gain fame posthumously.
  5. Rational vs. Mystical Explanations: Krishna advises not to jump to mystical or irrational explanations when things go wrong. Instead, analyze the situation rationally—consider whether the work is suitable, the environment is right, and the effort is sufficient.
  6. Illusions of Doership: Krishna warns against the illusion of being the sole doer. While we play an active role in our actions, there are many factors at play—skill, environment, effort, and destiny. If we become overly proud of our success or overly discouraged by failure, we lose sight of the bigger picture.

Krishna’s point is to help Arjuna understand that success and failure are not solely in one’s control and to avoid attachment to results, as there are many factors influencing the outcome.

So we see that I am one factor among the actions. Tatra evam sati kartaram. Atmanam kevalam tuyah. Pasyatya akrta buddhitvan. Nasapashyati durmati.

So basically, what happens is if I think I am the sole doer, then I will have these super extremes. I am a champion. I am the greatest, and otherwise, I am worthless. I am just good for nothing at all.

We all will experience loss in life. Now, loss is the event. And then we all ascribe some meaning to the event. So, an objective sense of meaning could be: I have lost. Okay, I gave this interview. I applied for this particular internship. I tried to do this. It didn’t work. I have lost. That’s one level.

Now, far more damaging is “I am lost.” So it’s not just about this; it’s more of a situation. “I have lost” is more of a situation. In this particular situation, it didn’t work out. “I am lost” means it’s about direction. I just don’t know where to go. I’m lost.

But the most damaging meaning would be: “I am a loser.” Now, this goes to the level of self-definition itself. If we go to that level, “I am a loser.” This is where depression comes in. This is where low self-esteem comes in. And ultimately, this is where suicidal ideation, suicidal thoughts, and suicide come in. So this is toxic. This is a very dark path. This is where many of the mental health problems arise because we ascribe wrong meanings to our life’s events. “All this didn’t work out. Therefore, I’m a loser.”

Now, this can also be applied to our attempts at sense control. We all may take some time. So if I am trying to control my senses, first of all, Karanam: What is the capacity of my senses? If somebody tries to fast, according to Ayurveda, there’s Kapha, Vata, and Pitta Prakriti. And each Prakriti doesn’t find it equally easy to fast. For some people, especially Kapha Prakriti, it is relatively easy to fast. For those with Vata Prakriti, it is almost impossible to fast. Sorry, with Pitta Prakriti, it’s almost impossible to fast.

But the point is, do I have the necessary skill sets? Are my senses suitable for that? If my body is suitable for that, then am I in the right place if I am trying to control my senses? So if I am fasting and working in Govinda’s restaurant, where either I am cooking food or serving food and seeing all the delicacies that everybody is eating, well, that’s not the right place for fasting, is it? It’s like if somebody wants to torture themselves, then maybe that is the place to go for fasting. But that’s not the best place.

And thirdly, have I endeavored properly? That means maybe I need to… Fasting cannot just be a one-time event. We need to overall regulate our diet and our body’s digestive patterns to become proper. Maybe I have to plan properly, I have to endeavor properly. So that endeavor could mean talking with those who fast regularly: What all do you do? What can be done about this? We learn things.

So with sense control, it’s like that. Maybe we try to fast once, it works. First it doesn’t work, second time it doesn’t work, third time it doesn’t work. Gradually we learn, okay, this is what I can do, these are my capacities, it grows. So this applies to everything in life.

So Krishna says, don’t claim sole-doership. Don’t think that it is because of you the war is happening. You are not the sole doer. At the same time, you are not the non-doer either. There is a bigger set of factors happening, and you are going to play one part in it.

Then after this, Krishna will analyze the various components of action. So he will say that we try to keep the various components of action in the mode of goodness. So this is a bit of a technical section. I won’t go too much into the technicalities. But Krishna explains that when we do action, there are certain factors involved. So these two verses talk about these factors, 18 to 19. But each word has a technical meaning, and then Krishna shows how that meaning relates to the specific list that he is going to give.

But without going into this technical part, let’s look at one verse over here. Gyanam karmach karta cha Tridhaiva gunabhed taha.

So when we are acting, there are various components involved in action. So first of all, we perceive things. Without perception, nothing can happen. So for example, if you are sitting here and suddenly the door opens and a tiger is seen over there, so that gyan will lead to the karma: run away from here. So there is perception and there is action. And then there is the karta, the doer. So basically, the components of action you want to see.

So Krishna will broadly say that we can try to be able to act with detachment. We try to get as many of the components of action as possible towards the mode of goodness. So in action, the first stage is gyanam. Gyanam is not so much knowledge here as perception. Gyanam is what is acquired with the karmindriya. And there is karma, the action that we do. Now there is, of course, the karta. Gyan, karma, and karta are there.

Now, along with that, when an action is to be done, there is a motive for the action. The motive generally is sukha. We all want happiness in life.

So, for example, if the door opens and we say, “Hey, there is a table with a nice large cake over there.” “Oh, I want to eat it. It is enjoyable.” We want to go there. So sukha is the motive for us.

Now, when we are trying to integrate this diagram later, let me first broadly explain. So gyanam is what we take in as information. Then Krishna says there is also buddhi and there is druti. I’ll explain how these three work. Buddhi is what? Intelligence. And druti is determination. So, how does Krishna explain buddhi and druti over here?

First of all, buddhi is different from gyanam. Gyanam is the information that we take in. Buddhi is how we decide to translate intention into action. When I see a snake slithering in from there, I have to run away. Maybe that door is further, and this door is closer. But there are too many people over here. They all are going to run through this door, so maybe I should run through that door. That’s intelligence. Intelligence is by which we decide how to translate intention into action. Intelligence is how we translate. This is the specific definition in this context. Intelligence can have many definitions, but when I have a particular thing to do, what should I do in this situation? How should I go about doing it?

Then, determination is what helps persist in this translation. I may have intelligence, for example, if someone feels that they are overweight and want to lose weight. The intelligence may be that, okay, maybe I have to do more exercise, or maybe I have to avoid certain foods. That intelligence might be there, okay. But after that, determination must be there to keep doing it.

Now it’s interesting, Krishna will say, all these three can be in the three modes: gyanam, buddhi, and druti can be in the three modes. So let’s try to look at these to put it all together now. When we act, gyanam comes into the karta. And then the karta is going to do the karma. So if we consider this to be the self, information is coming to the self, and action has come out of the self. Here you could say there are broadly, there is the buddhi. Okay, I’ve got this information, what should I do now? Then there is druti, the determination, and then there is sukha.

So why am I putting all these before karma? In one sense, these drive our action. Okay, we all are going to act, but we use our intelligence to decide how to act. We have our determination by which we decide how long we are going to act. And then we have a certain conception of pleasure based on which we act.

Let’s just take one example of these three things to illustrate how these three work. I’ll talk about druti, how the buddhi and druti work. Druti is determination, and how determination can also be in the three modes. Krishna talks about each of these in the three modes, but let’s focus on one of them.

So Krishna says right at the beginning, “Yaya dharmam adharmam ca, that which is right a person thinks to be wrong.” “Karyam ca,” sorry, not this one, “Adharmam dharmamitya,” that which is wrong, one thinks to be right. “Manyate tamasavrita,” the person who is covered by ignorance. “Adharmam dharmamitya, manyate tamasavrita, sarva arthaan, in all purposes, viparitamstha.” The person comes to the exact opposite conclusion.

Sarva arthaan viparitamsa.” Buddhi sa partha, what happened? I didn’t go to buddhi. Okay, let’s take buddhi only. Any of these is fine. “Buddhi sa partha tamasi.” Now intelligence can be used to arrive at a proper understanding of things, and then that understanding is the basis of action. Different people can take in the same facts, and they may arrive at completely different understandings. So, when the intelligence is in the mode of ignorance, a person’s realization is the exact opposite of what it is.

Once, an anti-alcohol campaigner gave a talk to a set of alcoholics in the audience. He told them how dangerous alcohol is. They said, “Now I will demonstrate to you.” He had a small beaker in which there was some alcohol, half of it full and transparent. He also had a small box in which he had an insect. He opened that box and just hurled the insect into the beaker. The insect fluttered around, struggling, and within moments, it just signed out, dead.

Just to demonstrate how dangerous alcohol is—kill you. So you look at everyone, so what do you learn from this? Everybody was looking down. One person, very cheerful with a bright smile, says, “Yes, what do you learn?” He says, “When I drink alcohol, all the germs and worms in my intestine will die.”

So, sarva artha viparitamsa. You arrive at the conclusion that is the exact opposite of what should be arrived at. That is buddhi sa sarva artha tamasi. That, with respect to cigarettes, when they started demonstrating, the companies were forced by the regulatory agencies to put that cigarette smoke is injurious to health. At least initially, what happened was they marketed in such a way that actually, people who are courageous, people who are adventurous, they all smoke cigarettes. So, when they put this warning signal, it triggered the rebellious instincts in people, and for some time, cigarette sales increased.

So, that is sarva artha viparitamsa. What is right, what is wrong? What is to be done, what is not to be done? If one is not able to understand clearly, it is confusing. This is stupid, and that is stupid.

Now, what happens is a person has many desires, and they are pulled in different directions. “I want to work hard and become famous.” “I want to enjoy right now, I want to party.” So, okay, do you want to work or do you want to party? “I want to do both.” You can’t do both, isn’t it? There are desires which pull people in different directions, and then intelligence is not able to figure out. It just doesn’t have a clear understanding of what is really important.

Now, this is not blind. Tamasik is just completely distorted. But here, ayathaavat. So rajoguna is not the same as tamoguna. Sometimes we equate rajoguna and tamoguna, but rajoguna enables people to work hard, and sometimes they work constructively. They can do extraordinary things in rajoguna, but often their priorities are not clear.

Now, this goes forward. We don’t have time right now. Then Krishna will talk about sukha, how that which tastes like poison in the beginning will taste like nectar in the end, and that which tastes like nectar in the beginning will taste like poison in the end. That’s exactly what he talks about, the various modes.

And why is he talking about all this? He says that by understanding all this, we try to put our buddhi in goodness. We try to understand how a definition of happiness is in goodness. Then it’s relatively easier for us to situate ourselves in goodness. And then our actions will naturally be in goodness.

Then Krishna says, okay, goodness is good, but it’s not good enough. We have to rise above goodness. While being in goodness, we need to function. We need to function for a higher purpose. So Krishna talks about the system of varnashram, where different people have their roles in life. After describing the typical characteristics of people in each of the varanas, Krishna explains how people in each of the varanas should function appropriately.

Then he says how to function in life. Let’s look at these few verses that are quite important. One of these verses is often mistranslated as “work is worship,” so we will see what is missed in the mistranslation. Krishna starts with:
“From whom all of existence is manifested, by whom all of this world is pervaded, Abhyarcha is worship.”

So, through your work, worship that Lord, and by this, one can attain perfection. If you look at the verse 18.46C (which is the line before), Swakarmana tam abhyarcha. So literally, if you look at it, it’s straightforwardly translated as:
Swakarmana: by your work,
Tam abhyarcha: worship that Lord.

So what this verse is saying is, through your work, worship the Lord. It is not “work is worship.” That’s all. Through your work, worship the Lord. Krishna is not saying that simply work is worship.

Now, work is worship may be defined as an ethical principle. This means, if there is a lot of discrimination against some people who do certain kinds of work, then there is no need to look down upon those people. All work and all workers should have some dignity. The idea of untouchability, whatever extent it had, was more of a hygienic concern, not a casteist one. Certain people doing specific types of work were considered more likely to be infected, so they needed extra care. But this is not meant to be a socially imposed way of discriminating against people. Of course, it became that way, which is horrendous.

But the idea is, if we consider “work is worship” to mean that all work and all workers should have a basic level of dignity, that’s definitely true. Krishna is also implying this. If through your work, you can worship the Lord, it means that the work is not profane, it is not sinful, and it’s not so dark and disconnected from God.

But the key difference is that “work is worship” means there is no need for any other object of worship. Essentially, work becomes a replacement for God. Krishna is saying that this is not the case. He is saying, basically, the understanding is: God is up here in the spiritual world, and we are down here in the material world. If I have to become liberated, I have to go to God. This is true, but it’s only partially true.

Why? Because Krishna exists everywhere. Krishna doesn’t just exist in the spiritual world, He exists in this world as well. So when we are doing this, this is worship. When we come in the morning, we chant the holy names, we do Aarti, this is worship. Then, after that, once we have infused that mood of worship into our heart, we remember that this Lord whom I am worshipping right now is everywhere.

This Lord is in my office, in my college, in my home, in the road I travel to get to work. So then we can work as worship. It’s not “work is worship,” it’s “work as a form of worship.” That Lord I can serve through my work too.

Now, somebody might say, “But this world has so many problems. There are so many things wrong in this world.” Sometimes we have to do things that are not proper spiritually or morally. That’s the nature of the world. Krishna says, yes, that’s true, but don’t fixate on that. The Gita is a very, in my sense, a realist book.

See, in education, there is always this tension. So, what is the tension in education? It’s not just how will I pass the exam. That may be the tension for students. But for educators, when they are giving education about the world, how much should it be about describing the world as it should be, and how much should we be teaching the world as it is? The tension between that.

For example, when parents are raising their children, they should tell them to speak the truth. Everybody should speak the truth. But should parents also tell their children that sometimes people lie? Sometimes not lying is good, but sometimes we have to acknowledge that people lie. Speaking the full truth may not always be the best course of action. How much do we speak about the world as it is versus as it should be?

This is idealism and realism. The best education is a blend of both. If it’s only idealism, it becomes impractical, and the person won’t be able to function. If it’s only realism, then soon the person will become immoral, unprincipled. Krishna says that we should work with good intentions, but acknowledge that sometimes there will be faults in life.

Let’s look at this verse. Krishna says, “Just as fire is considered sacred, but smoke covers the fire…”

So similarly, Krishna says that everything in this world, meaning everything born with, is inborn, born with karma, Arjuna. Faults are present in every activity that we do. Don’t give up because of that. And here’s an example: all endeavors are covered by faults, just as fire is covered by smoke. Let’s recite the verse together:

So, just as fire is covered by smoke, Krishna says, yes, it’s going to be difficult for you to fight against Bhishma and Drona, but life never offers us straightforward choices. Sometimes, but very rarely, is it this side that is all good and the other side all bad. There are often times when there is some good on one side and some bad on the other side. We cannot expect a utopia.

So, what is Krishna describing here? This is where he is describing Karma Yoga. Now, this last chapter is like a summary of the Gita. Krishna is drawing His message to the end. In the first few verses (from 41 to 48), Krishna will talk about Karma Yoga. Then, from verses 49 to 54, he talks about Karma Yoga which culminates in Bhakti Yoga. In verse 54, there is a famous verse:
“So through Gyaan Yoga, one attains perfection. And when one attains perfection, what happens next? That person attains Bhakti. Bhakti is the highest.”

After this, Krishna will say, “Actually, you don’t have to go all the way through all these paths. You can directly practice Bhakti from wherever you are.” He will discuss this broadly from 56 to 62. Verse 63 is the last verse where he speaks. He summarizes everything by saying, “Yes, the modes are there, and material nature exists, but above material nature is the Lord. So if you serve the Lord, you will be able to engage material nature in a way that will bring you closer to the Lord.”

Then, in verse 63, Krishna stops and says, “Now, Arjuna, I have given you the message. Now you contemplate and do as you desire.” He says, “Vimrishya itathā, as long as required, and then yathay shasi athaad kuru—do as you desire.”

Here, the Gita reveals a God who respects human intelligence and appeals to human independence. One of my friends, who lives in the southern part of America, which is quite Christian evangelical, wanted to write a book on the Gita. He said, “I am thinking of writing a book called ‘The Ten Commandments of the Bhagavad Gita.'”

I told him, “Please don’t write such a book, at least not with that title.” He asked, “Why?” I said, “The Gita’s mood is not the mood of commandments. The Gita is giving choices and consequences. If you do this, this will happen. If you do that, that will happen. Now you decide what you want to do.”

While the idea of appealing to a Christian demographic is nice, we want to convey the mood of the Gita as well. Krishna’s mood is that of a guide by the side. He is with us. Krishna is not like a deity far away in the sky. He is a guide by the side, speaking reasonably with Arjuna.

When Arjuna hears this, he becomes deep in thought. He starts thinking, “What does Krishna want me to do?” He remembers what Krishna said in the second, sixth, twelfth, and thirteenth chapters. He doesn’t think about it literally in terms of chapters, but rather reflects on Krishna’s messages over time: “Krishna said this then, Krishna said that there. What should I do?”

It’s like a doctor telling a parent whose child has cancer, “This is the disease, these are the options, and these are the factors involved in each option. Now you do as you desire.” It’s a serious decision.

When two people are very close to each other, they can communicate a lot without speaking. Just by a glance, they can speak volumes. Sometimes, when people are not close, they can shout a lot, but nothing is communicated. So, Arjuna is thinking, “What does Krishna want me to do?” and Krishna has told him, “Do as you desire.” But Arjuna wants to know Krishna’s desire.

Therefore, Krishna starts speaking. Krishna will say, “I will speak the most confidential knowledge.” In English, there are intensifiers. You may say something is very important, but repeating the intensifier does not make it more important. It’s like saying, “This is very, very, very important,” but it’s not really emphasizing anything.

Krishna uses intensifiers in verses 64–66 to convey that what he is about to speak is very special. Let’s look at these intensifiers:

  • Guhiya: Among all knowledge, this is the most confidential. It’s not just private but deeply intimate.
  • Paramam: This is the highest of all the words I have spoken.
  • Dhridham: Krishna is determined to love Arjuna. He is committed to this relationship for the long haul.
  • Ishta: Krishna cares for Arjuna and is speaking this for Arjuna’s benefit. Krishna is determined to care for him.
  • Te hitam: Krishna speaks these words for Arjuna’s benefit.

These intensifiers convey that Krishna’s message is not just important, but is deeply personal and committed to Arjuna’s well-being.

Earlier, Krishna told us that a devotee should be dṛḍha (determined) in worshipping Him. But here, Krishna is saying that what He is asking for in this relationship, He is also going to give in return. He wants Arjuna to be determined, but He Himself is also determined. Dṛḍham—because Krishna is determined.

This is similar to a doctor telling a patient, “Yes, now I will tell you something private. There are many treatments, each with side effects. But these are the most important things I want to share with you. I care for you, and I want your child to be healthy.” Krishna will speak the same words He has spoken before, but with a different emphasis.

Let’s recite this together. The difference is in the mood of urgency. Imagine a patient is admitted to the hospital. The doctor says, “You pay your bills, follow this exercise, do this and this, and you will be cured.” The emphasis here is on what the patient must do.

But if the doctor really cares about the patient, they will say, “Once you take care of these things, I will make sure you get cured.” While the responsibility lies with the patient, the doctor reassures them, “I will make sure you are taken care of.”

In verse 9.34, Krishna emphasizes what Arjuna must do, but in 18.65, Krishna emphasizes what He will do. Why is that? Because Krishna’s heart, as described by Chakravarthi Pali, is overflowing with compassion. Krishna wants Arjuna to do the right thing, but He is also saying, “I will do everything for you.”

This is why Krishna declares, “I will do all this for you. I declare it for your benefit.” And then, finally, Krishna speaks the Charam Shloka of the Gita, which Ramanacharya calls the crest jewel of all the words of the Gita. Let’s recite it together.

Krishna says, “Moksha is shami…” This is like a doctor saying, “Forget all the other treatments. Just do this one thing. Even if there are side effects or complications, I guarantee I will take care of everything.”

See, no doctor wants to take on liability. In fact, when a surgery is performed, the patient or their guardian must sign a form that disclaims liability—if anything goes wrong, it’s not the doctor’s fault. But Krishna is saying, “I will take the liability. I am telling you this is the right thing to do. Even if complications arise, I will protect you.”

You had different ideas about what your dharma is—kula dharma, kshatriya dharma—and I’ve given you broad paths to determine what to do: Karma Yoga, Gyaan Yoga, Dhyana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga. Krishna says, “Forget all that. Just do what I tell you, and I will free you from the reactions.”

This is the heart of Krishna’s eagerness and compassion. Previously, in the seventh chapter, Krishna explained how one must become free from all sinful reactions to practice Bhakti:
“Yei shaam tvantakaṁ pāpam janānāṁ gunya-karmanām te dvandva-moha-nirmukta bhajante māṁ dhradarvṛtāḥ.”
One must be free from sinful reactions to practice Bhakti. But here, Krishna says, “However you are, just practice Bhakti, and I will purify you. I will free you from sinful reactions.”

It’s like a mother training her child in Bhakti. She says, “Don’t make a mess with your clothes. Go to the restroom to do your business.” But the child makes a mess, and the mother says, “Don’t come to me until you clean yourself.” The child, helpless, says, “I don’t know how to do that.” And the mother replies, “Don’t worry, I’ll clean you up.”

In 7.28, Krishna says, “Clean yourself first, then come to me.” But in 18.66, He says, “Come to me, and I’ll clean you up.” This is the love of Krishna’s heart.

Then, Krishna says, “This is a confidential message. This is not to be given to everyone.” He talks about how He will free Arjuna from all sinful reactions. People might misunderstand this, thinking, “I can do anything in Krishna’s name, and Krishna will purify me.” But Krishna says, “No. Only those who have love for me and act with loving intention are protected.”

This message should be shared appropriately with others, Krishna adds. He provides three levels through which one can connect with Him, illustrating this with the example of a person stuck in a well.

Imagine someone trapped in a well who can’t get out. Someone from outside throws a rope and says, “Hold on to the rope, and I’ll pull you out.” The person responds, “No, my arms will hurt if I hold the rope.” The person outside then ties a loop at the end of the rope and says, “Just put this around your waist, and I’ll pull you up.” The person protests, “If I tie it around my waist, it will squeeze me and cause pain.” Finally, the person outside ties a tub at the end of the rope and says, “Sit in this tub, and I’ll pull you out.”

Krishna says, “First of all, you should preach this message. You will become very dear to me.” Arjuna might think, “Preach? Who can do that? The message is so complicated!” Krishna replies, “If you can’t preach it, at least study the message.” Arjuna might respond, “I can’t study it either, it’s too complicated.” Krishna then says, “Fine, just hear the message. Just sit inside the tub, and I will pull you out.” Krishna is extending the rope of grace more and more, urging Arjuna to connect with Him in whatever way possible.

Finally, Krishna asks, “Arjuna, have you heard attentively? Has your illusion been dispelled?” This is the only question Krishna asks Arjuna in the entire Gita. Normally, if a speaker asks, “Have you heard attentively?” it could seem like an insult, implying that the listener wasn’t paying attention. But in Arjuna’s context, this question has a different meaning. Krishna is aware that Arjuna’s mind was disturbed by his emotions, and they were in the middle of a battlefield, even though it seemed quiet externally. The very awareness of the battlefield itself could cause distraction.

Krishna is asking, “If you weren’t able to hear something, tell me, and I will repeat it for you.” Arjuna, overwhelmed with joy and gratitude, responds, “Krishna, I have understood. My illusion is dispelled, and I will do your will.” This is the essence of the Gita. Arjuna does not say, “I will fight the war.” The focus of the Gita has risen beyond the circumstances of the battlefield. At the universal level, the Gita’s purpose is not just about fighting; it’s about harmonizing with the divine will, recognizing that each person has a role in a greater plan.

Sometimes, that role may be difficult. Sometimes it may be easy. Sometimes it may bring glory, and sometimes it may require us to remain anonymous. But the key is to do our part and align with Krishna’s will. As Arjuna says, “I will do your will.” This could have been the end of the Gita, but from verses 74 to 78, Sanjay speaks, and these verses are important because they demonstrate the teachings of the Gita itself.

When Krishna speaks to Arjuna, the message is successful because Arjuna’s heart changes. But when Sanjay speaks the same message to Dhritarashtra, there is no change in Dhritarashtra’s heart. However, the message is still successful, because Sanjay’s heart changes. Sanjay becomes filled with remembrance of Krishna and joy in hearing Krishna’s words. In this way, the teachings of the Gita go from Karma Yoga to Bhakti Yoga.

At the level of Karma Yoga, the teaching is to be detached from the results of our actions. Sanjay demonstrates this detachment, as he remains steady despite Dhritarashtra’s lack of response. In Bhakti Yoga, while still detached from results, there is an added element of attachment to Krishna. This is the internal result that we seek: becoming attached to Krishna.

In our lives, success is often measured by the world’s standards, but happiness comes from our internal experience. It is possible to experience both success and happiness, but in Arjuna’s case, he will experience both. Sanjay, on the other hand, experiences happiness even though the success of his message isn’t evident in Dhritarashtra’s heart. Both Arjuna and Sanjay have become Krishna-conscious, and this is the true success.

The duality of the world is that being Krishna-conscious doesn’t guarantee worldly success. We may still face failure and difficulty, but even in failure, we can experience the success of our inner connection with Krishna and the joy it brings. The Gita concludes with a verse that summarizes this message.

Let’s recite the final verse together:
“Yatra Yogeshwara Krishna Yatra Parthodhanurdhara
Tatra Sri Vijayobhutir Dhruvani Tirmah.ama”

This means, “Wherever there is Krishna and wherever there is Arjuna, there is victory, glory, and opulence.”

Now, why is Arjuna necessary here? Why not just Krishna? The point is that the Gita’s purpose is not only to proclaim God’s position but to transform the human disposition. Yes, wherever Krishna is, there is success and victory. But we are invited to be with Krishna. Arjuna’s faith is expressed through his words, “I am with you, O Krishna.” This shows Arjuna’s commitment to doing Krishna’s will.

When Arjuna lifts his bow, it signifies that he has decided to act according to Krishna’s will. The significance here is that victory is not just about divine presence but also about aligning our disposition with God’s will. Krishna’s will has transformed Arjuna’s heart, and this is why the Pandavas will succeed in the battle.

The Gita began with Dhritarashtra asking, “What happened in the battlefield?” Sanjay’s response is essentially, “Your side will not be successful.” But he doesn’t say this directly. He says that where Krishna and Arjuna are, there is success. This has both a literal meaning (the Pandavas will win the war) and a universal meaning: if we align ourselves with Krishna, we too can succeed in life, overcoming dualities of success and failure.

With that, the Gita concludes. To summarize, we discussed the difference between Tyaga (renunciation) and Sannyasa (renunciation of the fruits of action), and the teachings of the Gita about aligning with the divine will, practicing detachment, and ultimately becoming Krishna-conscious.

In this discussion, we talked about the distinction between external renunciation and the internal disposition of renunciation. Krishna emphasizes the importance of focusing on the modes of nature. He explains that renunciation driven by Rajas (passion) is not healthy. For example, a person might avoid something because they perceive it as troublesome, but this avoidance doesn’t stem from a pure state of renunciation.

We also discussed the five factors of action. These factors serve as five planks between action and result, illustrating that we should not think of ourselves as the sole doers, nor should we see ourselves as non-doers. Instead, we should recognize that we have a part to play, and we must do it carefully. If success does not come, we should evaluate three key factors:

  1. Is the work incompatible? – Perhaps the task at hand doesn’t align with our skills or circumstances.
  2. Is the place inhospitable? – Some environments may not be conducive to the success of certain actions.
  3. Is my endeavor insufficient? – It could be that the effort put forth is not enough to achieve the desired result.

By considering these factors, we avoid blaming destiny for failures and instead learn and grow from the experience. We then moved on to discuss how action is translated into result, considering the roles of Jnana (knowledge), Karta (doer), and Karma (action). Between them, there is Buddhi (intelligence), Dhriti (determination), and Sukha (happiness). Krishna explains how, through the three modes of nature, being in Sattva (goodness) can help us avoid bandhan (bondage).

Krishna further explains that we can progress through different paths: Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, and Bhakti Yoga. He reveals that Bhakti (devotion) is the highest and most important path, offering a direct connection to the divine. Krishna emphasizes in verse 64 that He is giving the most confidential knowledge. He says, “I want to know your desire,” and in verse 65, He assures us, “I will take responsibility.” In verse 66, He promises protection, much like a doctor taking unlimited liability for their patient.

We then discussed Krishna’s grace: He invites us to preach if we can, study if we can’t preach, or simply listen if we can’t study. Krishna is offering His help in any form that we can take. When Arjuna hears Krishna’s words, he is moved and says, “I will do your will.” This is the universal conclusion we can all come to: Krishna, you have a plan for me, and I am ready to follow it.

The last part of our discussion focused on how Sanjay demonstrates both Karma Yoga and Bhakti Yoga. Bhakti Yoga teaches that even without worldly success, we can find happiness through our connection with Krishna. Sometimes we will experience both success and happiness, but other times, we might only experience happiness, yet that will be enough. Ultimately, through this connection with Krishna, we will find fulfillment.

The Gita’s focus is to glorify Krishna, but also to transform Arjuna’s disposition and decision. The Gita’s purpose is not only to explain divine truths but also to guide us in making the right choices in life. Arjuna’s Gandiva (bow) symbolizes our determination. In life, when circumstances become tough, we may feel like giving up. But by hearing the Gita’s message, understanding Krishna’s love for us, and connecting with Him, we too can lift up our “bows” and face the challenges that life presents.

Thank you very much for participating in this Gita Yajna. Over 18 days, with more than 36-40 hours of study, your eagerness, enthusiasm, and thoughtful questions have been inspiring. I pray that Krishna’s message stays alive in your hearts and continues to guide your lives. May the same guidance reach me as well.

Shreemad Bhagavad Gita Ki Jai!
Shreemad Prabhupada Ki Jai!
Gaur Bhakta Vrindaki Jai!
Gaur Priyamanand Ji Jai!

The post Bhagavad Gita Overview Chapter 18 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Bhagavad Gita Overview Chapter 17
→ The Spiritual Scientist

Hare Krishna! So now we begin the 17th chapter of the Gita.
This chapter is maybe not a very long chapter, so we will not read about it for long today.
In the 16th chapter, Krishna ends by contrasting the divine and the demoniac creatures.
He says that the divine, those who have divinity, follow the shastra, have faith, and follow the shastra. Now, shastra can refer to scripture, but, as discussed yesterday, shastra also refers to discipline and regulation. The demoniac, on the other hand, lack faith and do not follow shastra. These are the two extremes.
Immediately, you see, the 16th chapter seems to present a very black-and-white picture of human nature. There are divine people and demoniac people—it’s like a one-zero depiction. But much of reality actually exists in shades of gray, and Krishna gives this very serious black-and-white picture, which raises a question. A “question-begging” statement is one that raises a question in the audience’s mind. If I say, “I want to speak on three points” and only speak two, nobody will ask about the third point, but I’ll be left wondering, “What is the point of speaking only two?”
So Krishna speaks in a very black-and-white way, and immediately Arjuna asks, “What about the people in between?” because most of humanity exists in between these extremes.
Krishna replies that those in between have some kind of faith.

Now, what is the nature of their faith?
For example, across the world, we will see that someone might worship a devata, someone might worship a baba who claims to be God or whose followers believe them to be God. It’s possible that someone worships nature, a tree, or even a movie star or a sports player. These people aren’t literally worshiping physical temples, but they can worship anything and everything. Sometimes, they worship literally, by doing puja, but worship can also mean making something the center of your life.

This analysis can also apply to various religious traditions because in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna doesn’t always talk specifically about other religions, but the Gita provides a framework for understanding this. Krishna says we can understand the nature of someone’s faith by their actions. How do I know the nature of someone’s faith? By looking at their actions.

Faith depends on the mode of the object of worship. Krishna is not that simple. Someone might worship a person who claims to be God or who is considered to be God by their followers. There is a difference between those who claim to be God and those who are considered to be God by their followers. But either way, how do we know the nature of their faith? Because faith is seen through actions.

One way to understand faith is through actions like the food people eat, the sacrifices they make, and the charity they give. These things reveal the nature of someone’s faith.

Why these specific things? Because food represents what we take from the world. The most important thing we take is food. Other things might be space to live, entertainment, or interactions with people, but the primary thing we take from the world is food. The Vedic tradition of dharma, yajna, teaches that there should always be some kind of reciprocation: If I’m taking something from the world, I must give something back.

The primary thing we take is food, and Krishna classifies the types of food based on their impact on the world. Food is classified as sattvic, rajasic, or tamasic based on how disruptive it is.

For example, if someone considers all of existence to be potential food, this reflects their understanding of the universe. The most evolved food is prasad, and we will discuss why prasad is the most evolved kind of food.

Food represents the level of faith a person has. The least disruptive food is sattvic food, which causes the least harm to other life forms. Rajasic food causes more disruption, and tamasic food causes the most. Based on the food we consume, we can understand the level of faith a person has.

For example, if someone is so hungry for food that they disrupt others to get it, like pushing people aside in a queue or spilling food, that shows a lack of understanding of harmony. But if someone consumes sattvic food, it reflects their understanding that the universe is arranged in a way that allows them to get food without harming others.

This principle applies to the entire system of life, and it helps us understand the level of faith in someone’s actions. Faith is seen in their actions, like the food they eat, the sacrifices they perform, and the charity they give. These are key elements of religious virtue—tapa (austerity), dana (charity), and yajna (sacrifice).

So why these three particular activities? What is their significance in the majority of the remaining chapter? Krishna will talk about how these three activities can be used as parameters for judging the level of faith of a person—what kind of sacrifices they perform, what kind of charity they give, and what kind of austerities they do.

Now, to understand the significance of these three activities, one of the fundamental teachings of the Vedic tradition is that we humans are situated in three circles. These three circles are: first, the body (adhiatmik), second, society (adhibhautik), and third, nature (adhidaivik).

Practically speaking, the soul is in the body, the body is situated in some society, and we exist within the earth and the ecosystem—this is the adhidai mik. So, this is a fundamental understanding, and we need each of these circles for sustenance. If our body collapses, we can’t function. If society is filled with violence or crime, we can’t function. If nature leads to earthquakes, tornadoes, extreme heat, or extreme cold, we can’t function. All three circles are needed for our basic survival.

Not only that, but all these circles provide us sustenance. The body is our basic tool for functioning in society. We go about our activity as social creatures, needing to learn from the community, and nature provides us with universal utilities. So, these three circles are required for our survival and for our functioning. From a positive perspective, they are needed.

Now, from a negative perspective, all three can give us closure. The body can develop diseases, society can have terrorism, robbery, or dishonesty—these are the adhyatmik, adhibhautik, and adhidai mik closures. In many traditional Vedic ceremonies, at the end of the ceremony, especially the chandamantra, we chant “Om Shanti Shanti Shanti.” The reason for the three shantis is that it is an invocation of these three circles:
Om adhyatmik le shanti
Om adhibhautik le shanti
Om adhidai mik le shanti

These three circles can cause disturbance, and all of these require pacification. These three activities—tapa, dana, and yajna—are our way of harmonizing with each circle.

Tapa is how we return what we take from the body. We take from the body, we have desires, and the body is our tool for getting energy and things by which we do things. We return to the body through tapa. For instance, when we do regulation or austerity, the body gets rest. For example, fasting on Ekadashi allows the digestive system to rest. While it may feel unpleasant for the mind, there is actually a lot of research showing that intermittent fasting is one of the best ways to improve health and lose weight.

As an old Egyptian proverb says, “You live on 25% of what you eat, and the remaining 75% of what you eat lives your doctor.” This idea highlights that most people eat too much, which leads to diseases, and that’s how doctors survive. Of course, the exact percentage isn’t true, but the point is that fasting is actually very good for health. When the body is constantly working, it doesn’t get the time to clean itself or rest. A machine needs time to clean, revamp, and restore itself. So, fasting gives the body time to do that. Tapa is the way we harmonize with the body, and it can be compared to yoga or asanas—many yogis perform austerities, and sitting in a particular pose can also be seen as tapa.

Dana (charity) is how we harmonize with society. We take many things from society, and we are meant to return them. Now, of course, you might say, “I pay taxes,” but taxes are more or less mandatory. Austerity and charity are meant to be voluntary. You could say, “I work for my survival and my family’s survival,” and while that is a form of duty, it is not voluntary austerity.

Charity, on the other hand, is voluntary. For example, one devotee was saying that we should give 50% of our wealth to charity. If someone says, “I give my entire wealth to my family,” that is not charity—it’s a responsibility. Taking care of your family is mandatory, not voluntary.

And then we return to the environment, and that is through yajna. Yajna is not just a simple ritual of fire sacrifice; it is a way of offering. In the Rigveda, it is said that agni (fire) is the lowest in terms of accessibility. This doesn’t mean it is the least powerful; it means that it is the most accessible. Agni is the medium through which our offerings go to the devatas. Vishnu is the highest and most transcendental, and in one sense, Vishnu is the least accessible for everyone. When the devatas are in trouble, they go to Brahma, who prays to Vishnu, and we know the story. At that time, Brahmaji doesn’t see Vishnu directly but hears a voice, often from his own heart. Vishnu is very powerful, but agni is the means by which sacrifices go to all the devatas, ultimately to Vishnu.

In modern times, most people find fire sacrifices either sensational or silly. “Sensational” means that the idea of a fire sacrifice with chanting mantras and the sight of the fire spreading might seem bizarre or strange. When Prabhupada first did an initiation, they performed a fire sacrifice, and the neighbors called the fire alarm, thinking the house was on fire. Firefighters came and told them they couldn’t continue the ritual, as it was considered a risk.

So, we just need to comprehend it. Fire sacrifice can seem very sensational, or to some people, they might say, “What is this? You’re taking nice food, nice ghee, fruits, and putting them in the fire?” Once, when Prabhupada was performing a fire sacrifice for initiation, he gave all the devotees bananas. They sat through the rituals, and Prabhupada gave a lecture while they were thinking, “When can we eat the bananas?” They were holding the bananas, waiting eagerly, and then Prabhupada put the bananas into the fire. “What? You’re not supposed to do that!” they thought. The bananas were so delicious, and they had been holding them for so long. They were wondering, “When will we eat them?”

So, from a material perspective, it might seem like a waste. Yes, the material vision might see it that way, but the thing is, if we consider that fire is a deity, then fire acts as a means of exchange. Through fire, our offerings go up, and blessings come down. The blessings might not be seen immediately. Traditionally, when fire sacrifices were performed, there were three levels of success in the ceremony:

  1. Completion of the Fire Sacrifice: Just completing the fire sacrifice itself is considered an auspicious activity. Its mere completion is seen as a form of success. For example, when Vishwamitra Muni performed a sacrifice and demons tried to interfere, Lord Ram and Lakshman were asked to guard it. The idea is that demons know that if a sacrifice is completed, auspicious forces gain strength, which could threaten them, so they try to prevent it.
  2. Appearance of Celestial Beings: The second level of success is that higher beings or celestial beings may appear to the priests. These beings may give offerings like payasam or simply smile upon the sacrifice.
  3. Visible Appearance of Celestial Beings: The highest level of success is when everyone can see these celestial beings. This was extremely rare, but it signifies the ultimate blessing from the sacrifice.

The idea is that the celestial beings, the universe, and the gods don’t need the physical offerings. These material things are just symbols, but when we offer them, the intent behind the offering satisfies the higher beings. They get satisfaction from our offerings, and this is analogous to how we pay taxes.

Prabhupada compares yajna to paying a tax. Normally, we pay taxes to the state, but yajna is paid to the cosmic state, where the “state” refers to the cosmic order. So, when yajna is performed, it pleases the devatas (gods). Sometimes, just like with taxes, the devatas might notice the offering. If a substantial offering is made, the devatas might reveal themselves, acknowledging the sincerity of the offering.

Now, some may question this form of exchange, thinking it is bizarre. But in today’s world, we can understand it better through digital economy systems. For example, when someone deposits money at a bank and receives a credit or debit card, it might seem strange to someone unfamiliar with banking. The person may wonder, “You gave so much money, and you got just a card?” But the point is that, even though the exchange might seem unbelievable, it works. Similarly, yajna is a form of exchange, and the principle of exchange is universal, even if the form seems strange to us.

Now, Krishna explains how yajna, dana (charity), and tapa (austerity) can be performed in the three modes of nature—sattvic, rajasic, and tamasic. Let’s break it down:

  • Sattvic Yajna: This is where the yajna is performed as a duty, as prescribed by the scriptures. One does it with a sense of responsibility, knowing that it is ordained by nature and the higher powers.
  • Rajasic Yajna: In this case, the yajna might be performed to gain material benefits or for power, and it could be considered self-serving.
  • Tamasic Yajna: This is where yajna is performed incorrectly or inauspiciously, such as animal sacrifices performed without proper rituals. In such cases, the priests may not chant the mantras properly, or the sacrifice may not be done in a pure way. This type of yajna would be considered tamasic (impure or inappropriate).

In Kaliyuga, it is asked whether Kaliyuga exists only on Earth or throughout the universe. The answer here is more nuanced: while Kaliyuga is traditionally described as being on Earth, it can be interpreted as part of a larger cosmic cycle. The cycle of ages exists throughout the universe, but the specific experiences of different yugas (ages) may vary depending on the context.

Where does this exist? Earth, isn’t it? The time flows differently in other places, doesn’t it? So, Kaliyuga exists only on Earth, and not in heaven or other places. In the past, interplanetary travel was common in the sense that the devatas (gods) would come to Earth, asuras (demons) would sometimes come here, and humans would travel to other planets. But in Kaliyuga, because Kali is a very destructive force, Kaliyuga is considered a dangerous age. That’s why, in this age, Earth is somewhat quarantined, like a red zone during a pandemic. People are not allowed to enter or leave. The exchanges between Earth and other planetary systems become very rare to prevent the toxic influence of Kaliyuga from spreading elsewhere.

Why am I talking about this? Because yajnas (sacrifices) are very difficult to perform in Kaliyuga due to a lack of resources. Furthermore, the results of those yajnas, in terms of fire sacrifices, are not easily attained. In Kaliyuga, the devatas will never be visible. So, yajnas are not performed as much. However, the principle of sacrifice is still there. Even when we chant the holy names, our consciousness can be focused on many things, but when we choose to focus on Krishna, that is a sacrifice. So, the principle of sacrifice is still present, but the specific act of fire sacrifice is not as common.

Remember in the fourth chapter, we discussed how sacrifice can take many forms. Krishna told Arjuna that even the act of fighting on the battlefield is a form of sacrifice. The battlefield is like the yajna kunda (the fire altar), and the Kauravas are like the offerings being sacrificed. The specific act of sacrifice, such as a fire sacrifice, is just one way to perform a sacrifice. But the principle is that we give something for a higher cause, and that is what we need to do. If we do not perform sacrifices at all, or if we do them improperly, it causes disruption.

Now, let’s focus on tapa (austerity) and dana (charity). We’ll look at these verses briefly. Bodily austerity is relatively simple. For example, the austerity of the mind involves showing respect to deities, teachers, and wise people. This includes being straightforward and truthful. Why is this considered austerity? Because it’s easy to become angry or violent. Men generally become physically violent, while women tend to become verbally violent. Both can exhibit violence in different forms, but the tendency is there in everyone.

Violence can also appear in other ways, such as gossip or body-shaming. Women, for example, can be very judgmental of each other when it comes to body image, often criticizing each other for being overweight or not fitting societal standards. The tendency to harm others, whether physically or verbally, is part of human nature, but we train ourselves to show respect instead.

Shari ram tapa uchchate: This means that bodily austerity refers to controlling our physical tendencies, such as avoiding violence. Psychology and sociology have observed many differences between men and women. For example, women attempt suicide more often than men, but men are more likely to commit suicide successfully. This might seem paradoxical, but it’s due to emotional tendencies in women and the physical strength of men. In the case of suicide attempts, failure to commit suicide is a success because survival is the true success.

Now, let’s talk about austerity of speech. Our words should not agitate others. They should be truthful (satyam), pleasing (priya), and beneficial (hitam).

Self-study can basically mean studying in your mind. It’s interesting because, in the past, books were not easily available. Before the invention of the printing press, reading was never an individual activity. It was a social activity: one person would read aloud, and others would listen. Even now, you might see this—someone reads aloud, and everyone listens. The idea of reading silently in your mind is a modern concept. In the past, reading meant reading aloud, and this is still evident in group reading sessions, where everyone reads aloud together.

Reading aloud is similar to chanting aloud—it’s often more calming and absorbing. It’s slower, but if you find yourself struggling to concentrate while reading silently, try reading aloud (of course, not too loud to disturb others). This is why reciting scripture aloud can be beneficial. So, this is the austerity of speech—swadhyaya, or self-study, through recitation. Austerity of speech could involve reading aloud, remembering and reciting, or using the tongue to recite scripture. These all fall under the category of vanmayam (related to speech) and are considered an austerity of speech.

Now, what does austerity do? If you consider austerity as a form of discipline, discipline makes things more effective. If we exercise our body, it becomes stronger. Similarly, when we practice austerity in speech, our speech becomes more effective. It communicates better and can transform others more powerfully. Krishna describes two essential qualities of speech: sensible and sensitive. Sensible speech appeals to the intellect, and sensitive speech appeals to the emotions.

Krishna emphasizes four qualities of speech: it should be truthful (satyam), helpful (hitam), non-agitating (anudvega karam), and pleasing (priyam). The best speech combines all these qualities. At the very least, our speech should be non-agitating. Sometimes we may have to speak the truth, but even the harsh truth can be spoken in a respectful and polite manner. Speaking the truth does not require being harsh.

The goal is to speak in a way that respects the dignity of others. For instance, if someone has done something wrong and needs to be corrected, it’s better to do it privately rather than publicly shaming them. We should always respect others’ dignity, as every individual is a part of Krishna.

Now, moving on to austerity of the mind. Austerity means voluntary restraint—choosing to restrain oneself from certain actions or desires. For example, fasting means voluntarily choosing not to eat certain foods, or in some cases, not eating at all. Similarly, austerity of speech means voluntarily choosing not to speak hurtfully, even though we have the power to do so.

Austerity of the mind involves keeping the mind cheerful and calm. The mind can be very restless, but with practice, we can learn to calm it. For example, Mauna (silence) is often considered an austerity of speech, but Krishna links it to the mind. It’s easier to silence our mouth, but the mind can still be noisy. We may not speak, but our mind may be filled with thoughts of anger or dissatisfaction. To silence the mind is the true austerity.

Most people struggle to silence their minds, and in response, they seek external distractions like watching TV or other noise. However, the goal is to control the mind and resist the urge to indulge in distracting thoughts or fantasies. Instead, we focus on things that purify us. This is the true austerity of the mind.

Cheerfulness (prasada) is the key to mental austerity. The key to being cheerful is gratitude. In life, there are always two categories of things: things we have and things we don’t have. The things we don’t have will always seem to be more than the things we do have. If we focus on what we don’t have, we will feel dissatisfied. However, if we focus on what we do have, we can be content and cheerful.

Consider this example: After this program, there might be prasada (blessed food) available. But let’s say there’s a special feast where everyone gets different sweets. In your plate, there’s gulab jamun, jalebi, peda, barfi, and so on, while in my plate, there might be a sandesh (sweet). As I eat the sandesh, I enjoy it, but at the same time, I start looking at what’s on your plate. I wonder, “What’s on his plate? What’s in his plate?” While I’m eating, my attention is distracted, and suddenly, my sandesh feels like chalk. Why? Because my consciousness is elsewhere.

It seems ridiculous when we talk about food—why not just enjoy your own sandesh? But we all do this in life. We have things that are good and right in our lives, but we focus on what we don’t have, letting our minds become agitated. In a sense, keeping our mind satisfied is an austerity of the mind. We must consciously choose to look at what we have, not at what we don’t have. The more we focus on what we lack, the more dissatisfied we become. This creates a cycle of increasing dissatisfaction.

Unfortunately, we live in a world where advertising amplifies this by constantly showing us things we don’t have, and even making us feel dissatisfied with what we do have. For example, I have a phone, but then I see there’s a newer model. The advertising industry thrives on creating dissatisfaction. They say the fuel of the consumer economy is consumer dissatisfaction. We never see ads for basic things like rice, dal, or chapati because those are necessities that people already have. But the more we focus on what we lack, the more dissatisfied we become.

Consciously making an effort to focus on what we have can be very helpful. One way to do this is by practicing gratitude. A simple saying is to “count your blessings,” but it’s not just about counting them—it’s about making those blessings count. Write down what you’re grateful for, and think about why each item on your list is valuable to you. When you feel dissatisfied, consciously refer to this list, and don’t just read the list—read the descriptions of why each item is meaningful. This practice helps our minds become satisfied.

Gratitude increases our mental energy. So much of our energy is drained by craving things we don’t have and resenting what others have. But if we practice gratitude, we conserve and even multiply our mental energy. This helps us focus on what we need to do. For example, if we enter a class and see our friend with the latest phone we want, we might become agitated, which makes it hard to concentrate. Gratitude helps conserve our energy and keeps our minds focused. That’s why it’s the first austerity of the mind.

Now, moving on to charity. Charity can also be performed in three modes: goodness, passion, and ignorance. Krishna explains that charity can be given at the wrong time or to unworthy recipients. If charity is given without considering the time, place, or circumstance, or is done disrespectfully, it’s considered tamasic (in the mode of ignorance).

For example, if you give charity to someone in a way that makes them feel bad, such as insulting them by saying, “You’re a beggar, you need this,” it’s not charitable—it’s disrespectful. This is called asatkrutam (disrespectful charity) and is tamasic.

Krishna also explains that charity can be done with the right intention, at the right time, and to the right person. The action itself can be good, but to truly evaluate its goodness, we need to consider the intent behind it and the consequences it causes. This is known as contextual ethics.

For instance, charity is generally seen as a good act, but if it’s given to someone who will only use it for harmful purposes, it can cause more harm than good. If someone is a drug addict, giving them money might just enable their addiction and lead to greater harm. So, when giving charity, we need to consider not just the action, but also the intent and the outcome.

Broadly speaking, we have two political ideologies: the right and the left. Have you heard of these terms? What do they mean to you?

Yes, the right is conservative, and the left is liberal. But what does that mean practically?

In any society, there’s always some hierarchy—people at the top and people at the bottom. And the number of people at the bottom is usually greater than those at the top. So, the right and left are concerned with this hierarchy. The right is concerned with maintaining the existing systems, especially those that have worked in the past. They argue that these systems have allowed society to survive, and therefore, we should respect and preserve them.

For example, many criticize the caste system in India, claiming it’s discriminatory. And yes, it has its flaws. But if the caste system were truly so terrible, why is India still one of the most resilient civilizations in human history, while others like the Egyptian or Aztec civilizations have vanished? We’re not saying the caste system is perfect, but there must be something about it that contributed to India’s survival.

On the other hand, the left focuses on those who are left out by the existing system. While the right may argue that the current system works, the left points out that it may be discriminatory, and some people are being harmed or sidelined by it. Ideally, both the right and the left should coexist in society. The right helps preserve what’s good from the past, while the left looks for ways to rectify the harms caused by the system.

The right believes that traditions and systems are experiments that have worked over time and should be respected. If some people are struggling, the solution is for them to work harder and adapt. The left, on the other hand, believes the system itself is flawed and needs to be changed. The right emphasizes individual responsibility, while the left focuses on social justice—correcting societal inequities.

Why am I talking about this? The leftist ideology has become influential worldwide, even though communism, a more extreme form of leftism, collapsed. The left believes those with less power are often discriminated against and need support. For example, in many Western countries, there are welfare states where the government helps those who can’t find work. It’s believed that if someone is unemployed, it’s society’s fault, and the state should provide maintenance for them.

However, there’s a downside. If people are supported without any expectations of work, they may become lazy and stop looking for jobs. This was evident during the pandemic when the American government gave large sums of money to people to stay at home. As a result, many didn’t want to return to work, leading to economic problems. Support is necessary for those who genuinely cannot work, but if someone is capable of working but chooses not to, then supporting them only encourages their laziness.

This concept highlights the idea that “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” After World War II, the U.S. was geographically fortunate, with oceans protecting it and weaker countries surrounding it. America was the most geopolitically secure country, and it was successful in the aftermath of the war. Many of the soldiers returning home were wounded, so the government decided to create veteran homes to take care of them. However, this decision broke the intergenerational family link—traditionally, in India, it’s the children’s responsibility to take care of elderly parents, but in the West, this was largely replaced by government programs.

Afterward, with the sexual revolution, a similar shift happened. In the leftist ideology, women who became pregnant outside of marriage were seen as victims of toxic men who didn’t take responsibility. As a result, society began to support these women, providing for single mothers without expecting them to work. Over time, this led to an unintended incentive for single women to have children without getting married, as the state would support them.

In some U.S. states, for example, single mothers get a complete fee waiver for their college education. While the intention is to help, this creates a distortion of social values. The result is that the state becomes the caretaker of the family, rather than the family unit itself. This breaks the family bond, leading to long-term societal consequences.

The charitable instinct behind this welfare system is not inherently bad, but it can cause harm if it’s not properly implemented. The same goes for charity: it’s important to consider who receives charity and the effects it has. Should women and children be protected? Absolutely. But the proper way to protect them is through a strong family unit. When charity undermines family bonds and encourages dependency, it can lead to chaos, rather than welfare. In some cases, charity may end up causing more harm than good.

Krishna talks about a concept called “harm-causing charity,” using the example of drug addiction. In some liberal states in America, individuals who are drug addicts can get a certificate from a doctor stating they are addicts. With this certificate, they can go to a hospital where doctors will legally give them drugs.

At first glance, this might seem like a way to help addicts, but it’s actually enabling their addiction. The argument is that if addicts aren’t given legal drugs, they’ll resort to crime or take dangerous, unregulated drugs, which would lead to health problems and increase emergency healthcare costs. While this may seem cost-effective in the short term, the real issue lies in the long-term consequences. By giving addicts drugs, society removes the incentive for them to stop using and seek recovery.

This is an example of harm-causing charity. The intention is charitable—helping people who are suffering—but the result is ultimately harmful. Charitable actions must be guided properly, with a clear understanding of their consequences. Krishna points out that charity, like any sacrifice, must be connected to the higher truth (the absolute truth) for it to be truly beneficial. Without this connection, any sacrifice is futile.

In this chapter, Krishna stresses that faith can be understood through the actions we take, particularly in terms of what we receive and what we give. What we take is the food we consume, and what we give is through yajna (sacrificial acts). We are part of three circles: the body, society, and nature. For the body, we provide nourishment (through food); for society, we give through charity (dana); and for nature, we give through yajna.

Yajna is a cosmic tax, where the exchange between us and the universe is important. Even though the traditional forms of yajna (rituals) are not recommended in the current age (Kali Yuga), the principle of exchange remains. The universe gives us something, and we need to return something in kind.

We also discussed tapa (austerity), focusing on how the body, speech, and mind can be purified. For the mind, gratitude is key—choosing to focus on what we have, not on what we lack. Speech should be both sensible and sensitive, while the body should be disciplined through various practices.

Then, we explored the concept of charity. While charity is important, it can cause harm if it is not properly thought through. Charity should not enable irresponsibility. For example, facilitating single motherhood or encouraging irresponsible behavior can lead to the disintegration of the family, which is a harmful consequence. The intention may be good, but the result can be destructive.

I’ll share one final example of harm-causing charity. I once stayed with a couple in the U.S. who were planning to divorce. They had a son with a severe heart condition, and they couldn’t afford the medical expenses, as their insurance didn’t cover it. A doctor suggested that the wife divorce her husband, gain custody of the child, and become a single mother to qualify for government assistance. In order to get the necessary medical care for their child, they had to consider destroying their family unit. This is an extreme example of harm-causing charity, where the intention is to help but the consequences are devastating.

So, when we practice charity or help others, it’s important to consider not just the action but also its intent and consequences. Charity should support responsibility and strengthen, not weaken, the family or social fabric.

So, of course, they brutalized, they didn’t civilize, they exploited, but the point is that sometimes, when we value what we don’t have, we don’t value others. So if we can actually value what we have and value others, then our gratitude does not lead to pride. But then, after that, we share what we have with others because we value others also. That is the greatest thing. Somebody who has wealth, they can just give charity, that’s good, but if they have wealth and they create something, they will build a company where they can employ other people. They’re not giving charity, but they’re sharing the gifts that they have.

So, if I have speaking ability, singing ability, or any other gifts, I’m going to use that for good. That’s where the gratitude will stay on.

Yes, please.

Being satisfied with what we have, does it lead to lethargy? Yes, it can definitely lead to lethargy if it’s not connected with a higher purpose. See, if my pleasure comes from service, then I will want to use what I have in service. Some people can sing with the intention of gaining fame, while others can sing to spread joy. See, a gift in one person can be a gift for everyone. If one person has a beautiful singing voice, hearing that voice is a joy for them. If one person has artistic ability, the art they make brings joy to everyone. If one person has engineering ability, they can create something that brings comfort or relief to everyone.

So the idea is that whatever ability I have, if I’m using it for my own fame, prestige, or power, then that is unhealthy. I’ll never be satisfied, and I’ll always crave more and more. But if I truly value what I have, and it’s not just, “Okay, I’ll be satisfied,” I want to use it in the mood of service. Then we won’t become complacent; we won’t become lethargic. So gratitude does not take away our ambition. Gratitude elevates the motivation for our ambition.

Somebody who is a grateful singer, or somebody grateful for whatever they have, will still produce good content, but they will produce it so that others benefit.

So that is gratitude. Yes, it is a common notion that gratitude will take away our ambition. It won’t take away our ambition, but that is a possibility. But actually, in bhakti, we understand all gifts come from Krishna, and all gifts are going to be useful in the service of Krishna. It elevates the motivation for our ambition.

So, I want to compose songs; I want to sing songs not to become the most famous singer in the world, but to sing songs about Krishna or uplifting things, so that people can find joy, people can find contentment, and their consciousness can rise afterward.

So, gratitude can change our motivation.

Okay, thank you very much.

The post Bhagavad Gita Overview Chapter 17 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Mega Youth festival at ISKCON, Sri Jagannath Mandir, Mangalore
→ Dandavats

UMANG 3.0 Mega Youth Festival Date: November 30, 2024 Venue: ISKCON Youth Forum, Kudupu Katte, Mangalore ISKCON Mangalore hosted the UMANG 3.0 Mega Youth Festival with the inspiring theme: “Making India Addiction-Free.” The event marked the inauguration of the Deaddiction Campaign 2025 and was held at the Town Hall in the heart of Mangalore city.
Read More...

Odana-sasti
Giriraj Swami

Today is Odana-sasti, the date on which Lord Jagannatha is given a winter shawl. One year when Lord Chaitanya and His associates celebrated this festival in Puri, Pundarika Vidyanidhi, who is Vrsabhanu Maharaja, Srimati Radharani’s father in krsna-lila, received some special mercy. His experience is instructive for us all.

Srila Prabhupada explains, “At the beginning of winter, there is a ceremony known as the Odana-sasthi. This ceremony indicates that from that day forward, a winter covering should be given to Lord Jagannatha. That covering is directly purchased from a weaver. According to the arcana-marga, a cloth should first be washed to remove all the starch, and then it can be used to cover the Lord. Pundarika Vidyanidhi saw that the priest neglected to wash the cloth before covering Lord Jagannatha. Since he wanted to find some fault in the devotees, he became indignant.” (Cc Madhya 16.78 purport)

And Sri Caitanya-caritamrta (Madhya 16.78–81) describes the event: “Pundarika Vidyanidhi initiated Gadadhara Pandita for the second time, and on the day of Odana-sasthi Pundarika Vidyanidhi saw the festival. (78) When Pundarika Vidyanidhi saw that Lord Jagannatha was given a starched garment, he became a little hateful. In this way his mind was polluted. (79) That night the brothers Lord Jagannatha and Balarama came to Pundarika Vidyanidhi and, smiling, began to slap him. (80) Although his cheeks were swollen from the slapping, Pundarika Vidyanidhi was very happy within. This incident has been elaborately described by Thakura Vrndavana dasa. (81)”

From this incident we can learn that the Lord does not tolerate offenses against His servants, even from an advanced devotee, and that He chastises any devotee who commits such an offense even within the mind. We can also learn that a pure devotee accepts such chastisement from the Lord with great happiness, as a manifestation of the Lord’s mercy, of His love and care for His devotees—both for those who may commit such an offense and for those who may be objects of such an offense. A pure devotee thanks the Lord for rectifying him and preventing him from committing further offenses, and he feels great jubilation within his heart.

Hare Krishna.

Travel Journal#20.22: New York City
→ Travel Adventures of a Krishna Monk

Diary of a Traveling Sadhaka, Vol. 20, No. 22
By Krishna Kripa Das
(November 2024, part two)
New York City
(Sent from Brooklyn, New York, on December 7, 2024)

Where I Went and What I Did

The second half of November, I was happy to return to 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.


Sometimes I would give the
Srimad-Bhagavatam class in the temple, which is recorded on the ISKCON NYC YouTube channel. Sometimes they play the class on the big screen in the lobby in addition to a variety of kirtans.

On Sundays I would do a walking harinama with ISKCON NYC devotees around Brooklyn or over the Brooklyn Bridge for an hour or so and then chant with the Bhakti Center Soul Spot group in Washington Square Park for two hours in the afternoon.


I attended the 26 Second Avenue Saturday
Bhagavad-gita on November 16 to hear Prahladananda Swami speak and the following Saturday to give the talk myself. The next Saturday I just came for the prasadam and the association. At ISKCON NYC I also made walnut burfi for Radha Govinda to have on Ekadasi.

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 two books by Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami and a soon-to-be-published book by Devaki Devi Dasi on the vanaprastha asrama. I also share notes on classes in New York City by Prahladananda Swami and Hansarupa, Rama Raya, Hari Vilasa, Aditya, Matanga, Natabara Gauranga, Divyangi, Prabhavishnu, and Hadai Prana Prabhus.

Many, many thanks to Atmanivedana Prabhu for his kind donations to me for giving the Saturday lecture at 26 Second Avenue, both in October and November. Many thanks to Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu for the use of Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami’s car to go to Hudson to catch the train to return to NYC Harinam.

Itinerary

October 5–January 3, 2025: NYC Harinam
– December 28: lecture on Bhagavad-gita at 26 Second Avenue

Chanting Hare Krishna in New York

Divyangi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station above the 7 train (https://youtu.be/YfjBIJdGn-Q):


Srikar chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station, and book distributors Ryan and Javier dance (
https://youtube.com/shorts/C9vFtveSp6s):


Kaunteya Sakha Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge (https://youtu.be/nNYvGpT50wQ):


While
Kaunteya Sakha Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna, devotees danced in a circle (https://youtu.be/zAHodb-TRuo):



Sometimes passersby would play the shakers.


Vasily and others would distribute books to the people.

Here Arjunananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge (https://youtu.be/jr2O3XbOlYY):


Here is another video of Arjunananda in portrait orientation (
https://youtu.be/o19CroKgSFU):


Whie
Arjunananda Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna, devotees danced (https://youtube.com/shorts/i_eF0DNWAEg?feature=share):


Here
Arjunananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna on the Brooklyn Bridge, and devotees play shakers (https://youtube.com/shorts/fzrDdmLXl_w):


While Arjunananda Prabhu
was chanting, two Liverpool ladies began to dance, so I offered them some shakers which they played as they continued dancing (https://youtu.be/e4THcu2cq6Y
):


Vasily gave them Perfection of Yoga, but I suggested he swap it for Chant and Be Happy, since Liverpool is the city where the Beatles began, and so he did.


Rebecca, who blissfully listened to several minutes of harinama, used to visit the temple when she lived nearby in Brooklyn, but living in Chelsea she admitted to being out of touch. She surprised me by saying, “You can be here. And then you can say ‘Srila Prabhupada,’ and then you can be there. Is it true that just by saying the guru’s name you can be elevated?” Of course, it’s true, but how many people you meet on harinama express it!

Here Natabara Gauranga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center subway station in Brooklyn, the subway station that is closest to the temple of all that we do (https://youtu.be/7LSaAO8rCUo):


Piu chants Hare Krishna
there too (https://youtu.be/6Ya_PGAzNio):


Sevika Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna
there, and a family plays shakers (https://youtu.be/7ZQErnLrkSw):


Radhika chants Hare Krishna there in Brooklyn too (
https://youtu.be/Pn4UMd2boNA):


Jayananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna also (https://youtu.be/Qe8s3-yOOqc):


Nityananda Chandra Prabhu chants Hare Krishna there too (
https://youtu.be/-sTKM4yAtHk):


Ryan chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street subway station in Manhattan (
https://youtu.be/VngaV8PkzZI):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street subway station in Manhattan and a little girl dances (
https://youtube.com/shorts/rZlxQ1OBHx4?feature=share):


Kanai Krishna Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue subway station
in Queens (https://youtu.be/RvDI4ctlnvg):


Radha chants Hare Krishna
there too (https://youtu.be/nWAlI9AcAHI):


Paramasundara Govinda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna
there in Queens (https://youtu.be/tw1VJ_nY35w):


Conner chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (https://youtu.be/KyDWZlt94os):


Param Prabhu of Vrindavan chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/5d7nRiWWmSI):


While
Param Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna, a girl whose mom was working nearby plays the shakers (https://youtu.be/caP9mnnv0gM):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/w1duIJcE3tE):


Arjunananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna with Gita Life devotees on Schermerhorn Street in Brooklyn
on Sunday (https://youtu.be/I1KOdybXPqY):


Arjunananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Guru Puja kirtan at ISKCON NYC, and devotees dance (
https://youtu.be/X3U29iisGcE):


Param Brahma Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Fulton Street subway station (
https://youtu.be/ZcBhiAnGEcw):


Nipun chants Hare Krishna
at Fulton Street (https://youtu.be/TgNbFszRHRY):


Kaunteya Sakha Prabhu chants Hare Krishna during the Sunday
arati at ISKCON NYC (https://youtube.com/shorts/MxTQ1GEekGU):


Here I chant
Hare Krishna at Atlantic Avenue / Barclays Center subway station (https://youtube.com/shorts/JYXNUKP6Js8?feature=share):


The next day I
chanted Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue subway station in Queens (https://youtube.com/shorts/_aLH9u5TmNM):


Priya Krishna Prabhu chants Hare Krishna
there in Queens (https://youtu.be/qNiWnc8axtY):


Here he chants another Hare Krishna melody (
https://youtu.be/9cumNMmVZps):


Sushree chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue subway station (
https://youtu.be/U7-ukc4HYQs):


Ryan chants Hare Krishna
there too (https://youtu.be/V2VAbM6jJYc):


Srikar chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue subway station, and a passerby dances with the devotee women (
https://youtu.be/fduevvgQ4Hc):


Later while
Srikar chanted Hare Krishna there several devotees and onlookers danced (https://youtu.be/rNKnUn9d7Fk):


Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue Station, and devotees dance (
https://youtu.be/eu8hrXSUfvU):


Ekakanta Rukmini Devi Dasi of Russia chants Hare Krishna at Times Square station on Thanksgiving (
https://youtu.be/f4x_AL0-Jqc):


While Ekakanta Rukmini Devi Dasi chanted Hare Krishna, several devotees enthusiastically danced (
https://youtu.be/RPqhAyZMV0k):


Braja Sakhi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station, and devotees dance
(https://youtube.com/shorts/VQZNm9MsQL0?feature=share):


Hadai Prana Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station on Thanksgiving, and devotees dance (
https://youtu.be/dUcAdwy745o):


Later as
Hadai Prana Prabhu chanted Hare Krishna, passersby danced with the devotees (https://youtu.be/YrT-A05lcQ8):


Ritu Rai chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/Lj68z6Yyv8c):


After chanting in Times Square subway station on Thanksgiving, we got to honor the Thanksgiving dinner we offered to our congregation and restaurant customers.


The soup made by the wife of Yamuna Prabhu was especially delicious and memorable.

Here I chant Hare Krishna at Times Square subway station (https://youtube.com/shorts/jhPf7iWSxuw?feature=share):


Conner chants Hare Krishna in Times Square subway station (
https://youtu.be/0cuq5GP0t7w):


Narada Muni Prabhu returned from Govardhan on the last day of November, and
he led the Hare Krishna chant in Times Square subway station. While he was singing, several passersby played shakers (https://youtu.be/Zn5kU4NSeYQ):


Photos


We can tell them how to go back to Godhead, but they just want to go to Queens!

Experiences

I couldn't find any offered milk to put on my granola so I just put caranamrita on it. It was pretty good.

Attendance at mangala-arati was down 70% on Black Friday. Apparently there was a retreat I was unaware of. I worried that people ate too much at the Thanksgiving feast or were waiting in line at the shops for a good deal!

Insights

Srila Prabhupada:

From Message of Godhead, Chapter One:

Everyone who is devoid of transcendental knowledge is just like a blind man; such a blind man must first eradicate his blindness before he can attempt to lead others to light.”

From Message of Godhead, Chapter Two:

We are as if roaming in the street like street beggars, although we are all the transcendental sons of the richest personality, the Personality of Godhead. With a cool head, we could very well understand this fact. But unmindful of our supremely rich father and our relationship with Him, we go on endeavouring in many ways to solve our street-beggar problems of poverty and hunger, but with practically no appreciable results.”

From a letter to Madhudvisa on November 7, 1975:

Even if somebody does not go in one line with the rest of the godbrothers, he can remain separately, but it does not mean that he may disobey the principles that I have laid down. So long as one follows the principles, he continues to be my disciple.”

From a morning walk in Los Angeles on December 12, 1973:

Churches are being closed. Similarly, if you do not keep yourself fit to preach, then your temples will all be closed in due course of time. Without preaching, you’ll not feel enthused to continue the temple worship. And without temple worship, you cannot keep yourself pure and clean. The two things must go on, parallel. Then there is success. In modern times, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, there is no teaching of philosophy, therefore they are closing, either mosques or temples or churches. They will close. Unless we take care of the books and preach and read ourselves, understand the philosophy, this Hare Krishna will be finished within a few years. Because there will be no life. How long one can artificially go on, ‘Hare Krishna! Haribol!’ That will be artificial. No life. Without preaching, without understanding philosophy, you cannot keep your strength. Everyone should be thoroughly well conversed with the philosophy we are presenting. That means you must read thoroughly every day.”

From Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Adi 7.171, purport:

The members of this Society must always remember that if they stick to the regulative principles and preach sincerely according to the instructions of the acaryas surely they will have the profound blessings of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and their preaching work will be successful everywhere throughout the world.”

From a pandal lecture on the Srimad-Bhagavatam preface in Bombay on January 14, 1973:

I have traveled all over the world. They have got enough money, enough material facilities, but still this Vedic culture is different. It is so high. And it is taken still in estimation, in adoration, all over the world. So my request, especially to the Indians, is to not neglect your culture, the Vedic culture.”

From an interview with Mr. Koshi, assistant editor of The Current Weekly, in Bombay on April 5, 1977:

The whole world is in darkness of ignorance. So India was expected after independence to give real knowledge. But instead of giving that real knowledge, they became victimized by the glimmer of material civilization. So I wanted that such a magnificent gift from the side of India, it shall [not] remain uncontributed to the world, let me try.”

From a class on The Nectar of Devotion in Vrindavan on October 17, 1972:

Especially those who are born in India as human beings should take advantage of this knowledge. They should not manufacture knowledge. The knowledge is already there. Simply one has to take it. Just like Bhagavad-gita. Everything is there already. We have to take it, accept it, apply it practically in life, and distribute the knowledge throughout the whole world. This is the mission of India.”

From an arrival lecture in Delhi on November 10, 1971:

India is meant for doing welfare activities to the world, but we have forgotten that. We are trying to imitate the Western countries and technology, and we have thrown out our Vedic treasure house, our transcendental knowledge treasure house.”

From a room conversation with Ratansinh Rajda, a member of parliament, in Bombay on March 27, 1977:

It is the duty of the Indians. But instead of Indians, I have to collect these young men from foreign countries.”

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.5.11, purport:

It is the duty of every responsible Indian to broadcast the transcendental message of Srimad-Bhagavatam throughout the world to do all the supermost good as well as to bring about the desired peace in the world. Because India has failed in her duty by neglecting this responsible work, there is so much quarrel and trouble all over the world.”

From Back to Godhead, Volume 3, Part 3, April 5, 1956:

People misunderstand Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu because He did not open any hospital, because He did not canvass for the undertakers, or because he did not labor for any so-called social welfare work. But in fact what He did includes all varieties of social, political, humanitarian, altruistic, moral, and spiritual work.”

From a letter to Ramesvara on January 9, 1973:

All decent men want to give service to humanity; the only thing is they do not have information really what is that service. Hospitals, feeding the poor, Red Cross – these are service to the bodies only, not to the man. Service to humanity means jñana. Giving people knowledge, jñana, is the highest service to humanity. We are performing the actual welfare work of society by informing everyone through our literatures who is God, who they are, and what is the relationship. In this way everyone who hears our message gets the opportunity to fulfill his actual position as human entity and become delivered from the clutches of maya. So you may understand that by disseminating our Krishna conscious propaganda anywhere and everywhere – by selling books, by making publicity, newspapers, television, there are so many ways to spread Krishna conscious information – by utilizing our energy in this way to give everyone access to the Absolute Truth, that is the real understanding of the desire to serve humanity.”

From a letter to Rupanuga on November 30, 1971:

I am currently in Vrindavan with a party of forty devotees, and we are having daily parikrama of the holy places. The officials and residents of Vrindavan have greeted us very nicely, and they are simply astounded to see our sankirtana party chanting with great jubilation through the city streets. The mayor has publicly proclaimed that I have done something wonderful, and practically speaking, they realize that before I went to the Western countries no one there knew about Vrindavan. Now hundreds of visitors and hippies from your country come here to see Krishna’s place. The Vrindavan devotees have understood that Vrindavan is now world-famous due to my preaching work, so they are all very much appreciating their hometown Swamiji.”

From a letter to Karandhara on November 4, 1970:

Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu has forecast that this Hare Krishna mantra will be heard in every nook and cranny of the globe. He is God, so it will happen, that is a fact. So if we take advantage then we may take the credit, but if we do not someone else will.”

From a letter to Yasodanandana and Gurukrpa on December 1, 1973:

Pray to Krishna that our humble attempts to spread Krishna consciousness may be successful and that we may always please the acaryas and Vaishnavas by our service.”

From a letter to Babhru on December 9, 1973:

The test of our actual dedication and sincerity to serve the spiritual master will be in this mutual cooperative spirit to push on this movement and not make factions and deviate.”

From a lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.6.1 in Vrindavan on December 2, 1975:

We don’t do any business, but we are spending at least twenty-five lakhs of rupees every month, but Krishna is supplying. If you remain Krishna consciousness, fully dependent on Krishna, then there will be no scarcity. I started this Krishna business with forty rupees. Now we have got forty crores of rupees. Is there any businessman in the whole world within ten years with forty rupees he can increase to forty crores? There is no example. And ten thousand men are eating prasada daily.”

From a letter to Karandhara on November 30, 1970:

My guru maharaja used to say, ‘Don’t worry about money. Do something nice for Krishna and money will come.’ So we should always be thinking how to distribute the message of Krishna and surely He will give us facility. Even an ordinary man if he wants publicity then he gives so much money for propaganda work. Similarly Krishna is not poor. He can supply any amount for the devotees who are engaged in broadcasting His glories.”

From “The Center of Attention” in Back to Godhead, Vol. 33, No. 6 (June 1999):

Once in Mayapur a devotee asked, ‘Srila Prabhupada, we’re sitting in these rice fields, and you’ve asked us to build a city. Where is all the money going to come from?’

Srila Prabhupada laughed. ‘You are always worried about where the money will come from. Here we have Radha-Madhava. “Madhava” means the husband of the goddess of fortune. You just worship Radha-Madhava nicely, and everything will come by Their mercy. You don’t have to worry about money.’”

The humble servants of Srila Prabhupada:

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.11.6, purport:

Lord Krishna is so kind that He patiently sits in the heart, trying to guide the conditioned soul back home, back to Godhead. Certainly no material friend would remain with his foolish companion for millions of years, especially if his companion were to ignore him or even curse him. But Lord Krishna is such a faithful, loving friend that He accompanies even the most demoniac living entity and is also in the heart of the insect, pig and dog. That is because Lord Krishna is supremely Krishna conscious and sees every living entity as part and parcel of Himself. Every living being should give up the bitter fruits of the tree of material existence. One should turn one’s face to the Lord within the heart and revive one’s eternal loving relationship with one’s real friend, Lord Krishna.”

Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami:

From The Delaware Diaries, Volume 1, Tachycardia, Part 1:

The evil monster Ravaṇa, who kidnapped Sita when she stepped outside the protective circle Rama had drawn around her. In the questions and comments period, Lila-avatara said that Prabhupada has drawn a protective circle around us, and Maya cannot reach us as long as we stay within the circle—the four regulative principles. Yes, how true. Maya can rip us away if we step outside the circle.”

When I said to Prabhupada in 1966 that I was disturbed and couldn’t understand how Lord Krishna, the respected mystical speaker of Bhagavad-gita, married sixteen thousand wives, Śrila Prabhupada shot back, ‘You cannot understand! Even the greatest scholars cannot understand!’”

You are scattered all over the place. You should be focused on Krishna’s name and delivering Krishna’s name.”

From ISKCON in the 1970s:

He [Srila Prabhupada] did tell Bhavananda Maharaja that we should not become another Gaudiya Matha and split up and fight.”

Prahladananda Swami:

Faith is essential to develop Krishna consciousness. That faith must not be blind but based on experience. Based on our different experiences we have different amounts of faith.

Krishna does not say we should not have affection for our families. He just wants us to sit down with our family members and chant Hare Krishna together morning and evening. We should also read Srimad-Bhagavatam and Bhagavad-gita, worship the deities, serve the devotees and spiritualize our homes.

It is nice to go to the temple on Sunday, but it is actually more important to have a daily spiritual program at your home.

Someone asked Srila Prabhupada what he was doing for the world. Prabhupada asked the man if he had practiced Krishna consciousness. The man said yes. Prabhupada asked the man if he felt it benefited him. The man said yes. Srila Prabhupada made the point to the man that just as Krishna consciousness has benefited him, it will benefit others.

How will we be able to fix our minds on Krishna if we do not practice it every day?

We are always spiritual beings, and thus we have to always connect with the spiritual energy.

We may become an award winning Olympic swimmer, but in the next life we may become a fish. Then we will not have our medal to show off to our friends.

We can improve our japa by doing the five most important items of devotional service, because by doing so, we will gain faith in Krishna, and thus we will take japa more seriously.

Hansarupa Prabhu:

Observing Srila Prabhupada’s every act, I could see his expertise in everything he did. That made me feel confident I had found the right shelter.

In the corporate world, losing your reputation is the greatest loss.

Daksa offended Lord Shiva because of being in the mode of ignorance. Sati was innocent but by Daksa’s association, she also became contaminated by ignorance.

Although disciples left when Srila Prabhupada said that we did not go to the moon, now the majority of people believe that we did not go to the moon.

We have the secret of how to obtain love of God.

We are only here in the temple to engage in service, and the remuneration is priceless.

Senior devotees may be very friendly in their dealings with us, but we should not take it that now we have come to their level and can treat them familiarly.

In the pastime of the appearance of Lord Nrsimha, the fact that only Prahlada Maharaja was able to come forth to garland the Lord shows that sincerity and not seniority is important in pleasing the Lord.

From within the devotee feels satisfaction so he does not need confirmation from outside that he is doing OK.

We may imagine that so many additional things will enhance our devotional service, but the secret is vyavasatmika-buddhih, one pointed intelligence, focused toward the essence, hearing and chanting about Krishna. This is sufficient.

From a practical point of view, Srila Prabhupada was ready to do anything to push on Krishna consciousness.

The Lord in His incarnation as a devotee taught that, “My spiritual master considered me to be a fool.” He showed the humility required for one in the presence of one’s spiritual master.

The words of the guru and the words of Krishna do not require any commentary by my mind.

Srila Prabhupada knew that he was the pet of his spiritual master, but he did not exploit it.

Akincana Krishna Babaji wouldn’t say very much. If someone would ask him a question, he would tell the person to chant Hare Krishna.

How did we Westerners know that Srila Prabhupada was different from all these bogus gurus? By hearing and service.

Listen to Srila Prabhupada’s morning walk conversations. He speaks more intimately with his disciples there than in his books. When you hear them, you feel that you are right there on the walk.

In January 1978, Gaura Govinda Maharaja, Bhagavata Prabhu, and I, were visiting Jagannatha Puri, and we came to the birthplace of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. We were not paying attention to the Vaishnava calendar very strictly, and we didn’t know that the day was the appearance day of Bhaktisiddhanta. We arrived after the ceremonies and while they were preparing the temple room for serving prasadam. As we entered the foyer of the temple, we saw it filled with all these sannyasis who were disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta. Only Akincana Krishnadasa Babaji Maharaja spoke to us. He asked if we were disciples of Swamiji.
We replied, “Yes, we are disciples of Bhaktivedanta Swami.”
Then he pointed to the sannyasis, and said, “Do you know what they used to call your guru?” We did not know what to say.
He said, “They used to call him a ‘useless grihastha.’
Then he pointed back to the sannyasis and said, “See who is useless now!”
Then it came time to serve the feast. In the Gaudiya Math, the sannyasis serve the feasts, and so they served us prasadam.

Rama Raya Prabhu:

The devotee, like the expert geologist who can extract gold from ore, sees the sincerity in the souls despite their external appearance.

By desire we come into this material world, and by desire we go back to the spiritual world.

The ultimate paradox is that although Krishna is atmarama, completely self-satisfied, He is attracted by His devotees’ love.

We can give people a few ideas about what to say, but ultimately Krishna as the Supersoul gives the book distributors what to say to convince the conditioned souls.

Because people are envious, they have no ability to distinguish spirit and matter.

When we chant Hare Krishna in public, we are offering respect to everyone’s soul without discrimination.

Karttika is known as Radha’s month. The following month is Krishna’s month, Margasirsa, as mentioned in Bhagavad-gita.

Devaki Devi Dasi:

From her soon-to-be-published book on the vanaprastha-asrama:

Once when taking chemotherapy in Melbourne in 2007 and visiting my oncologist for a check-up, we encountered a humorous situation. In the waiting room, there were a Muslim lady, a Christian nun and me. All of us were dressed in our uniforms – I was in a sari and tilak. Later, the doctor said, ‘All of you three ladies were in the same situation, suffering the same disease. It gave me a good opportunity to compare your religious practice; and I must say, you are doing the best! Factually, never have I ever had such a happy cancer patient before.’ And laughingly, he added, ‘It seems like being a Hare Krishna offers a good disposition for doing chemotherapy!’ I couldn’t restrain myself and cheekily responded, ‘Maybe you want to recommend it?’ We had a good laugh, and he said, ‘Well, I’m not quite sure about that!’ In this way, even a non-devotee doctor could perceive that a devotee approaches such a situation with a different outlook; that a devotee can cross over these kinds of challenges without being confused, unlike others who may struggle in bewilderment.”

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura advises us in his Chaitanya-sikshamrita: ‘Make your chanting heart-deep, not just lip-deep.’”

Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja describes an ISKCON temple as a crying school, where we learn how to cry out to Krishna.”

To be accepted by Krishna is not a cheap thing. Who do we think we are to be accepted by Him? Our heart must be flooded with an intense longing and begging for the position of being accepted and welcomed by the Lord.”

It all begins with a mindfulness of the Personality of Krishna being actually present. Thus, our chanting becomes my time with Krishna. Adding this aspect of longing for Krishna to our chanting has the power to transport our meditation to a different level. It can transform our chanting from an impersonal, mechanical and dry ordeal into our time of personally associating with the Lord. We can meet Him face to face.”

We may view the entire Srimad-Bhagavatam as a catalogue advertising Krishna’s divine abode.”

An effective way of starting the process [of becoming free of inattentive chanting] is chanting daily a certain amount of rounds – preferably the same number of rounds each day like four, six, or eight – with full care and attention. . . . The remainder of our rounds, we may continue chanting as we have been for so many years. This practice will give us a direct experience of the difference: We will feel how the attentive rounds offer so much more satisfaction to our heart. And in proportion to the number of rounds chanted in the recommended fashion, we will become increasingly disgusted with our inattentive rounds, which are indeed like empty medicine capsules.”

Hari Vilasa Prabhu:

It is important to understand that the holy name is authorized by the scriptures.

The reason the chanting of the holy name is recommended in this age is that it is very simple.

Dharma, although eternal, adapts to the circumstances of the age. The religious practice, the duties of the ashrams, etc.

There are qualifications for chanting Hare Krishna, but they are not material qualifications like wealth, intelligence, and strength.

Beneficial qualifications include consistency, ability to relish the holy name, etc.

Just because something is not easy does not mean it is impossible. Unfortunately we are so attached to things being easy, that if it is not easy, it becomes impossible for us.

The instructions of Srila Prabhupada to live simply are like the lifestyle of the Amish, completely detached from the surrounding modern civilization.

Whatever you see, you also have to digest, just as whatever you eat, you have to digest.

Challenges:

Sinful activities have become normalized.

Sinful activities flood our consciousness with impediments to chanting the holy name.

We do not feel we have time to focus on the chanting.

Distraction is prevalent and hard to surpass.

Unless you can absorb your mind in transcendence, there is no peace.

Getting people’s attention is the most valuable thing.

If we are self-absorbed, we will sometimes feel very bad about ourselves and at other times feel very proud of ourselves.

It is better not to endeavor for self-esteem but for detachment.

People who are detached are consistently happy.

Comments by me:

The Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.3.22 also mentions that devotional service begins with the chanting of the holy name:

etavan eva loke ’smin
pumsam dharmah parah smrtah
bhakti-yogo bhagavati
tan-nama-grahanadibhih

Devotional service, beginning with the chanting of the holy name of the Lord, is the ultimate religious principle for the living entity in human society.”

In the translation of the iti sodasakam verse in the purport, kali-kamasa-nasanam” is not mentioned specifically. This phrase means that the holy name destroys the impurities of this Age of Kali.

Mathuresa Prabhu once said a Srimad-Bhagavatam class decades ago that this practice of Krishna consciousness is guaranteed to remove anarthas, and therefore, if we are attached to our anarthas, we will get removed along with them. It was such a striking statement, it stuck with me for perhaps forty years.

I know what you mean by saying gambling is the worst of the four sinful activities. I tried distributing Origins magazines in Reno, Nevada, airport, and the people at the slot machines had no ability to even hear my presentation, they were so absorbed in their gambling.

You stress absorption in Krishna in your class. I am so absorbed when I edit harinama videos on the trains that I completely tune out all the craziness of the New York City subway, and my twenty-minute ride seems to take just a few minutes.

Aditya Devi Dasi:

Bhaktivinoda Thakura in Jaiva Dharma says that the svarupa-dharma of the living is to serve Krishna in Krishna prema.

It is described that we are still in the spiritual world. We just turn away from the pastimes for a moment and have this material dream.

Kumbha-mela is named after the Kumbha, or pot, of immortal nectar, from which drops of nectar landed at Nashik, Haridvara, and Prayaga.

Vasanta-pancami, the first day of spring, is also the marriage day of Shiva and Parvati.

Shiva, because he is not a jiva, never becomes conditioned by the material world.

Matanga Prabhu:

I was at a temple in South India and I did not have much service, so I was on my phone a lot. One brahmacari noticed, and pointing to the phone, he said, ‘That is your wife.’”

Natabara Gauranga Prabhu:

In this purport we learn that Daksa’s envious words directed toward Lord Shiva were the result of an envy that had been building up for a while. We can understand from this that if we notice an envious attitude toward a devotee building up within ourselves we should do something to counteract it by serving or glorifying the person before it results in an offense.

We should always try to increase the quality and quantity of our sadhana.

Divyangi Devi Dasi:

There are other talks between Lord Shiva and Sati in the Vedic literature in which they reveal important truths. In particular one conversation reveals the thousand names of Radha.

You see a lot of psychology in the Bhagavatam. Here Sati tells Shiva, “We can go to the sacrifice if you would like,” instead of directly saying “I want to go to the sacrifice.”

The Bhagavatam is always reminding us that this world is untruth.

Daksa was very absorbed in his service, but he ended up with the head of a goat.

My guru [Vaisesika Prabhu] says, “We have to be humble because we are only moving in the world according to the mercy of others.”

It takes at least two people to have a fight. If the other person does not interact then there is no fight.

In distributing books you learn to react nicely when dealing with all kinds of people.

In distributing books, you meet philosophical people who have no interest in stories and people who like stories and have no interest in philosophy.

When we are in the association of advanced devotees, we can by their mercy, experience higher levels of consciousness than we usually experience.

Find the ideal distance where you can properly respect a person, and do not go closer or further than that.

Comment by Indian Prabhu: Thanks for reminding us that it is good to understand the Bhagavatam philosophy so if we lose the taste for chanting we will continue to do it out of duty.

Prabhavishnu Prabhu:

All the stories in the Bhagavatam, even those that cause us to wonder why they are there, are for our ultimate purification.

The pastimes in the Bhagavatam assist us in resisting material allurements and developing an attraction for Krishna’s pastimes.

Hadai Prana Prabhu:

Lord Shiva did not stand up to honor Daksa, and Daksa’s inability to tolerate this resulted in several chapters of drama in the Srimad-Bhagavatam.

Radhanath Swami reminds us that everyone in the temple should receive guests in such a way the guests will appreciate Srila Prabhupada’s love for Krishna and Srila Prabhupada’s love for them.

A mature Vaishnava sees one who finds fault with him as benefactor revealing anarthas that he was unaware of so he can correct them, and he offers obeisances to such a person.

-----

Mahavishnu Goswami from Gujarat inspired me to once memorize the prayers of Queen Kunti. This month I dedicated to memorize again all those I had forgotten.

Kunti Devi prays to Lord Krishna for one-pointed devotion to Him:

tvayi me ’nanya-viṣaya
matir madhu-pate 'sakṛt
ratim udvahatad addha
gangevaugham udanvati

O Lord of Madhu, as the Ganges forever flows to the sea without hindrance, let my attraction be constantly drawn unto You without being diverted to anyone else.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.8.42)

Adelaide Temple Opening
→ Ramai Swami

The new Adelaide temple extension, with its beautiful deity room, high ceilings, chandeliers and artwork, is a wonderful addition to the temple complex. Sri Sri Radha Shyamasundara, Gaura Nitai and Prahlada Nrsimha were graciously bestowing Their mercy to one and all.

There was a big crowd in attendance for the opening festival, including the federal and state members of parliament , HH Devamrta Maharaja and local temple presidents, Adi Purusa Krsna and Sita Rama Laksman. Everyone gave wonderful speeches of appreciation for the new temple and the contribution of ISKCON in Adelaide.