Planet ISKCON

So since I got this verse, I was told this three, four days ago, I’ve not been able to sleep very peacefully. These are these are in many ways a very difficult section of the Bhagavatam to explain, first of all, to understand and to explain. So today and tomorrow, I’ll be discussing this theme of how the such a brutal hell or a brutal description of hell, how can it be reconciled with the idea of a loving God? That what is described over here, sometimes if we don’t know the language, then sometimes if we don’t know the language when what two people are speaking, we can only make it out, we can only guess it, infer it And India itself is a very multilingual country. So sometimes when somebody is angry, you can make out even if you don’t understand the language by their gestures, by their expressions, by the volume, you can make out they’re angry.

But among the various Indian languages, Bengali is a very sweet language. And I was once in Mayapur and two devotees talking and the whole language sounded very sweet But then after that, the devotee who whom I was talking who was talking to some other Bengali the other day, he after he finished the talk, he was very disturbed. I said, What happened? He said that this devotee, he just spoke so this other person was not a devotee like a person who’s coming to the temple, they’re working some contract on land with him, it’s favorable like this. He spoke such harsh language and such foul words, very shaken.

So I he was speaking in a very plain tone and Bengali is a little sweet language. So sometimes the language might be very sweet but the words might be horrible within it. So like that, you know, if we just come and recite the verses and we don’t know the Sanskrit, this verse can seem like any other verse. Sanskrit is is is a exalted language and if you know how to recite, it can be very sweet to recite also. But what is being talked about over here is is the punishments that are described in hell for those people who have indulge unrestrictedly in sensual pleasures.

So how do we understand this? So today and tomorrow, I’ll talk about this and I’ll broadly use the same approach, use three points, you know, the approach that we take, the context in which this is spoken and T will we’ll talk about transcendence, what the essence of the Bhagavatam is. This is the acronym I’ll use. Now because this is I’m giving class tomorrow also, I’ll have a little time, so I’ll go backwards and rather than focusing on this particular verse itself, we’ll look back at our tradition. And Bhaktivino Thakur was the first person in our tradition who had to encounter modern sensibilities.

If you consider the tradition, the tradition has been going on for a long time if you consider you know, and if you consider tradition to be like lineage, spiritual lineage, then every Acharya does outreach to their particular audience. So for example, Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did outreach to the people at his times, then the six Goswamis, they were in Vrindavan and they did outreach to their particular audience. Now it’s interesting, the Goswamis hardly wrote any books about Lord Chaitanya because they were based in Vrindavan. In Vrindavan, Mahaprabhu had come and Mahaprabhu had created a sensation. But like any other visiting guest, when the visiting guest come, they say, Oh, huge, I’m Philip, but after the visiting guest goes back, things literally go back to normal.

So Vrindavan was a land of Krishna not of Lord Chaitanya. So they wrote books about Krishna, Krishna Leela, Krishna Attua and they wrote mostly Sanskrit because Vrindavan nobody knew Bengali. So every Acharya speaks to their audiences. So then after that we have Vishnu Acharya who is also in Vrindavan, but he was restoring Vrindavan after it was devastated by the intolerant Islamic ruler Aurangzeb. And then after that we have Baldevidya Bhushan.

Now Baldevidya Bhushan was speaking to a broader audience of the Vedic scholars because what happened was during Aurangzeb’s time, there are many of the deity like Radha Govind deity in order to be protected had to be taken to Jaipur. And in Jaipur there is already an existing religious group, the Ramanandis. And when Radha Govind came he stole the heart of the king over there. And actually the king started giving more patronage to Radha Govind and his worshipers and the previous group that was there, they started becoming very upset. And in order to try to gain back the patronage, they started to challenge the very validity of our tradition itself, the very validity of the worship of the way we are doing it.

So Bal Devidya Bhushan had to respond to that and that’s why although Chetan Mahaprabhu had said that the Bhagavatam is a natural commentary on the Vedanta Sutra, Baldevidya Bhushan had to write a commentary. So it is almost as if Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said that there is no need for Vedanta Sutra commentary. Vedanta Sutra because he said the same author who wrote the Vedanta Sutra also wrote in his full maturity the Bhagavatam and therefore the Bhagavatam is a natural commentary. But during Bhakti Nota, during Maldive Devotion’s time, this same statement was seen simply as an excuse for not having a commentary because whenever we are discussing or debating with someone, we have to have a common basis of authority. If they don’t accept the basis of that that common basis, so if we are going to debate with somebody who is scientific and we quote the Bhagavita and say the Bhagavita says that we are not physical we are not physical beings, we are souls.

I don’t care what Bhagavita says, we may have to use some scientific evidence, something which they will accept. So the point is that had to write. He felt a strong need for a Vedanta Sutra commentary and nobody considers him in the tradition a deviant for writing such a commentary. Why? Because it was the need otherwise our Samprada itself would have lost its credentials.

So people who did not accept Lord Chaitanya Mahap’s authority, who were challenge challenging him and his tradition, we cannot argue with them by quoting from him. So therefore he had to write a commentary. So why am I giving this background? It’s like in the tradition each Acharya has to fight the battles of that generation and the battles of that generation may be very different from the battles of the previous generation. So if you consider the First World War and the Second World War, in the or we consider Second World War and the and the Cold War, in the Second World War we have Russia and America fought together against Germany.

But as soon as the war got over or even before the war was over when it was clear they were going to win, then there’s a competition between Russia and America who would have more power. So people who were ally allies can become enemies. Similarly, not everybody who were on the one side in the first world war were on the same side in second world war. So basically the battle lines change. In the material world, avidya ignorance always has to be fought.

But just as Krishna takes many Avatars, similarly Avidya also takes many Avatars. Avidya, ignorance also comes in different ways. And the principle in the tradition is that the current avatar, the current incarnation of avidya, of ignorance has to be fought. So each Acharya has to do that. The current avatar of Avidya has to be fought.

And the Baldevidya Bhushan fired the last salvo in the traditional battles. The traditional battles were basically everybody accepted the authority of the Vedas, but they debated fiercely about what was the meaning of the Vedas. The Vedas authority, but what does what the Vedas actually teach, that was the debate. But by the time it was Bhaktivinod Thakur’s time, What happened was the whole battleground had changed because westernization had come to India. And along with the westernization came, it was more of Europeanization if you want to say, you can call it the West or and because of that people were not really so concerned about what is the meaning of the Vedas.

The question was do the Vedas even matter? Do the Vedas even have anything of value? Are the Vedas just old fashioned, outdated, superstitious, irrational, primitive works of works that have no relevance of value today? So, Bhaktiv No Thakur had to fight a different battle and one of the battles that he had to fight was for explaining the Bhagavad. So what is it?

What is this? The, rational presentation of Vedic wisdom and especially of the Bhagavat. Oh, when did it stop? That’s funny. Oh, thank you for informing me.

Okay. Let me see what can I do over here? It got disconnected somehow. Maybe I just have to keep writing, otherwise, it gets disconnected. It’s come.

It’s come. Okay. Of the Bhagavatam. So he was the first person who had to give a rational presentation of the Bhagavatam. And Prabhupada in one of his talks on the while celebrating Bhaktiorn Thakur, his appearance disappearance days, he says, Bhaktiorn Thakur is the founder or the father of the modern day Krishna consciousness movement.

What he meant was that it is Bhaktirath Thakur who set the example in the standard of how to engage with modernity, how to engage with modern modernity and specifically the challenge of modernity was rationality. So modernity came with its own sensibilities and these descriptions of hell in one sense in pre modern times were not that provocative for many reasons. One reason was in the pre modern medieval times in general punishments were quite brutal. We know in France there’s a guillotine where people would just be killed. Even in Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s time they did this guy the Changa, Changa was like swords are kept upside down, swords kept up and somebody is thrown on top of that and that is what happened in Bengal.

So the medieval and the they were physically quite brutal times and there were ways in which people were punished. So but in the modern time, the sensibilities changed and when the sensibilities changed, there are many questions that came up. So I so at that time, Bhaktivinath Thakur wrote an essay called the Bhagwat. And in that essay, he talks about what are the difficulties in understanding the Bhagwat, and he primarily talks about three difficulties. So in fact, he almost takes an autobiographical role over there.

He says that when I grew up, you know, I had an aversion to the Bhagavatam and he said I felt there’s nothing of value in it. So he’s talking to people of a similar background who have all been educated in the Western, the European way of thinking and he’s empathizing with them. He says that, Yeah, I was also like that. And he says there are three challenges, the first challenge is based on cosmology. So the second challenge is based on morality and the third is based on philosophy.

So he says the cosmology, the time scales, the description of the planets, all this just seems utterly irrational. It just seems what science has revealed is totally different from what the Bhagavatam is telling. Then with respect to morality, he focuses primarily on the morality of the character of Krishna and he says that many people considered at that time, especially Christian missionaries in order to target Hinduism, the religion of that country at that time, targeted on the immorality of the characters. So basically, when when the British infiltrated into India, initially the East India Company which was ruling did not allow missionaries to come in because they said that we are here for business and they saw that Indians are very religious, so let’s not mess with their religion. And they also saw that the last Mughal king was Aurangzeb and the main reason one of the reasons one of the main reasons why he just fell was that he just persecuted Hindus a lot.

And that’s why the Hindu just relentlessly fought against him, so they decided let’s not mess with these people’s religion. So, at that time many of the missionaries, the protestants, the Anglican church mainly, they would stay outside India in Burma and they would come Bangladesh was the border state, they would come in illegally, they were illegal immigrant preachers, they would come in and go back. But then, in Britain also, there were two political parties and they were just like here, one political party goes, another political party comes. A lot of policy changes happened. So there was one political party which was more on the rational side, scientific and scientific progress, the other was on the more religious side.

So in the British elections, when the party that was more on the religious side, the Tory party, they won. They said that that so the the Christians who were supporting them they said that, We’ve got this huge unchurched land, This is our duty to Jesus, we have to church them, we have to civilize them. And then that’s when the missionary work started very heavily. So basically both so the the rationalists, those who wanted scientific progress they criticize Hinduism as irrational and the Christians criticize Hinduism as pagan. So both were criticizing and their criticism was basically they talked about how every deity in the Vedic tradition, Krishna is so immoral.

And at that time the other deity that was very popular in worshiping in Bengal was Kali. So Kali is so brutal. So Kali is brutal and Krishna is immoral and Nabaktino Thakur was us living and teaching and trying to present body of Vaishnavism at a time when this came up. And now what happens is that this to the modern sensibility, the description of hell seems both, It seems brutal and it seems immoral. So this is the cosmology, the morality, and the philosophy.

So the description of hell as it is given in the Bhagavatam. Now the Christians did not critique that much because even in the Biblical tradition there is similar description of hell. The specifics may vary, but there is quite a brutal description of hell. Now when the cosmology is concerned, at that particular time, now also we are facing this challenge when we are building the planetarium, how do we actually explain the fifth canto, how do we depict the fifth canto? So these are challenges, it’s not like a one and done thing.

One Acharya gives an explanation and everybody accepts the explanation. It is an ongoing challenge that we face. So it is to address some of these challenges especially the challenge of cosmology, Bhaktivinath Thakur wrote a book called the Krishna Samhita. Now this is among his more controversial books because in this he took a somewhat of a non literal approach to the Bhagavatam and many traditionalists did not appreciate that approach. And Bhaktivedanta Thakur in his own writings later says he wrote his own autobiography in the form of a long letter to one of his sons Lalita Prasad and there he says many people misunderstood this book.

Nobody understood what I was trying to do with this book. So there we see even nowadays also in our movement there’s a debate between conservatives and liberals and people feel misunderstood, people feel attacked. So Bhaktivirath Thakur himself went through all that. He felt attacked. But anyway, I’ll talk about how he has dealt with this and then we will move forward and we’ll talk about this.

So in one sense Srila Prabhupada is trying to in the purport make this relatable for us. He says that in the holocaust terrible things happened, the concentration camps people were forced to eat their own refuse and so it’s no wonder that in hell something like this happened. But then while Prabhupada is trying to make it, you know, these things happen in this world also, they will happen in hell also. But for some people instead of making it relatable, it makes the whole idea of God unrelatable. That means what happens is that I was just talking with one American devotee, he said that when he read this he says that the thought that came in his mind is that what this purport is saying is that Krishna is like Hitler, that Krishna is a creator of a concentration camp worse than what Hitler created.

So sometimes what happens is intent is one thing but what the intent completely backfires. So how do we explain this? So I’ll talk about a lot of things, but first I’ll go into the approach that Bhakti Vinod Thakur takes. So specifically with respect to the descriptions of hell, Bhaktivinath Thakur seems to take a fairly non literal approach and he says that it is the principle of accountability for our actions that is vital that each one of us for whatever we do we will be held responsible. Beyond that the specifics are not that important.

The specifics are given to create fear so that people will stay moral, that people will do the right thing. Now this is not an unfamiliar approach. Bertrand Russell was a prominent atheist and when he would have discussions of atheism, he would have them in his library and he would lock the doors so that none he would have his intellectual friends come and discuss, but he would not want any of his servants to hear his discussions of atheism. Why? He said he felt that if the servants start believing that there is no God, then they will start stealing my silver and my gold from my house.

So the idea that fear will keep people in line, that is not an uncommon idea. And in many ways every country has this that if there is no fear of the law, then people will just there’ll always be criminal elements and they will just run wild. So Bhakti Rudhakur says such descriptions are given to create fear, not fear in the sense of terror, but fear for the sake of what is called as deterrence. Fear can be I’m sorry. Fear can be either for the purpose of creating terror and keeping a person to live in fear forever or fear can also be for deterrence.

Deterrence is where a person is just like you know India and Pakistan and China, these three countries have had lot of wars before. But now every one of them has has nuclear weapons. And although there are many confrontations there, it has not been outright war because there is deterrence. So this is these are meant to be deterrence, that’s what his mood is. So now Prabhupada did not quote Krishna Samhita much, he mentions this once or twice, he did not quote explicitly from Krishna Samhita so much except for one theme, but he did not reject Krishna Samhita directly.

At the same time, Prabhupada, while he did not directly say that the description in hell of hell are non literal, he certainly did not emphasize them too much. He did not emphasize them too much. If you for example, in the Christian outreach, often they start with if Jesus is the only way, if you don’t surrender to Jesus, you’re going to go to hell and you’re going to go to hell forever. So that God loves you so much that if you don’t love him back, he will send you to hell forever, you know. And unfortunately, this is not a caricature of Christianity.

So Bhakti Vinod Thakur himself talked about four levels at at which people can approach God. There is fear, there is desire, there is duty, and then there is love. So fear and desire is the level of karma kanda mostly. If you don’t do this, you’ll be punished by God. If you do this, you’ll be rewarded by God.

The fear and desire is the level at which most of the world’s religion operates. At the level of duty, it is more of karma yoga, nishkam karma yoga. When one understand that God has already done some so much for me, I have a duty to take care I have to serve him. Now love is the primary level at which we approach God in Bhakti Yoga. So now what Bhakti No Thakur states, I’ll talk about one last point and then we’ll have some questions if there are and we’ll continue tomorrow.

The key difference, the first point in reconciling, the idea of a loving God with the brutal descriptions of hell is that our while the term hell is the same, but the conception in the Vedic tradition is very different from what is there in the Abrahamic tradition. What is the difference? There are two main differences, the first is in the Abrahamic tradition hell is eternal, we go to hell and stay forever. In the Vedic tradition although hell is described it is temporary. It is when Srila Prabhupada was asked, Is hell eternal?

Prabhupada replied that, Nothing except ecstatic loving service to Krishna is eternal. So hell is temporary. So hell is in one sense if you can say in the Vedic tradition the whole universe is like a university. We are all meant to learn lessons, learn ultimately what matters and go towards that. And so within this university, hell is like a tough classroom.

Sometimes some kids are very very unruly, maybe they are sent to something which is a like a very difficult or something like a boot camp, they’re sent over there. So hell is like a tough classroom. So no society can actually flourish, even survive without a certain level of law and order and discipline. And if God does not have that system of disciplining people, then where is the question of justice and without justice where is the question of love? So it is not a condemnation.

So what is the implication of this that it is eternal, it is temporary? The implication is hell is for condemnation that you didn’t love God so you’re going to go to hell. But if hell is temporary, it is not for condemnation, it is for reformation. So it is not that God has permanently condemned us, it is that God wants us back and God wants us to reform. And another critical difference is that in the Abrahamic tradition, hell is for non believers.

If you don’t believe in Jesus, you don’t accept Jesus as your savior, you’re going to go to hell. In the Vedic tradition, hell is not for non believers, it is for wrong doers. It is not that just because you don’t worship Krishna you want to go to hell. Somebody may not be worshiping Krishna and if they are living in Sattva Guna, in the mode of goodness Krishna says, So somebody is charitable, somebody is kind, somebody is polite, and maybe they don’t believe in God, they’re a good person. They won’t they’re not good enough to go back to Godhead, but they’re just being good, But they won’t be sent to hell.

So this is not the personal vendetta of God. You didn’t believe me, so I’ll send you to hell. No, it is not like that. That is this actually when when you say have the implication that hell is for non believers, so these together are one point and this is a second point. When you say hell is for non believers, it is for almost like a vengeful God.

The idea becomes that God is vengeful. But whereas here, it is not a vengeful God, but a lawful God that if you create trouble for others, if you hurt others, if you harm others, then you will be punished. So the conception of God itself is very different and therefore can we reconcile the idea of hell with a loving God? Yes, it is possible because hell is not eternal and God does not send people to hell just because they don’t love him. It is because they are causing harm to others that they go to hell.

So I so I’ll continue this tomorrow and I’ll talk further about what is the specific bhakti wisdom about it. So I talked till now about the broad Vedic challenge and the Vedic wisdom. So I’ll summarize what I discussed today. We’re talking about hell and God’s love, can the two be reconciled. So I talked about how first there is the challenge that is there for the tradition always that always there will be ignorance and every has to face the current incarnation of avidya that is there.

And then within that we talk about how Bhakti Vinod Thakur faced the challenge for the Bhagavatam at three levels. And three levels is that it’s it’s cosmology, it’s morality and it’s philosophy. And within that the approach that he takes for this is to say that this is non literal, that the principle is that hell that we are accountable for our actions. Now Srila Prabhupada does not take that approach but Srila Prabhupada, this is non important in the sense that Prabhupada did not emphasize it. Prabhupada did not start by saying that don’t worship God or you’ll go to hell.

Prabhupada’s approach was much more at higher level. We’ll talk about Prabhupada’s approach tomorrow. And finally, we discussed about the difference in the conception of hell in the Abrahamic traditions versus the Vedic traditions. The Abrahamic traditions, it is eternal and that’s why it makes a serious difference whether it’s temporary, it’s eternal, it’s for condemnation of a reformation and the Abrahamic traditions, it is for non believers. So it’s almost like God is out to take revenge against those who don’t love him.

But in the Vedic tradition, it is for wrongdoers, those who hurt others. So this is what gives the idea of a lawful God. Now after talking about a lawful God, tomorrow I’ll talk about how it can be reconciled with the idea of a loving God also. Thank you very much. Hooray Krishna.

Any comments from? Okay. Okay. Yes, from here. Yeah.

Yeah. So how would you respond to a person who says, well, I like your, conception much better than the Christian conception. But, you know, here in in America and Western countries to have a saying, if you give a fool enough rope, he’ll hang himself. So it seems like Krishna is giving people a lot of rope. Why doesn’t he, you know I mean, the Bhagavad Gita says, why hasn’t he, you know, cut us off at the past, so to speak, before we hang ourselves because you know Well, I would say hell is the way he cuts us off the path.

So it’s like when actions have consequences, that’s what brings us to our senses. So in general, one person can guide another person only in three ways like many times when parents ask how do we guide someone, how do we guide our children, there are broadly three ways. First is conscience, that the conscience is like an innate voice, something just cannot be done. If we grew up seeing our parents never doing something, it’s out of question, no matter however angry you are, you don’t hit anyone. Then we ourselves certainly it’s wrong.

So conscience is like the voice of emotion, but it’s not just emotional, it’s that innate sense this is like an inner compass. Now if the compass is not there then there is intelligence. Intelligence is where we appeal to a person, you tell him if you do this, this is what is going to happen. Intelligence is where you give the person a vision of the consequence that is going to come. And if intelligence doesn’t work, then there is the experience.

Experience of what? Experience of the consequence. So broadly speaking, we cannot do anything, we cannot force anyone to do anything. Consciences, they just immediately feel it’s wrong, so I can’t do it. Intelligence is, okay, I see this is bad, so I’ll not do it.

Like somebody just feels, I don’t I don’t wanna kill animals. I don’t wanna hurt animals. He says, oh, if I eat red meat, I’ll get a heart attack. I don’t want to do that. Somebody gets a heart attack, he says, okay, now no more eat meat, red meat.

So basically, there’s a three way. So in one sense, hell is the way by which God is ensuring that the rope is not too long. So hail hell is where God is giving experience to people so that they can reform. Okay? Thank you.

Thank you. It’s true. Yes. All through. After thank you for a wonderful class.

What what comes to mind when you’re reading things of this this stature is that it it’s so phantasmagoria practically. I mean, it’s like not it’s like a movie or something. How how how do you get the living energy to understand these principles of freedom like Krishna conscious when you have to read these kind of descriptions which how many people would really believe. In other words, if you’re out there, you’re talking to a normal person and you know, he’s eating a hamburger and you said, well, if you continue eating that, you’re gonna have to take a you know, somebody’s gonna eat you or you’re gonna have to eat something else. So how how do you how do you take that particular idealism and and give it to someone to make them sincere or, help them understand these these principles from the Bhagavatam?

It’s tough. That’s why the principle which I find is best is choose our battles. There’s a very almost humorous conversation when Prabhupada was in Hawaii, some devotees came and told him that Prabhupada, when we try to talk with the scholars and we tell the scholars that that in Dwarka the king Ugarasen had some astronomical number of bodyguards. It’s quite a phenomenal number. So they started laughing at us.

They said where were their toilets, where are their homes, how could they live in Dwarka? Now Prabhupad could have Dwarka, so does he hear really? Or maybe it is two different places also, maybe there’s So anyway Prabhupad took different approach at different time. Prabhupad here, he said that in this conversation, among all the sections of the Bhagavatam, was it the only thing you found to speak to the scholars? So it is what is one of the one of the choosha battles means what?

Krishna’s Prabhupada himself says intelligence means to see things in their proper perspective. That’s what he said in the tenth chapter of the Bhagavata Purport, Buddha, Gyanama Sam, Mohan at ten point three four five. So that means we ourselves need to know what are the big things in our philosophy and what are the not so big things. So from Srila Prabhupada’s example itself we know how often did Prabhupada talk about hell. Generally when he talked about giving up sense gratification, it is not that you’ll go to hell if you do sense gratification, that is the general Christian version of they use the word adultery, adultery or fornication, you’ll go to hell and you’ll suffer in hell.

Prabhupada’s approach was this pleasure is so insignificant, you are meant for far greater pleasure. So Prabhupada took a particular approach. So my understanding is first is we don’t talk about it ourselves and we don’t this could work as a deterrent at a particular time. Now it doesn’t work as a deterrent and that’s why we are having this discussion about how to explain it. So to some extent it is possible although there is so much propaganda about sense gratification in the world today, many people soon realize that there’s nothing so great about it.

It’s just that because they don’t know any alternative they keep trying it and they keep trying it in new ways sort of hope that they’ll get some pleasure. But for many people if they they can be presented Krishna consciousness in an attractive way and they experience the happiness of Krishna consciousness then okay you know this you know there is better way to live and that’s how they give up sense gratification. So I think that’s the much more healthier approach rather than so I think this is the approach of intelligence rather than experience. You know, there is a better way to live, there is a better way to enjoy life and so we nowadays so there is enough arguments like we can make health arguments for giving up meat, we can make arguments based on environment which is a big concern for people. There’s also an argument based on I I talk about meat eating and talk about help the world with your food.

Well, I had all four things. One is at a health level it is beneficial, at the environmental level it’s beneficial, at the level of livestock, you know, so many people are killed just for your food. And then at the level of poverty itself, global poverty, That is if the amount of land that is used to make meat is used to raise grains for human beings, then far more people can be fed. So poverty itself then, that is not just us, UNESCO has said that. So this is basically there are different ways that’s why I said I give the example of what Chetanya Mahaprabhu said there is no need for this and Balibayash said we have to do this, we have to write a comment to the Midland Sutra.

So I think the same purpose but different approaches to that purpose. I personally wouldn’t use hell at all to talk about it to people. Okay. Thank you. Should we yeah.

There is one statement that says that whatever is written in the verus has to be taken as true. Either you like it or you don’t like it. So I try to understand in the Srila Bhakti Vinodakur statement and Srila Prabhupada in which take it literally and the other one is not that important. See, actually whatever is written has to be taken as truth that is that is there is a statement like that. At the same time there is a clear understanding of context.

So for example, in the Bhagavad Gita itself in 2.17 Krishna says Avinashita tadviddhi, that the soul cannot be destroyed, the soul is indestructible. And yet in the same Bhagavad Gita in the sixteenth chapter ninth verse, sixteenth chapter 20 verse, Krishna says that these things will destroy your soul this will destroy your soul So these will these are soul destroyers. So now there’s just no way both of these statements can be taken literally and they will be true. So then we have to look at the bigger picture. So So what is Krishna saying that here it’s non literal that Krishna is saying the souls spiritual tendency, the souls spiritual awareness that will be destroyed.

So we have to look at the context and that’s why while Shabda is the highest but pratyaksa and Anuman are also required. Yuga Swami used the example of Sandarbas that if somebody says that he lives that his house is on the Ganga. Nobody can house a house on the Ganga unless we are going to make a whole stretch of imagination and say this person is a mystic yogi who has built a house which floats on on there. Okay. This is the way to tell me to finish the class now.

Okay. So the thing is that we have to use our intelligence. So pratyaksha and Anuman, so by pratyaksha we know that there cannot be any house on the Ganga then it means it’s on the banks of the Ganga. So we have to propach and we have to make do we don’t want to do mental speculation but philosophical speculation is required. So there are clearly sections in the Bhagavatam which are in the scriptures which just cannot be taken literally.

So I would say it is that’s why studying scripture requires faith but also requires intelligence. And if it were only based on faith just take it literally true everything as it is then why do we even need commentators. I just this is it that’s all there is in fact that is one of the big split between the Catholics and the Protestants Some at least some of the Protestants say that the scripture is self evident, we don’t need any commentary. But then when it’s self evident which part is are you going to accept? Because in the Bible also there are contradictory strict ways.

So we need an approach that’s why when we would say whatever is said in scripture is true, that is true. But there are two ways to approach, one is with faith and the other is with intelligence and both are important. It is not only faith, if you have only faith we can become fanatical, if we have only intelligence we’ll become skeptical or even cynical. So we don’t want to go in either directions. We want to have a balance of faith and intelligence.

Okay. Thank you. So I think, should we continue tomorrow with any other questions or? There’s more question. Okay.

Do you have a question? Please take yours. I’ve been trying to find, because sometimes when speakers speak about this subject matter in class, they say that the soul the subtle body in the hellish planets when he’s being punished, he experiences it as being a long, long period of time. But we know it’s not eternal. But we also hear speakers say that, it’s actually just a flash of time, but his experience of it is very a long time.

So I haven’t been able to find that anywhere in the fifth kendo or the, third kendo. Do you do you know where that’s? Yeah. I mean, I also not heard about it. Is it?

Yeah. But they just talked about the traveling, it didn’t talk about the punish Okay. So what she is saying is suffering in hell. I’m talking about the suffering, not the traveling. So I think two things over here that, like, it is said in the in the that he has to pass 900,002 and then he’s at once engaged in tortures of his village.

Then he’s at once engaged in the torturous punishment which is just trying to go to hell. So so what does say that? Within a few moments, so it doesn’t does it say over here that it feels like a long time? It doesn’t exactly say that. But my point is that, you know, I, this notion that suffering that that the relativity of time, that something can be very short time but can feel very long, No, that that is not something which is completely outside our domain of experience.

Even Einstein talked about relativity of time, that’s how he explained that. Now if you’re sitting on a hot if you’re sitting on a hot, hot pan somehow, then in a few moments will feel like hours. And if you’re talking with somebody attractive whom you love, even several hours will feel like minutes. So it’s like sometimes we have a nightmare and it may just be for a few minutes, but when every nightmare we feel it’s very long. So the experiential level, pain doesn’t seem to be short, pain does seem to go on for a very long time.

So I think even if there’s no explicit scripture for that, it’s it’s something which is a reasonable inference from our own experience that what could be a short period could also seem very long, okay. So thank you very much.

The post Brutal hell & loving God How can both go together part 1 Chaitanya Charan Prabhu SB 3 30 25 4 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Hare Krishna. I’m grateful to be here with all of you today. And today, I’ll speak on this verse from the Bhagavad Gita. This is 2.14. So am I audible clearly?

Oh, okay. It’s gone. It had connected just now. Okay. Thank you.

This one? Okay. Thank you. So the topic I’ll speak on today is tolerance. Now what does tolerance mean and how to tolerate?

Recently I have been in a tour of America for about one and a half one and a half months now, the part of a three month tour and I was asked this question that this idea that Krishna tells in the Bhagavad Gita tolerate and this won’t that lead to some people doing abuses and we thinking that oh I’m just meant to tolerate and we continue tolerating. So what does tolerance mean and how tolerance is actually a great power provided it is understood properly. That’s the theme I’ll discuss. So when something bad is happening to us, when do we tolerate it and when do we decide not to tolerate it. That’s the broad topic I’ll discuss.

So this is extra from my latest book, this is for prayers inspired by the Bhagavad Gita. So in this I have taken each key verse of the Gita and there is a small poetic rendition of the Gita’s verse and then there is a prayer inspired by that verse. So let’s recite the words. So the theme I am talking about is that what you talk let tolerance increase my intelligence, oh lord, not my importance. Tolerance is not meant to make us powerless.

So let us look at these words, Those of you who are familiar with the font can recite after me. So once more we’ll recite. One last time now. This time we decided together all of us, not responsibly but together. Together.

So I tried to do a poetic translation of the verses over here. From the contact of senses with their objects comes joy and pain. These are time bound like winter’s cold and summer’s rain. They come and go forever, they never stay. Tolerate them all, march firm on your way.

So they never stay, march firm on your way. So this is the key over here that Krishna is telling us to march ahead. We’ll read one or two sentences from here. So when we are going through life, how do we decide which battles to fight? We’re all fighting some battle or the other.

So right now, you’re sitting here. Maybe there’s a battle in your mind. You know, you have got so many things to do at home. You hope this class won’t go too long. Maybe you’re hungry and there’s a battle.

Maybe if I go right now, can I get food in advance? Or maybe you want to focus on this class, but sitting on the floor is not so comfortable. So constantly, there are many things going on in our head and like that many things are going on in our world. And we cannot fight all the battles that are happening in the world. So in one sense when Krishna talks about tolerance, the key to tolerance is choosing our battles.

That means we decide which battles I’m going to fight and which battles I’m not going to fight. So I was in Australia and I gave a class over there one sitting in a temple. And there’s one young man who comes for my classes there regularly every year when I go, and he gives after my class, we have an intelligent discussions with him. He gives some thoughtful points how he appreciated. So my class topic was tolerance.

And so after the he he came a little late, so he’s sitting behind it. After the class, I asked him, so what do you like about the class? So he said, see, normally your classes are very intellectually stimulating. He says, but in today’s class, I got to practice what you taught. You know, my class was on tolerance.

So I was thinking you had to tolerate my class? So there’s a Jewish saying, have your ears heard what your mouth has said? So that he saw my expression. Yeah. And he said, no, no.

Actually, I was sitting behind. And when I was sitting behind, the person next to me was constantly talking on phone. His phone was not silent, phone was beeping, and he’s also talking quite loudly on the phone. I was annoyed with that person. But then I thought the class was on tolerance, so I tolerated.

But then because I was tolerating, I couldn’t hear any of the class. So I told him with all due respect, whenever somebody uses the phrase with all due respect, what is going to come after that is not going to be very respectful. So I told him, with all due respect, that is not tolerance, that is importance. So now, what does it mean that it’s not tolerance but importance? You see in this particular verse, which we are discussing right now, this is two fourteen in the Bhagavad Gita, This is well known as Tam Sitiksha Sabharata.

Here Krishna is talking about tolerance. And so I’ll be talking about tolerance in three broad perspectives and using the word acronym called WIT, w I t. The three aspects of tolerance. Now before Krishna cues a call for tolerance, there is the words So before that Krishna is giving intelligence. So we need to have intelligence, a synonym for intelligence is wisdom.

So that’s the first w, but first we need to have wisdom or intelligence. And what is wisdom about? Wisdom means to know which are the big things in our life and which are the small things in our life. So when there’s a lack of wisdom, what happens is we need to make small things very big. If somebody has to go somewhere urgently and they drive, although they they are driving a car, although they know there are no brakes in the car.

I want to get there very fast. Will you get there somewhere else very fast? Isn’t it? So what is the big thing? Okay.

Going to a particular place is important, but surviving is much more important. So which thing is more important and which thing is less important? Which is a big thing, which is a small thing? Understanding that is wisdom. And without wisdom, tolerance has no meaning.

Now if you go forward, this is going to be the key of our talk, but what is tolerance? Tolerance is basically that we are able to keep small things small. Tolerance is where we keep small things small and we keep thereby big things big. We keep small things small and we keep big things big. What does this mean?

That in this case of this young man I was telling him, say, if you come for a talk, the big thing is to hear the talk. Now while getting the talk, we may want to sit on a chair, but sometimes all the chairs are occupied, so to sit on the floor. That may be a little inconvenient. But, okay, the talk is going to go for me forty five minutes, one hour. I can tolerate that discomfort of sitting on the floor.

So relatively speaking that’s a small thing so that I can do the big thing of hearing the class. But if I’m coming for the class and I can’t hear the class only and that interference, that distraction, that noisiness if I tolerate that, then what is happening is I’m not able to do the big thing. So tolerance is actually about keeping small things small, when you keep small things small, you can actually keep big things big. And conversely, when you keep big things big, you can also keep small things small. So but tolerance cannot be exhibited unless we have the wisdom of the intelligence to know what is a small thing and what is a big thing.

So here itself in the Gita Krishna is calling Arjuna to tolerate. Now does the tolerance mean that oh the Kauravas the opposite side in the army has done horrible atrocities. They tried to kill his brother, they tried to assassinate him, burn him and his entire family alive, they tried to disrobe his wife, they cheated and defrauded them of all the property and on top of that they had no remorse, no repentance. The way they try to humiliate Draupadi eventually in the same place in a similar way they try to dishonor Krishna. That’s when the Pandava decided enough is enough.

So when Krishna is telling tolerate is he telling okay you know just accept all the atrocities that the Kauravas have committed, just tolerate it and live with the injustice. Is that what Krishna is implying? Actually Krishna is calling upon Arjuna to fight. So what to tolerate is important to understand. When Krishna is telling Arjuna to tolerate it is not tolerate the Kauravas atrocities.

The Kauravas have committed many atrocities and they are not to be tolerated. Now what is it that Krishna is telling Arjuna to tolerate? Here it is, the pain of fighting against his elders. He has to fight against Bhishma, he has to fight against Drona. These are the people from whom he learned archery, these are the people for whose pleasure he learned archery.

But unfortunately, now duty is calling him to fight against them. It’s very difficult but Krishna is telling him, yes it’s difficult but you need to do it because this is the way you’ll be able to do your duty, you’ll be able to establish Dharma. So the bigger cause of establishing a virtuous order in society is important and therefore tolerate the pain of fighting against Vishnu Mindrula. So before we can actually tolerate we need to have the wisdom to know what is a big thing in our life and what is a small thing And then we can keep the small thing small and then we move toward the big thing, we can focus on the big thing. When Srila Prabhupada was in India, not many people were coming for the outreach that he was doing from 1920 to when he met his spiritual master.

From that time he was trying in various ways to reach out to people and especially after 1940 he started focusing more and more on outreach and till 1965 he was trying many things and somehow there was not much success. Various reasons Prabhupada was primarily preaching in English. Most people even those times did not really were not really comfortable with English. Prabhupada was giving a more philosophical spirituality. Indians at that time were more interested in Katha centered, story centered spirituality.

And India was very much infatuated by the West. So now Prabhupada could have said, okay, you know, maybe people are not coming, what can I do? Maybe this is Krishna’s plan for me, let me accept it. Nobody is coming, nobody is interested, what can I do? I’ll accept it.

No. Prabhupada didn’t accept. Prabhupada tried to change things. The change he did was he came all the way from India to America. Now why he came?

We’ll talk about that as a part of later strategy. But the point is when something bad is happening, something unwanted is happening, it is not an automatic virtue to simply tolerate it. First we have to see what is the big thing in our life and what is the small thing in our life. So now after we have decided this, then the next point that comes up is does anyone remember the acronym? WIT, yes.

WIT. So W is wisdom. We need to know what is the big thing. So the whole point of tolerance is that keep small things small so that you can keep big things big. Otherwise, what happens is if we lack tolerance, sometimes we may life is always filled with ups and downs.

So there’ll be good times and there are bad times. In any relationship, there can be good times, there can be bad times. You know, any job we are having, sometimes the boss may just ease us, sometimes somebody may be rude to us, sometimes it may be very pleasant, we may get a lot of success. Now, often what happens to us if we do not have the capacity to tolerate, then when we go through ups and downs, our mind goes way up and way down. So this is what makes people very unstable.

So nowadays this is becoming more and more. Sometimes when something good happens, you know, two people meet each other and they have some pleasant interactions. One person says, I love you. I can’t live without you. And a couple of days later, we had one unpleasant interaction, I hate you, I can’t live with you.

So it is just we become very very unstable and what happens is these phases will come and go. So if we lack tolerance then we all have emotions that are often reversible, we often have emotions that are reversible. But if we don’t have tolerance, now tolerance means what? Yeah, this is the bad phase we are going through and this phase will go. I’m feeling terrible right now, this phase will also go.

But if there is no tolerance, then due to reversible emotions, we end up making decisions that are irreversible. So this is a great danger. If we lack tolerance, see when we are going through a bad phase, we’ll feel terrible. And in that terrible phase, what is the point of all this? Oh, when people when the people in the relationship they say it’s a break up.

When there is no up actually, it’s a break down most of the time unfortunately. The thing is that we don’t want reversible emotions to lead to irreversible decisions. So for example, there are some people who are very emotionally unstable. So when something good happens to them, they go way up and they think, now I can I have so much energy, I can shake the whole world? So it’s like this is a manic they have a manic level of energy.

And then something bad happens and they go so down that they go into complete depression. Psychology calls this the manic depressive personality. So one day they seem to have so much energy they can shake the whole world. Next day, when something goes wrong, it seems the whole world can’t shake them out of their bed. They just want to pull a blanket over their face and stay there.

So now this is if okay these faces will come they will go, don’t take them so seriously. Sometimes when something goes wrong in the people’s lives, this is terrible, I’ve lost everything, not everything. But, starting I’ve lost it, this has gone wrong, that has gone wrong, that has gone wrong. Our mind starts replaying everything that has gone wrong in our life, starting if my life itself is wrong. And that’s how sometimes people may try to end their life itself and that’s totally irreversible decision which arises from a reversible situation.

So what happens is that if we don’t have tolerance then we make a small thing very big. Yeah, it was a loss but it’s not the end of the world. So when there is no tolerance, what happens that we all will experience loss in our life, but we all will process loss differently. The loss could be loss of a job, loss could be loss of our savings, maybe a stock market crashes, loss could be loss of a relationship, a loud one may pass away, relationship may break down, losses can happen. Now there are three ways we can process loss.

I have lost. This is the most objective, the Bhagavata calls this as the Sattvic way of processing. In Sattva, this was the opportunity, I lost it. I have lost. But if we are in rajas, it might become much more I am lost.

Now I am lost is far more disorienting. I don’t know what to do. Sometimes somebody has invested a lot of time and energy in a particular career and then maybe somebody wants to become an athlete and they get a career ending injury. I don’t know what to do in my life. I’m lost.

This is far more damaging. But the most damaging is I am a loser. Now when somebody starts interpreting it like that, that can be devastating and this is Tamas, this is the mode of ignorance. So if we start interpreting it like that, suppose we were in a relationship with someone who we thought was a loser, then what would we do? We want to end that relationship as quickly as possible.

But if we thought that we ourselves are losers, then what are we going to do? Can we end our relationship with ourselves? Can we break up with ourselves? Well we can’t but many times suicide is like a desperate attempt to try to break up with ourselves. So tolerance is a great virtue that enables us to keep small things small.

Somebody said this is not a small thing, this is a terrible thing. Yeah it’s terrible but it will pass, don’t overreact to it, don’t let reversible emotions lead us to irreversible decisions. So tolerance is a great virtue, it’s a very important power and each one of us we need this power because we live in a world which is very very volatile and we live with minds which are even more volatile. It’s a deadly combination. So tolerance is very much a virtue.

At the same time, what is it that we have to tolerate that we have to understand with wisdom. And then I was talking about the WIT, I is influence. Okay, I may decide that this is a big thing for me and this is a small thing for me. So now once I decide something is big and something is small, then I have to check. I wanna work on this big thing, but do I have the power right now to work on that big thing?

Or if you don’t have that power, what do we do? We have to work each one of us has a certain level of influence in our lives and we need to work with the influence that we have. So I’ll explain what this means that some of you may notice that I need crutches for walking. So when I was one, I got polio. That I my mother took me to a we used polio to a physician.

We were staying in a small town in Maharashtra in India. And she took me to a physician to get a polio vaccine. And unknown to that physician, because it is a small town, that clinic had had a power outage the previous night. And the fridge in which the clinic had been kept, the clinic had kept the vaccines had got disconnected from power. So the temperature had increased.

And the attendant didn’t notice that, neither the finished physician noticed that. So they gave me that vaccine, but because the temperature had increased, the germ percentage had increased within it. And the vaccine, instead of preventing polio, ended up causing polio. So now I don’t remember any of that, but I was about one and I was just learning to walk and I fell down and I could not walk afterwards normally. So and this happened, I had a maternal uncle here in America.

And he was among the first in our family, extended family, who had come to America. And when he heard this, he immediately said, you should you should sue the doctor. Now, my father is among the calmest persons I have known. His favorite verse in the Bhagavad Gita is of the section on Stitha Pragya, bistoik. So he told my uncle, my maternal uncle, he said that the Indian legal system is such that if you see sue them in court, probably we’ll die before the case comes for hearing.

Anyway, the thing has happened, what can we do about it now? So he accepted that. Now a few years ago, I was talking with a friend of mine, and he told me that this happened in America, in Florida. He said he he he was expecting a, a daughter, his wife was expecting, and, there was some complications, so she was rushed to the NICU and then they had a baby that was somewhat premature. But in the whole process, the the the medical staff did some multiple mess ups.

And because of that, when the baby was born, she had cerebral palsy and number of other issues. And now, then this devotee, he wrote to his spiritual master, spiritual master is also my spiritual master, Radhanath Maharaj, and he asked Radhanath Maharaj that should I accept this? This has happened, we’ve got a baby like this. Should I accept this as my karma or should I sue the hospital for it? It was their negligence.

So basically Maharaj replied to him saying that, it is what has happened, it has already happened, it is you have to accept the responsibility to take care of your daughter now. At the same time, it is your when it is your dharma to take care of your daughter, if you can get some support, some assistance in doing that dharma, in doing your duty, then you should seek that assistance. So he he sued the hospital and because it was a clear case, not a medical malpractice but medical negligence. So the hospital settled out of court and he’s got a fairly decent financial support for the lifelong care of his daughter. Now that does not change the fact that she is tragically physically damaged, but the fact is that it is not that tolerance means that something bad has happened, it’s my own karma accepted.

No, it is that we have to see what influence do we have. The focus is not on why something happened. The focus is on the cure. The focus when we are trying to deal with any problem in life. The focus always has to be on not whether it is karma.

Oh, is it my karma? Is it the baby’s karma? Is it this person’s karma? Our focus should not be on the cause. Whose karma is it?

Our focus needs to be on the cure and the cure is what is my dharma in this situation? What is my duty in this situation? And for the sake of my duty, I will do what is best for me. If we start focusing too much on karma, then where will we stop in that case, isn’t it? Say, if there’s a newborn baby, say, if say a guest comes to our home and the guest says we give them we have we have a guest room, say, and the guest says, oh, it’s so cold over here.

Can we tell them it’s your own karma that you are feeling cold? No. It is. What? If they have come to our home, it is our duty as hosts.

It’s our dharma to take care of our guests. So our focus should always be on our dharma, not on someone else’s karma. If we have a newborn baby and the baby is crying, and should the mother think, oh, the baby is crying because of her past karma? No. It is your present dharma to take care of the baby.

Now sometimes despite our best efforts to take care of the baby, sometimes there might be some disease that might take some time to heal. And that time the baby might be crying, we feel very bad, we see the baby is in pain. But then, if after doing our dharma according to our influence, according to our capacity, still if the problem remains, then we need to tolerate it. So our focus is not meant to be on the cause because we don’t know what whose karma is, what is known for us is what is our dharma. So we focus on our dharma and that way we see, okay this is my dharma, but how much influence do I have right now to do my dharma and we act accordingly.

So now what I understood, my my father when he was in India, the Indian legal system and the American legal system are quite different. I traveled all over the world, only in America have I seen ads of lawyers. Just as I was coming along, I saw, who hurt you? So, in each country, what what billboards are there, that does indicate something about the culture. I traveled all over the world.

Only in India have I seen jewelry ads. Huge ads of jewelry. It’s not generally for brides, but it’s for all occasions. So anyway, so America is a much more litigious country than India. And in India, my father didn’t have much influence.

So he took care of me and my parents, they I’ll talk about them a little bit forward, but we have to see what our influence is. It’s a big thing if a child is damaged in some way. But do we have the influence to choose to do something about it? If we don’t, then best to tolerate it and move on with life. If we have, then we should make a change to it.

So we look at our influence. And then the last part is what are the acronym once again? Wait. Wait. Yes.

Thank you. So now T is transform. Now transform can mean multiple things. Sometimes it can mean various kinds of transformation. So here once we have tolerated, so there is a very big difference between tolerate, to tolerate is not to suffocate.

Sometimes we are angry with someone, somebody is doing something, she’s annoying us, irritating us, and we keep burying all those feelings underneath us, and we keep tolerating. And then what happens is we keep tolerating tolerating tolerating but it’s all suffocated. And one day that person does something and we explode. And then when we explode what that person at that time has done might be very small but we explored for all the seventeen thirty six things that they had done before. And we didn’t do anything about that.

So tolerating is not about burying our feelings and living in a suffocated way. Tolerance is a much more resourceful way, like I said of choosing our battles. Which battle am I going to fight and which hurdle I’m not going to fight? So we need to transform something, either transform ourselves internally, transform ourselves externally. So this is where that way we transform is in three broad ways.

This is the concluding part. I use the acronym here for act. Sometimes we accept what has happened. So broadly speaking, what can we do? Say, if I am here and there is a big bully who is tormenting me.

Now what can I do? There are there is a person situation that is troubling me. So either I can just accept it, I can accept that it is there like that, or I can counter or I can transfer myself. Transfer myself means I go away from there. And all three options are perfectly valid.

The focus for a devotee like I said for others, how can I do my dharma? How can I serve Krishna in this situation? Ultimately, our dharma is to serve Krishna. So let’s take two sets of examples and I’ll conclude with that. See when the Pandavas came to the kingdom, they were born in the forest and their father unfortunately passed away and that’s when they were told by the sages, go back to the kingdom.

They told Kunti, you’re a single mother now and the forest is a dangerous place filled with deadly animals. You better go back to the kingdom. Little did those sages know that in the kingdom, in the palace was a far more dangerous animal in two legs on two legs. That was Duryodhana. So now when when they tried to poison Duryodhana tried to poison Bhima.

Bhima was Bhima somehow survived and he was enraged. He said, I’m going to trip this Duryodhana apart. I’m going to beat him to death. So at that time, Yudhishthir told him, you know, it’ll you don’t have any evidence that it was Bhima who did this. It’ll be your word against his word.

And we’re just new over here, we don’t know who in the family will support us, who will not support us, we don’t want to rip the family apart. Maybe he’s just a little insecure, maybe he could not Yudhishthir was a good reader of people. He noticed that Duryodhan had a lot of power. So but then when the Pandavas came, Bhima was much more powerful than Duryodhan. So naturally, Duryodhan might have felt a little insecure.

So Duryodhan Yudhish still wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. That is even people hurt us, there can be broadly say when some someone hurts us, there can be broadly two kinds of reasons, many, but broadly two kinds of reasons. The most positive explanation is that they are just insecure. They are not hurting us because they want to hurt us, but they’re just insecure. And if you pacify them that I’m not a threat to you, and they will support us.

The other is that they have envy or even enmity towards us. Maybe envy is in between. From envy, when it becomes active, it becomes enmity. So now, Yudhish still gave the benefit of the dog. He said, let’s accept it.

Let’s not do anything. But then what happened was, unfortunately, it did not work. What did they have to do? That they had actually, he started doing worse things. Initially, he had tried to poison Bhima, then he tried to kill the entire family including their mother also.

See, among all the ways in which you can kill an enemy, burning them is the most painful. Sometimes if there’s a big building on fire, people prefer to jump and die because in one moment it will be over. They’re burning, they’re burning for several minutes and a long time, it’s very painful. So he tried to do that. Now at that time, all the Pandavas said, okay, you know, let’s not confront them.

So they decided to remove themselves from the situation. They transferred themselves, okay? They stayed incognito for some time. Later on, when they got the kingdom, they also decided they they got half of the kingdom which is barren, they said let’s accept it and let’s live separately. So they transferred themselves away from the situation.

They moved to a different situation, let’s forget it. But then, Duryodhana was such that he kept persecuting them. He tried to dishonor their wife, then he after forty, thirty years of exile, he tried to dishonor their Krishna also. Then the Pandava decided, this person is never going to learn. So then if we are truly protectors, we are Kshatriyas, we need to protect not just our family, we need to protect society, protect humanity from this tyrant and therefore we have to fight.

So we need to fight against them. So basically there are different choices in different situations and in all of them the focus of the Pandavas was on how to serve Krishna. How can we best serve Krishna? If you look at Srila Prabhupada’s life, when Srila Prabhupada was in India, there’s a place called Jhansi, where Prabhupada has tried to start an organization. He called it the League of Devotees.

And this was between the first World or second World War at that time, there was a League of Nations that had been established. So Prabhupada had that grand vision that this would actually unify the whole world. So he started that and it was it seemed to be going well, but then suddenly there was a clique against him and the very property on which he was going to have his temple, that property was the deed to it was challenged. Now Prabhupada could have legally challenged that, fought the battle, but but Prabhupada decided to leave. He so again, if you look at this act what is act?

Remember, a is accept, c is counter. Counter. And t is? Transfer. Transfer means go somewhere else.

So when Shlupra was in Jhansi, what did he do? He transferred himself. Okay. Now why did Prabhupada transfer himself? He is reasoning, he tells in some of his talks afterwards, he said Jhansi was a small place, the people also were not so serious at that time, they’re more religious than spiritual, and they’re more ritualistic.

He said they’re not really interested in seeing seekers. So Prabhupada left for there. He said fighting this battle is not that big a thing. Now, when he came to America, he was staying, he was first staying in Butler, Pennsylvania. He was staying at the house of the Agarwal family who had sponsored his visit.

And they used to eat meat, even beef. And then would offer the proval of have his bhoga which he would cook for Krishna. He had to keep his bhoga in the same fridge. And now the hostess, she was was an Indian man who had married American women, just Gopal Agarwal and Salia Agarwal. So she she had some sensibility because her father-in-law would sometimes come to America, so she said that, Swamiji, I’m sorry, I have only one fridge over here.

And what does Prabhupada’s reply? Think nothing of it. Think nothing of it. Now, if in, say, five years down the line, ten years down the line, if in a temple, if something like that have been found, would Prabhupada say think nothing about it? Prabhupada would have said think nothing except about this.

How did this happen? Isn’t it? So at that time, Prabhupad in Butler, he accepted that. Why did he accept it? Because he knew he is not gonna permanently stay there.

These people are they are hosting him. They are not themselves. Prabhupada could make out very quickly that these people are they’re doing this as a courtesy for their father-in-law. They’re themselves not interested in becoming devotees. So Prabhupada is not interested in imposing his principle on people who are not interested.

So he said, okay. So the temple, they accept it. But then afterwards, when, around in the 1970s, when Prabhupada started working on a big project in India that was in Mumbai, in Juhu, Now there, there is a person who tried to, there’s a politician over there, he tried to take the money and not give the land. And when that happened, Srila Prabhupada, he wrote a letter to one of his supporters, he says, if he wants to steal Krishna’s land, he will have to go over my dead body. So Prabhupada fought over there, Prabhupada countered And why was that?

Prabhupada felt that Mumbai is a very important place, that Juhu is a prime property, we have already invested time, energy and money in the project. We want this for the service of Krishna. So Prabhupada was choosing his battles. So sometimes Prabhupada accepted, sometimes Prabhupada has transferred himself, Prabhupada sometimes countered. So in this way, tolerance is one virtue.

But the biggest virtue for a devotee is not tolerance, the biggest virtue is transcendence, being dedicated to the service of Krishna. And how do we serve Krishna? Sometimes we accept the situation we are in, sometimes we change the situation, sometimes we change ourselves and go to some other situation. Now most of the times, our tendency might be to fight, but that’s not very healthy. Sometimes our tendency might just go away from that situation.

But no. What is healthy is see, accepting, as I said, accept is not to suffocate. To counter is not to retaliate. It is counter means we are trying to fix the situation. We don’t hate the person.

The the person who was trying to take the money and the land from Srila Prabhupada, he passed away because of a heart attack. And then his wife tried to fight and she sent some hoodlums, some thugs to try to attack the devotes and intimidate the devotees. But then Prabhupada and the devotees were very courageous, they fought and finally she realized this is a battle I can’t win. She came to Prabhupada and then they signed the land deal properly and she says, Swamiji please forgive me for what what I did. And Prabhupada was completely saintly and ferocious, you are like my daughter, I’ll take care of you.

So countering is not retaliating. It is not that we we treat the other person as enemy and we have a vengeance. Countering is this is a wrong situation, I want to fix the situation. And transfer is not running away. Or in psychological terms, this is not that it is fight, flight, or freeze.

We’re not talking about any of these things. When we when we are talking about learning to tolerate, we’re not freezing, we’re not fighting, we’re not flight we’re not flighting, what we’re doing is we are focusing. We focus on what is the best way I can serve Krishna in this situation. And when we have that vision, that’s how we can move forward. So my parents, they didn’t just, okay, this is he’s got polio, we can’t do anything about it.

Now I what I remember when I was about two and a half or three, one of my relatives, distant relatives had come to meet us and she was consoling my mother saying that it’s so sad your son got polio. And I remember my mother’s voice very calm, clear, confident, She said, whatever he lacks physically, God will provide him intellectually. So, I don’t know why she said that, what ability she saw in me, but somehow that part stayed with me. And, yes, as I grew up, I couldn’t play outdoor games like other kids could play. And I part of me felt, you know, why why why is this happening to me?

This is unfair that I have this physical disability. But when I started studying, I noticed that, I could read rapidly, I could remember well, I could articulate clearly. And then somewhere in the back of my mind, it settled down that, okay, what did I do to deserve this intellectual ability either? Isn’t it? So life is unfair.

We all sometimes get things that we don’t deserve, but in the big picture, life is fairly unfair. Life is fairly unfair. Sometimes we get more than what we deserve and sometimes we get more than what we deserve. So the unfair part we want to tolerate, so that the fair part we can transform, we can tap that for the service of Krishna. So in this way tolerance can be very empowering for us.

I summarize what I discussed today, broadly speaking, mention three points that we’re talking about what is tolerance and how to tolerate, how basically the theme was how can tolerance be a power for us, how can tolerance give us strength and not be lead to importance, not make us weak? So I talked about three points. What are the first, what are the acronym? Weight. Weight, w I t.

W was? Wisdom. So wisdom is to know what are the big things and what are the small things. And the purpose of tolerance is to keep the big things big and the small things small. So tolerance is a great virtue because without tolerance, when life’s ups and downs happen, we will go way up and way down.

And what will happen is because of emotions that are often reversible, we will end up taking decisions. If there is no tolerance, then we’ll end up taking decisions that are irreversible. So that could be a disaster. And that’s why when something is going back, we’re going through a bad phase, tolerate it. It’s not going to last forever.

So it is meant to help us avoid irreversible decisions and that is a power. But we also need to recognize that it is not the big things that we should be tolerating against. So now if we decide, I is influence. Now what is it that we can do in a particular situation? So our focus should not be on whose karma is it.

Oh, this is this person’s karma, this is that person’s karma. Our focus should be on our dharma. What is my responsibility? What can I do in this situation to fix the situation? So when we are dharma focused, if we have the power to fight, we fight, if we have the power to we don’t have the power to fight, we accept, but then we fight in some other direction.

So the essence of tolerance is we all have to fight, but we need to choose our battles. So each of us in different situations will have different powers. So I give the example of, you know, my polio versus the cerebral palsy in America. This is the. In one case, they accepted, my father accepted.

In another case, you accept the response to find the situation because the we need to do our dharma and we do it in the best possible way. And last, he was transform. Now how do we transform? That means tolerance is not passivity. We can transform broadly.

You know, if there is somebody or some situation that is terrorizing us, they are persecuting us, then we have three options. We accept it, we counter it, or we transfer ourselves from that situation. So all three options can be done in a mood of service. So this is it is called the acronym act. Now the key difference for a devotee is how can I do my dharma?

How can I best serve in this situation? How can I serve Krishna in this situation? If we have that consideration, then we will decide what is the best thing to do. So transferring is not running away. Accepting is not suffocating.

It is not that we encountering is not retaliating. We are not focused on the situation, we’re focused on fixing the situation. So it is not fight or flight or freeze, it is focus on our service to Krishna. In this particular situation, how can I serve? So ultimately, when we chant the holy names, it is not just a utterance of a ritual, it is a prayer to Krishna, please engage me in your service.

So Krishna is actually guiding us that means, Krishna, please give me the intelligence to know which battles to fight. Krishna says I’ll give you the intelligence by which you can come to me. So let us pray to Krishna that He help us to choose our battles in the tolerance, helps us to keep small battles small and focus on serving Him in the best possible way in all situations according to our capacity whether it is by accepting, countering or transferring ourselves. So let’s repeat this prayer once, My dear Lord, can you repeat with me, My dear Lord, let tolerance increase my intelligence increase my intelligence not my importance. Thank you very much.

The post Tolerance How it empowers, not disempowers Charan Prabhu Sunday Feast 4 27 25 appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Thank you very much for coming today. Today, I speak based on the Bhagavad Gita, and we talk about the principle of how God and God’s actions in this world when we say God protects. So how does Krishna protect? What does God protection mean and how does that protection work about? So many times if we look at scripture, we look at Shastra, there are two kinds of stories that are discovered.

There are some stories in scriptures. There are some stories which majority are those which are remembered are the stories of protection to say how Draupadi was protected by the Lord or how Arjuna was victorious in the crucial war. But then in the scriptures, there are also stories where there is devastation. Arjuna, although surrendering to Krishna and although being faithful and devoted still lost his son, Abhinav. So where what does Krishna’s protection mean?

And how does Krishna protect us? So I use three principles over here to explain that there is there is Prakruti, then there is Vikruti, and there is Sanskriti. So prakriti, vikruti, and Sanskriti. Prakrti means what does the word prakriti literally mean? Nature.

What does Sanskriti mean? Sanskriti is sanskar culture. And what is vikruti? So we have nature, we have culture, and we have culture. Well, yeah, so it’s perversity.

So the vulture sometimes it’s like a vulture culture is the word that some values. Vulture may go high up, but from there it just looks for corpses. It doesn’t look for any beautiful sight that can be seen from high up in the sky. It looks for where I can find it dead flesh so that I can eat it. So now when we use the word like in the Mahabharata there is a sentence that those who are followers of dharma will be protected by that.

The Bhagavad Gita is also a search for dharma. Arjuna is asking Krishna, Ruchami Tlam Dharma Sammoog Jethaha. So asking what is dharma? So now dharma has many different meanings. And I’ll focus on one meaning, and then we’ll see how other beings fall within that.

Dharma essentially means harmonious belonging. That whatever we belong to, we belong in a harmonious way. So in every situation, we will all will have some dharmon. For example, if say now we are having a spiritual talk so when we’re having this talk at that time my dharma the way I belong harmoniously if I am playing the role of a teacher is that I prepare the subject and I am ready to speak it properly and the dharma for those who are participating over here is that they come and join that they participate in a say you’re attentive you’re participating now if suddenly somebody’s phone starts ringing very loudly Then that’s an annoyance. Now if all of you are sitting together, now right now, now many of you may know each other, some of you may not know each other, but all of you are reasonably confident that the person sitting next to you is not going to suddenly turn upon you and slap you in the face.

Don’t look at the person next to you. Now is that possible? You could say anything is possible, but we understand that if somebody has come here for a spiritual talk they will have enough discipline enough awareness of situation and they will behave in a proper way. So whichever larger unit we belong to, there has to be harmony. So we need to belong in a harmonious way.

So for example, if you’re driving on the road, then we are being a part of the road transposes. Our dharma will be to follow the rules of the so we belong in a harmonious. So dharma in that sense has two components to it. There is individual and there is social. So individual Dharma means that I need to belong in a harmonious way and when I belong in a harmonious way, the society, the larger unit to which I am belonging should also reward me appropriately.

So there we follow the traffic rules, but then those who are overseeing the traffic rules should also be just. That means if somebody breaks the law, then they should pull them over, they should fine them, they should maybe take away their license, arrest them, but if somebody is not breaking the rules and still there is it, that will be a problem. Sometimes discrimination happens against certain groups of people. So dharma is both individual and social. For harmonious belonging to be possible, there has to be the all the components the individual and the collective should work properly.

Now if we consider in the Bhagavad Gita itself both meanings of dharma are seen. In 2.7 Krishna is asked being asked by Arjuna, I want to know what is dharma. It’s interesting he is not just asking what is mama dharma? What is my dharma? That’s of course the implied question, but he is asking a more universal question.

What is dharma? What is the right thing to do? Now when Krishna later on speaks in the Bhagavad Gita in the fourth chapter in the famous verses which describe the avatar, So now when he says I come to establish dharma, what does that mean? Does it mean when Krishna comes everybody will follow dharma at that time? Well, no.

There will always be people who will misuse their freedom. But at least the social order is made in such a way that those who are just those who are virtuous are rewarded and those who are vicious are punished. So, when Krishna comes to establish Dharma, that’s at a collective level. Now, even Krishna does not force Duryodhana to become dharmic. He persuades and doesn’t listen.

So dharma has a voluntary aspect. If the police cannot force people to follow the traffic rules. They don’t follow the traffic rules, there’ll be consequences. So there are in general, in life there are choices and there are consequences. Now, normally speaking if there is Dharma in society, if there is virtue in Buddhist society then positive choices will lead to positive consequences.

If somebody is helpful, kind and then they will be appreciated, they will be praised. If somebody is mean, somebody is cruel, they’ll be criticized, they’ll be content. So negative actions will have negative consequences. But when there is Adharma in society, what do you think happens? What do you think happens?

Positive actions lead to negative consequences. Somebody who is kind and helpful, that person gets exploited. That person gets abused, mistreated, taken for a ride. On the other hand, if there’s negative, then what happens? There are positive results of that.

Somebody, for example, is mean and cruel and exploitative, they say, you know, it’s clever. That’s not clever. That’s terrible. Isn’t it? So sometimes, you know, if we all know there are certain destructive habits, if taking drinking alcohol.

You see, in the western world, the general idea is that drink but don’t become drunk. That’s the idea. In fact there was a western thinker, European thinker who said taste of wine is the proof that God loves us. If God did not exist and God did not love us, how could something as tasty as wine exist? There are so many tasty things in the world.

Why fix it on that? But the point is that normally if a person is disciplined, regulated, if somebody says, you know, oh, I don’t drink, then, yeah, you’re a disciplined person. You’re a good person. Regulated person. That’s how society should be.

But if somebody doesn’t drink and say in college sometimes kids tease each other, you know, you are just, baby drinking your mother’s milk. When will you grow up? As if growing up means, drinking alcohol. So when somebody is doing something good and they are mocked for it, they are ridiculed for it. That is one sign of other.

Similarly, if somebody does sometimes people have drinking competitions. Now who can drink more? And if you drink more and more and still you act as if you are sober. Wow. Drink doesn’t affect you at all.

So that’s drinking you’re taking poison into your body. So Adharma is not just some religious morality given by somebody and if you don’t follow that, that’s Adharma. Yes. Religious morality is there, but Dharma is a universal principle of existence that we all need to belong to whatever unit we are a part of. And we need to belong in the proper way.

And if we belong in the proper way, then we should be rewarded for that. So, that is the principle of that. So, now if we look at this, Dharma means harmonious belonging. Now, let’s go back to three terms I use Prakriti, Sanskriti and Vikriti. Now what is Prakriti?

Now each of these levels have dharma. In Prakriti, the dharma. Dharma means the harmonious way of belonging. His mind is right. This is the rule of nature.

The rule of nature is survival of the fittest. Now, of course, it is true even the fittest don’t survive. Everybody dies eventually. However, what Darmaine talked about is not entirely wrong. It’s and it’s not what he talked about.

It’s a basic fact of nature that in nature, might is right. So in nature, if a deer can’t run as fast as a tiger kissing it, what will happen? The deer will die. Now the deer may say, you know, I’m harmless. I’ve never hurt anyone.

Yeah. It doesn’t matter. That this is the mind, relevant bite is speed. Now if the tiger or the lion doesn’t run fast enough. The deer speaks, You dear, how dare you run away from me?

I am the king of the forest. You are the king but I want to run away. Krishna says nuganam rugesh broham. Among animals I am the king. He talks about lion.

But still doesn’t matter. In nature the rule is might is right. So whoever has strength, that person wins. In the there is a saying jiske lathi, buske beis. So the idea is this is a basic rule of nature.

So prakriti that’s why we said there’s a law of the jungle and especially now if in a society law and order breaks down. If say the the police stop function. If in a society the criminals take charge then what happens? There’s a law of the jungle. Then there are criminals in charge in society.

They will not care who is who is law abiding, who is law breaking, all that they will say is who has well, let’s steal the intro. So so basically society in can also degenerate to the level of animal world. That is human society can also become existing at the level of the jungle. At the level of the jungle, it is might is right. So this is prakriti.

In prakriti, the dharma is might is right. As in the language of our old friend, it’s survival of the fittest. So now interestingly there is sanskriti. Sanskriti means culture. Now sometimes you say Sanskriti means wearing a particular kind of clothes, eating a particular kind of food, putting particular kind of markings on our head.

These are all parts of Sanskriti but they are not the essence. The essence of Sanskriti is that the Dharma here changes. Dharma means the harmonious way of belonging is here might plus virtue is right. Mind plus virtue is right. Now, it’s interesting that here also might is important.

See, Sanskriti is built on Prakriti. Sanskriti does not reject Prakruti. So, what does it mean? Here, it is not survival of the fittest, it is often sacrifice by the fittest. Sanskriti means sacrifice by the fittest.

So, what does sacrifice by the fittest mean? That it means that if say there’s a fire, in Los Angeles, there’s a horrible fire month or a couple of months ago, devastating loss happened. Now at that time, there are trained firefighters and they are expected to be fitter than everyone else and then they could say that, you know, there’s fire happening in their home. Let me go. No.

They are fit. They’re expected to run into the fire and save those who are and save those who are in danger. So, in Sanskriti, we don’t leave it to survival of the fittest, if you are unfit you die. Even if you are unfit, the fit will come to help. In Sanskriti means say, if a person is blind, he is trying to cross the road.

It is not that people with eyes push that person, get out of the harbor. Sanskriti means those who have eyes will help that person. It is maybe they’ll be in a hurry, but no. Okay. This person is not as fit as I am.

Let me help this person. So now still the law of nature is still there. What is the law of nature? That the stronger people will be stronger. The stronger people might will still be right.

If a person is very weak and that person goes into a burning fire to save someone else, that person will not be able to lift anyone. That person will not even walk out themselves. If a person can’t swim and the person says I will save someone who is drowning. They will not save someone who is drowning. Somebody will have to save save them when they start drawing.

So might remains the defining reality in the world. The might can be different kinds of might. It can be it can be physical strength. It can be skill. It can be intellectual power.

So for example, if terrorists have AK 40 sevens and the police have simple pistols. Now what is going to happen? Who is going to win? The terrorists are going to win. So might is still going to be right.

Nobody can change that principle in life. Might is right. Even the Pandavas in the Mahabharata as long as they didn’t have power they suffered. When they didn’t have power Bhima was poisoned. When they didn’t have power then they were attempted to be born alive.

It was eventually when they married Draupadi when an alliance was formed with another powerful king And that’s when Dhritarashtra had to take their claim for kingship seriously. And even then Dhritarashtra tried to whistle away out by giving them a barren half of the hill. But the point is that might is right is a fundamental principle of existence. But cultured society will be where there is sanskriti. It is not just might is right.

It is might plus virtue. That is why Krishna says two things indicating the seventh chapter and the tenth eleventh verse he is talking about. And he also says that Balam balavatam cha kam raaga vivarjita. So, Bala will be there everywhere, but that Bala is to be recommended which is not driven by selfish desire. Kam raaga vivarchita.

So, Sanskriti is where might plus virtue is right where those who are virtuous are protected by those who are might. Where the strength is used in the service of Marjana. Now as contrasted with this so there is prakriti and there is Sanskrit. Now if we had survival of the fittest as the rule in human society, it is partly a rule in human society. No doubt.

But it cannot entirely be the governing principle. In a family, say if one child is not very intelligent, maybe the child is not very competent. Then what happens? Other family members take care of that child. We say that cannot be cannot take care lifelong and each each person has to learn to be responsible.

But the idea is that in any group of people where there’s a sense of community, if one person is in trouble, we don’t say that’s oh you are unfit. Yes. It’s your problem. No. Others come to me.

That is Sanskritly. So, now as contrasted with this, there is Vikranti. Now in Vikranti what happens? Might plus wise is right. When there is difficulty in society, might and strength is used for the innate protection and perpetuation of vice for selfishness, for anger, for greed, for lust.

So, that is Vikrant. So, when Krishna said dharma a viruddho hute shu kamosmi vraddarsha. This is kama that is that can mean desire in general and it can be sexual desire in particular. Now kama needs to be in the pursuit of that. Karma should be engaged in in a way that a person can belong harmonious.

Belong harmoniously means what? Right? Karma is directed within the institution of marriage. But when that is not there? Vikruti is that a person who has who has lust, that person gains might and that person that person does anything in empathic.

Now that might could be physical power by which they overpower others. That might could be charming words that they speak that might could be the looks that they have by which they seduce others, renewed others. So, Ravana’s abduction of Sita that is Vikruti where might plus vice becomes right. Now when there is Vikruti in society then the vicious are rewarded. Like I said here what happens is dharma is when we do positive we get positive and we do negative we get negative.

Adharma is when we do positive and get negative. We do negative and we get positive. So this is the situation of Adharma. And this Adharma is where Vikruti becomes dominant. So now in every society we consider that Prakruti is the default reality and from Prakruti, we can rise to Samskruti or we can go down to Vikruti.

Now, this is a so so site choice for society, but this is a choice for every individual and at every moment sometimes it’s in a big way sometimes it’s a small way say no we are hungry And say, there are gulab jamuns. There’s there are 10 guests, and there are 10 gulab jamuns. Now we all want to enjoy good food. So for kruti means I’m hungry, I want to eat. Sanskriti would mean, okay.

Even if I get first to the fridge, I can’t eat all the gulagins. I should divide it. Vikruti means that I gobble down as much as I can and I hide the remaining and say, oh, there’s no gulagas today. So that would be Vikruti. So basically, for us at each moment, each moment there is a choice.

For example, the words we speak. Sometimes if we have power, we can dominate others and we can force them to do what we want them to do. Now that we that having that power that authority that is that is prakriti but we could use it to educate others. Okay. This is the right thing to do.

Therefore, you should do it or we could use it to exploit others. If you don’t do this, I’ll destroy you. So this choice between from prakriti to sanskriti or vekrti. That is a choice we have to make at every moment. Now Dharma as I said Dharma means harmonious belonging.

I’ll make two more points and then we’ll open for question answers that and each of these points will take one and a half hours each. So the Dharma as I said it means harmonious belonging. So each one of us belongs to many units. So for example we belong to a family. From a family we get something and we are expected to kill somebody.

So similarly we may be working in a company. We work in an office. So when we belong in the office we get salary from the office and we are expected to do work as the way to belong to our movies. We belong to a community. We belong to a country.

So each of us belong to many larger units and thus we have many different dharmas. For each unit that we belong to we have a dharma over there. So if we are in driving in America we drive on one side of the room. If we go to India we drive on another side of the room. The specifics of Dharma may have any but we are meant to belong to whichever whole we belong in a harmonious way.

And like this if we consider there are larger and larger wholes and then the largest whole is God is Krishna. So, when Krishna says, so, he is not telling that you give up Dharma. The emphasis is take up the So say if we are working in a company and sometimes if you are working in software company, you might be a part of we might be a part of two teams. In one team, we are expected to do one thing, another team we are expected to do another thing. And now if both team leaders want us to work at the same time, what do we do at that?

That is a Dharma Samgata. So we are belonging to two holes and two holes are pulling us into different directions. If say there is a deadline in our workplace and we have to be there in office at the same time maybe our child has got into trouble in school and we are as parents have come into the school in which I have met with the accident or child has got in some kind of trouble. Now okay should I go to school or should I stay at work? That is Dharma Samkut.

When there are two dharmas pulling us in two different directions so which hole do I belong to? That is something which has to be decided and we all need to be able to decide that care And this can be a tension this can be a cause of tension. For those of us say who have come from India to America then for us our identity still we are Indians. Although we are born in America, we live in America, we may have American citizenship. I have seen that Indians, they live for thirty years in America, but they are much more interested in Indian politics than they are in American politics.

Now American politics affecting them, so they are more alert to it. But we all have a certain sense of belonging. Now children, if they are born here, then what happens is they have two dharmas. As well as children who are born in America, they are like coconuts. What do you call coconuts?

They are they are brown from outside but white from inside. So what happens is that when the skin is brown, so you could say genetically or genealogically or ethnically they’re Indian. But psychologically, culturally often they think like Americans. So then what do you do? You know which identity do we highlight?

That becomes the conflict. It’s a Dharma Sankat. There’s a term called ABCD. Have any of you heard of this? Yes, American born confused they cease.

Some people are confused. That’s a Dharmasankat. What do we do? In today’s world for example, women face this competing dharmas especially. See, one of the big emphasis of feminism is, oh women should have a career and it’s fine.

It’s like women having a job is nothing against traditional culture. The in the gopis used to sell butter. There’s a fruit vendor over there in Krishna Lila also. But there’s one dharma is okay I want to have a job, I want to have a career, I want to have my own identity. Now other dharma is, I want to be a mother, I want to take care of my children.

Now these two dharmas, sometimes they pull us in different directions. Now which dharma is important? What is happening is that while both dharmas may be important biologically there’s a choice is do I want to be something to someone or do I want to be everything for some? You know, like, if somebody just goes into a career, okay, you become a software engineer, you become this, you become that. No.

We become like an interchangeable or replaceable unit in a large associate. Nothing bad about that. But for a month, for a child, the mother is not interchangeable or replace. To some extent that we can apply the same thing to the father also, but specifically nature has arranged that the mother is the primary caregiver, not just biologically, but even psychologically. Mothers are much more attuned to be able to take care of children.

So now what happens is two dharmas may pull us into different directions. So which dharma do we decide to belong to more? In the West, it has happened that more and more women choose career and then often the propaganda comes that marriage and motherhood are like traps. And then the result of that is they by the time they were 35, 40 or some 45 income, they feel very lonely and empty and they’re like, what am I doing? What do I have in my life?

And it’s another big problem is sociologically population is decreasing in the Western. The population will decrease enormously unless if there had been no immigration. Only immigration that is keeping the population balanced to some extent. Immigrants generally bear bear more children than the than the what they call the Vast, right? Anglo Saxon protesters, Americans, Caucasians.

So in many of the big cities in America among the white population, the number of pets is more than number of children. So what happens is that the need to nurture is there and we don’t have a need to nurture, we don’t address the need to nurture by taking care of a baby when we get a pet. I was at the Govardhan Eco Village and it’s a place in India where there’s a lot of spiritual opportunity and atmosphere for for people for anywhere but especially for westerns. And lot of yoga teachers come over there. They come to learn yoga, the yoga students come, their teachers come to learn to further deepen their practice, they bring their students.

So I met one person over there, I said, yes, I asked him what do you do? American person, he said I am a yoga teacher. And what? Yoga? He said, no, dog teacher.

Says, what is dog? Doga is yoga with dogs. I want to do everything with my dog so actually if you see Google there are pictures like you know the person will be doing yoga stretching and the dog will be searching its paws and the person that shifts us and I don’t know how dog will do shifts us but whatever so there is dooga and then there is koga what is koga Yeah, cats. So basically the need to nurture is there and that is now missed there is elected elsewhere. So but the point is it’s attention is the concept of dharma and dharma samovar different dharmas pulling us in different directions.

That is something which is universe. Universe, we cannot avoid that. So when I was in, when I think I started coming to America for twenty fourteen. So 2015, I came by the coast of actually. 2060, ’20 ’70.

So I was once in Texas. I was giving a class, and after in that class, an American girl asked a question, why don’t religions fight among each other? And I gave an elaborate answer. And I could say I talked about three more. They talked about extremism and everything.

She was quite satisfied with the answer I could see. Then after the class, I was talking with people, and then she came forward and said this question had been burdening me for a long time. You have relieved me. I’m so grateful. Can I give you a hug?

Now I’ve been told that this possibility is there. And in the western culture, hugging is just a normal expression of affection. That doesn’t seem like that for us and certainly as a Brahmachari. So now what happened for me that as a Brahmachari obviously I have to say no. But as a teacher of Bhagwadida, as a preacher, I should not discourage it.

So I had talked with my spiritual guides and they said that for them, that’s an expression of their appreciation and attention. We cannot reject that. So then I just look at the devotee was with the host over there, organizing the provost. I figured, please help me. So he helped me, but in the most unexpected way.

He said, he’s a monk. On his behalf, you can hug me. And his wife was next to him. When the wife said, I’m his wife on his behalf. So I told this incident to my spiritual master, Raghav, but he was laughing and he said that.

No. We cannot accept the expression of affection, but we cannot reject the affection that has been offered. So we have to find a sensitive way in which to deal in such situations. So the point is that we all have multiple identities, multiple roles, multiple dharmas we have and often there will be a tension between them. So when Krishna says Sarva dharman parit jama mekam sharanam raja what does he mean?

He means that when two dharmas are pulling us into different directions, should we do this or should we do that? Let us focus on Krishna and let us think of how best can we serve Krishna in this situation. So ma ekam sharanam ji. For Arjuna, the two dharmas that were pulling him in two different directions were at that time Arjuna was a Kshatriya and Arjuna was a Kuru Nandena, he was a Kuru Mancha leader. So as a Kshatriya as a Kshatriya dharma was fight.

Anybody who is a aggressor, anybody who is a aggressor, that person needs to be killed. But now he was not just he had a he belonged to the Guru Amisha he was a Guru leader. He was a Guru. He had a Kula Dharma. Kuladharma is if we are belonging to a particular community, a particular race, a particular dynasty, a particular family, we are going to protect the Hinduism.

So Kshatriya dharma told him fight. And Kuladharma told him, both fight. So does he had a what do I do in such situations? So now what does Krishna tell over here? That if two dharmas are pulling us in opposite directions instead of looking here and looking there and getting confused look upward look upward to see ultimately I belong to Krishna.

I’m a part of Krishna and in this particular situation, how can I best search? How can I best search? So there Krishna wanted that Dharma we established in society and for that purpose Arjuna needed to fight. So when Arjuna says I will fight, how did he fight? He is not saying I look I am Kshatriya and therefore I am fighting.

He says Krishna, I will do your will and if your will means fighting, I will fight. So going back to the earlier example I gave that somebody is working in the company and they have two team leads. They belong to two teams and each team lead wants them to do the same something at the same time. What can they do? I suppose that they have access to the CEO and the CEO they write into there is two projects whatsoever the CEO says you know okay you work on this project but what about the other team that team need to get get angry with me I’ll take care of him.

I’ll deal with him. So the idea is that Krishna is not telling Arjuna to give up Dharma. Krishna is telling Arjuna to have a higher vision of a bigger belonging, a bigger belonging. For example, in the Mahabharata said that for the larger whole, sometimes the smaller whole is being supervised For the sake of the family, one member will sometimes be sacrificed. For the sake of a village, one family will be sacrificed.

For the sake of a country, one village will be sacrificed. Now, of course, ultimately, it says for the sake of the soul, the whole world can be sacrificed. But the idea is that there is higher dharma and dual dharma, and the highest dharma is our dharma for Krishna, belonging to Krishna. Having said this, so what are we discussing over here that how does Dharma work in this world? So sometimes there will be tension between Dharma.

Dharma basically is might is right. So, but might with virtue is right that will be sanskriti. That is the kind of dharma we want in society. Not that the law of the jungle. So, now that brings us to the last call Janik that when Arjuna won the Kurukshetra war did he will because of the knowledge of the Bhagavad Gita or because of the knowledge of archery that he had learnt throughout his life?

What do you think? Both. Sorry? Both. Both.

Yes. Now both. Why both? Because the knowledge of the Bhagavad Gita gave him a purpose. Okay, what am I meant to do?

And the knowledge of Archery gave him the tools. So we need the purpose. What what am I meant to do? Why am I meant to do it? And then we need tools for it.

So if Arjuna had not been that great in Archer, he could have fallen to the fox. Karna could have killed him. Dhruva Pratyakshmi. So Abhimanyu was not that great messenger. Of course the opponents resorted to Adharma.

They fixed up the attacker but eventually he was killed. So in this world for us if we want to do some service, so I’ll close with one diagram. This is epitomized by Hanuman. It is actually also Hanuman like Arjuna, he’s a great devotee, he’s also great warrior. So Hanuman’s folded hands, they signify bhakti.

Now bhakti in one sense is the ultimate dharma. We want to belong to Krishna. So that is dharma taken to his ultimate. Hanuman, the mace that he hands is in his hands that signifies Shraddi. So for us to succeed in life, we need Shakti and we need Rakti.

We consider four quadrant diagram. We need Shakti and we need Rakti When both are there then there will be success. Now suppose somebody is asked to cook for a festival and they have bhakti. They cook in a very devotional prayerful mood, they have they have nice picture of deities, the kirtan is going on, they also pray to Krishna, they will start cooking but they just don’t know So they have bhakti, but they don’t have shakti. When they cook, Krishna will be pleased by their cooking, and only Krishna will be pleased.

Isn’t it? So bhakti without shakti, there will be spiritual but there’ll be material failure. There is spiritual success but at a material level, there will be success. So if you want to be successful in the material world, we need to acquire the required shunt, whichever field that might be. If somebody wants to lead a kirtan, they may have a great devotional heart, but if they don’t know how to sing, they may sing off off tune, and Krishna will be pleased with the singing, but you know others will not be.

So the idea is that if there is no bhakti and no shakti, you know that there’s only failure, material and spiritual failure. Now if there is Shakti but no Bhakti then what will happen? Like industrial success. Shakti there’ll be material success but there will be spiritual in it. So now what we want is both bhakti and shakti in our life.

So through our practice of, the sadhana we do our chanting, we do kampasat samura, we all try to increase bhakti. But by all this we can also develop our shakti. Sometimes we have particular Shaktis already. We can use them in Krishna. Sometimes the practice of bhakti uses clarity.

K. These are the gifts that I have been given. These are the gifts that I can use. And then we can use those in Krishna’s sense. So if you see Arjuna Shakti was different from Bhima Shakti.

Bhima had great physical prowess and Arjuna did not have. Now Yudhishthira Shakti was different from Yudhishthira Shakti. If you consider the perspective of character, you cannot think of two brothers who are as different as Yudhishthira and Bhima. Yudhishthira was a Kshatriya, but he was almost like a Brahminical Kshatriya. That bend backwards and but try to avoid conflict.

Bhima was a Kshatriya Kshatriya He was not like Duryodhana. He was not out to abuse his power for selfish purposes. But still he was different. So the point is that we all will have different kinds of Shakti. And when Krishna says Maa Anusmarat Yudhye Chah.

Maa Anusmar is our bhakti. Yudhye Chah is with our particular skills, with our particular strengths we fight in this world for whatever service we are called upon to whatever dharma we are called upon to do. And when we do both that’s when we’ll be successful. Srila Prabhupada’s life if we consider he had always great Bhakti who read his writings written in 1940s the way back to God that he published over there. He is filled with profound realization.

However, at that time he did not have any followers. He did not have any references. His message did not go very far. The message was potent. When he came to America, he got followers.

When he had that shakti, then Shakti I am talking into the material manifestation of the Shakti. When that happened the Prichy ex now this is expanded. So this is the principle each one of us when we want to serve Krishna, we want bhakti and we also want Shakti. Shakti means whatever particular service we want to do we need to have the appropriate skill set for that sense. And when Srila Prabhupada asked how will the Krishna conscious movement spread?

He said it will be by organizational intelligence. One of the questions he was asked towards the end of his life. Now he did not say you should wake up and attend mughalati every day. He did not say that you should charge him to stay in a hotel. Of course, all those things are important.

But if the Krishna conscious movement is to spread in the material world, we need the appropriate material skills. We need the appropriate material skills. What is material skills? We need to plan properly, we need to follow-up properly, we need to organize properly. So if we are not doing that then we won’t reach.

One of my friends, he has now become a devotee. He he told me that when he was searching for his path, he wrote he wanted to this was before the Internet 02/2007, ‘2 thousand and ‘8. Internet and email had not become that big. So he said they were there. He said he wrote through 25 temples, big temples in India.

He does an email, send physical mail asking what what you know I want to learn more about Hinduism. I want to learn more about Bhagavad. I want to learn more about Dharma. Can you teach tell me some things? Said I wrote to 25 temples and I wrote to 25 churches.

And among the 25 temples, not even one temple was put. Not all of them were called temples. You know the way these temples. Among the 25 churches, there was not even one church that did not respond. He said all of them responded within one week, ten days.

He said five of them, they send me free Bibles. And two of them actually send a representative to give a Bible to me at my home. So now in this world, might is right. Those who market themselves better will reach better even if there’s some substance is not not that great. So might is right will always be a truth.

Now it is this is not to criticize Christianity as adharma. I’m just talking about a principle over here that those who are competent, those who are at a material level having the appropriate skills and working appropriately, they will reach more people. That’s just a fact of life. So when the war started, when the Islamic rulers were attacking India, Indian Kings would fight on elephants and the Muslim kings would come on chariots. Now the elephant has a certain level of majesty but just because you are so high up makes you also vulnerable.

So if one Muslim king would shoot one arrow and a king is killed, the whole army would collapse. Shivaji Maharaj changed the complete dynamic. If you see Shivaji Maharaj, the famous king in Maharashtra, you will not see a single image of him on a chariot. He is always on horseback. The Muslims would come on chariots.

Now horses without chariots run much faster. So he was outnumbered. The strategy he used was sudden attacks. Guerrilla warfare. As nowadays they call it asymmetric warfare.

So it was Asymmetric. He just did not have the forces. So what did he do? He used the Shakti of speed. So the Shakti we all whatever battles we need to fight we need to acquire the right Shakti.

To the extent we acquire the right shakti, to that extent we will be success. So shakti and bhakti are both required. At the end of the Bhagavita, Krishna says Yatra Yogeshwara Krishna, Sanjay says actually. Where there is Krishna and where there is Arjuna? There there will be victory.

So there there will be glory. There there will be happiness. So in this way Krishna and Gita calls all of us to actually grow in our lives in both Shakti and bhakti. Well, someone writes what I discussed today. I talked about the Gita’s teachings three principles how we can apply them in our life.

So I talked about first is that there are three terms. The first is prakriti. I the first the first part is I basically introduced terms. Prakriti means might is right. Now on that basic truth, we can move in two directions.

Sanskriti means what? Anyone remember? Yes. Might will always be right, but it is might plus virtue. So it’s Sanskriti is the rule of the jungle.

In the jungle, if an animal animal becomes weak, animal becomes, become develops, becomes lame or blind, They just fall prey. It will just be devoured by others. But in human society, if somebody is weak, it is not sacrificing, surviving of the fittest, it is sacrificing of the fittest. That is Sanskriti. As compared to that, Vikruti is what?

Might plus wise. Might plus wise is right. That means though might is right will always be a truth, but above that we can have various truths. And then I talk about Dharma means harmonious belonging. So Dharma has two aspects.

There’s individual aspect that I do my part properly. If I am driving, I follow the rules of traffic. And then there’s a social part. Social part is where that I do my part rightly, and I’m not pulled over because I belong to a particular community and I’m not just allowed to go scot free just because, I belong to a privileged community. So there’s individual dharma and the social dharma.

So individual dharma means we make right choices. We belong harmonious. And social dharma means that the right choices will lead to the right results, so the right consequences. So the positive will positive actions will give positive rewards. Now Adharma means the opposite.

Adharma means that those who do positive get negative and those who get do negative get positive. So now how might Adharma occur? Adharma may occur when there is Vikruti in suicide. When those in charge are not concerned about virtue, they become concerned about vice. So might becomes used in the service of vice.

Then I talk about Dharmasanphet or Dharmasanphet. We belong to we have because we belong to many different roles. We all may sometimes feel pulled by different roles. Like a parent may feel pulled. Should I continue working at home or should I go and take care of my child who is having some crisis?

So basically we all belong to multiple holes and we could say each one is larger than others and the largest one is is Krishna. So that is God. So when we feels that means one duty is pulling us in one direction and other duty is pulling us in the opposite direction. For women their maternal and professional roles may pull them in opposite directions. For a preacher culture may impen them to do one thing but compassion may require them to do another thing or sensitivity may require them to do another thing.

So we are pulling in different directions. So what is the solution? At such times we need to look upwards look upward towards Krishna and see how best can I serve Krishna in this situation and then act accordingly? And then lastly we discussed that we should resolve dharma properly and then we talked about the principle that samskrti has to be built on top of pranupati that we all we need to acquire the appropriate shakti in our life. We discussed this diagram that there is shakti.

Shakti is not just physical strength but skill that is required for service and that is good. This is the best situation where there is all around success, material and spiritual success already. So now he if we have Abdi Vadhu Shabdi, we’ll have spiritual success but not material success. Now if we have neither there’ll be no success at all and there can be material success if there’s shakti but there’ll be no spiritual success. So it is our responsibility to develop bhakti by sadhana but also feel responsibility if you want to do a service at bhakti then we also need to develop the right shakti.

So seva if you have a seva vow, if you have a service attitude, that means the Bhakti has not just devotion, but devotional service. So devotion is seva vow means we try to increase our bhakti, and we also try to increase the shakti which we can do our own. So if you want to build a temple for Krishna, bhakti that intention is good. We do nice kirtan, we do nice identity worship but we may also need to raise funds for that. And so Bhakti and Shakti when both come together that’s when we could actually practically transform the world.

And each one of us may have different Shaktis which you can use in Krishna’s Essence. Thank you very much. Are there any questions or comments? Yes. So you’re talking about the response, Kriti.

How would that be applied in a corporate culture? For example, this start helping somebody who does not have correct strength. That would also be leading to, ineffectiveness of the organization that you are spoon feeding somebody in higher that can be solved. How would you worry about this? Good question.

I need to go to get into politics. I understand. Yeah. So this basically this is the fundamental question of conflict between the political left and the political right. You know, what is the idea of the political right?

The right is all about the right are conservative. Those on the left are liberal. So what we can understand is those who are on the right are concerned with what is right in the existing structure. And those who don’t fit in that structure, that’s your problem. You exist.

You settle. So the right are concerned about they see how many things are working in society. Preserve that. Now the left are concerned with those who are missed out by the existing system. So the right and the left both have any concerns say for example if we have say consider credit in India now credit is immensely popular but say probably ten, fifteen, twenty years ago.

The cricket coaching academies and cricket talent scouts they’ll mostly be in the big cities. Mumbai has a disproportionate number of players being a part of the Indian cricket. Is it that Mumbai has more talented cricket players born in Mumbai than anyone else? That could be one possibility. Other possibility could be that that the the support is a supporting environment, is much more.

So now the the right will see, this is working. We are getting so many so many good candidates coming over. But the left will say, oh, good. All other part of the country is left out. We should have coaching and there also.

We should be. So now who is right? Sometimes the right is right, sometimes the left is left is right. What that means is sometimes we need to conscript that this is still and it’s working and we can’t just reject the system because some people don’t fit into it. But sometimes it may be that the left is right.

Okay? Not many people are left out of it or the people who are left out of the system. There’s a they they are suffer severely. So for example, now in in the case of right, they focus a lot on individual response. You know, you work hard.

You raise yourself up by your bootstraps. In the left, there’s a lot of emphasis on social justice, social change, systemic adjustments that so now which is required will interpense. It’s not that there’s one absolute answer. Sometimes so now in the case of your specific question, if people are incompetent, can they become competent? Maybe, maybe not.

So everybody needs a bit of a helping hand sometime or year and we should have an ethos when we offer children a helping hand. But it shouldn’t happen that somebody offers a helping hand and the other person expect that your hand should be there all the time for the rest of my life. Everybody then you can actually take a response. So in general competence is like Shakal. People need to have basic competence.

If people don’t have competence and people don’t have the commitment to develop the competence then helping them is really not helping. Like I think it was in Harvard there’s a big court case There’s an Indian boy. He wanted to get into medicine and he had nearly 3.94 perfect cGBA. He didn’t get it. He was in South India.

So he did some some kind of underhand things and then he brought some kind of genetic connection and he claimed that he is black and he got his meditations from all I believe universities. He actually he entered in and studied for one year and then he just dropped out and he is going to book out with experience so exposing the college. So basically Indian and Chinese students they sued Harvard because they found that now a student with maybe 2.9 c g p a from certain communities could get in and somebody with 3.9 c g p a wouldn’t get in now. So actually in many ways Indian universities are much more transparent about their admission quotas or admission systems. Now if you have what above this much percentage there’s a cut off.

So although the law will get admission, although the law will not get. But many of the big universities in America they don’t reveal their their priority rights. They’re very non transacting. So now America prided itself on being a meritocracy. But you know if say if merit is not there I have a devoted friend who works in in Harvard although the whole environment is a leftist and he said I cannot speak this public name.

He says that when through this diversity quota students come in they just can’t cope. Like some everybody in the class has a IK of 141 student has got IQ of one twenty. Then what happens is you can either you have to slow down everyone to fit that one person or that person’s still are they struggling to catch? And then that often these people just drop out and they feel very they feel I failed with my life. Instead of going to Ivy League College, they could have gone to a middle level college and they would have actually succeeded.

So the point is Shakti will always be required. Now sometimes support is needed. So this giving support cannot change the reality that competence will be required. So a person does not have a basic level of competence then just creating social change is not going to correct those changes. So that’s why the broad answer will be a support should be given but support should be given so that the person starts learning and growing and taking responsibilities.

The person either is not willing to do that or the person is just not able to do that. Then maybe the way support should be offered is give that person some other group or help them encourage them to find some other group. Just a follow-up, probably. So in society, it is different. In, organization, it is different.

Society, we may even the person is not able to raise him up for the competence, we may still help out. Yeah. But in organization, it’s not like that. It it it works everywhere also. Society also to what extent can you do it?

Many countries now especially which is that? There are some countries where the China is facing this problem, Japan is facing this problem. They will have a very large older population and the younger population is not there at all. So there is no very few people who are wealth creators and there are large number of people who are dependent on socials their version of social security or whatever. So So how much can society support image?

I think in Italy, in two countries, I think Italy and Poland, they have arranged that that actually, like, any couple who has more than two children, then the pope will personally baptize their child. There’s that much of a crisis over there. So they release they have they have financial incentives that the government provides some support But the thing is that society can support only up to a particular point. So I think the extent of support will differ from the particular organization that one is part. So especially if one is in a very competitive field.

Say, for example, if somebody in the military, if you don’t have competence, you will be killed. You will cause other people to die. So if somebody in some other field where it’s not so high stakes, then, you know, more support can be given. So I think it which which four you do not also make a difference. Yes, sir.

Okay. I understand. Hello, Krishna, Progy. You said, Progy, when we are in the two dharmas in opposite direction, We need to look up to the lord of Narsisha. Correct.

But in that situation, our mind will not go there. Our mind will go this two situations one. Correct. How can you talk? Well, you have to get frustrated looking in two directions.

So that is one way. The other is we have some devotees who guide us somebody who is looking upward and they help us look upward. See ultimately every one of us has to come to terms with the finiteness of the human condition. That means that we are all finite beings and we cannot do everything that we like. We cannot even do many things that we want to do.

So we have to make choices And the idea is that ultimately when we look up, it is not just in frustration. It will be a lot of frustration. But eventually, it is by the understanding that God has a part for me to play. But that does not mean I have to do the whole thing. Now I have a part to play and I meant to play my part as well as I But then when we surrender depend on Krishna that doesn’t mean you don’t play our part.

It means I will play my part but that doesn’t mean I have to control everything and to make everything else. So that’s why sometimes we have to decide that this if you connect with Krishna we may be able to understand the Dharmi Yogam from Krishna says that we will get a little bit of clarity of confidence that okay this is the part I should play right now I should prioritize right now. Other things will be taken care of afterwards okay I take care later Rokshana will take care things will work out so that understanding that I am a part of a team We say often this we use that as a shloka to beat bioethics. The philosophical implication is that the eternal parts of Krishna do not become one with Krishna. But its psychological implication is that if we are always parts of Krishna that means we will always have parts in Krishna’s plan.

Krishna will always have a part to play for us. Say somebody take a cricket team and now they will only if they are in the cricket team of India, they will have a part in the team. Now what is that part? Are there crit keepers, fast ballers, media pacers, spring baller, and attacking batsmanner, sheet time, middle order batsman, whatever. I think that will be but they have a part.

So we are always on team Krishna. We always have a part. Which part it may be that we’ll gain? Sometimes you may have to accept that this part I can no longer play. And I’ll focus on this part and then play this part.

So the last question before we start with thank you very much.

The post Why we need shakti along with bhakti, Sacramento – Chaitanya Charan appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

In today’s fast-paced digital world, it’s refreshing to come across individuals who use their online presence to share messages of love, compassion, and spirituality. Kishori Jani, a devoted follower of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) and popular social media influencer, is one such individual who has been successfully spreading the teachings of Lord
Read More...

The discussion focuses on a section where various demigods and celestial beings are offering prayers to Lord Nishingadeva (Narasimha), who has just killed the demon king Hiranyakashipu. Each group of celestial beings describes how Hiranyakashipu had oppressed them and expresses gratitude for his death. Key themes in the class include: The destructive nature of bad
Read More...

His Holiness Bhanu Swami stands as one of the most influential and respected spiritual leaders within the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). As a senior disciple of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Bhanu Swami has dedicated over five decades to preserving and propagating Gaudiya Vaishnava traditions through scholarly work, leadership, and devoted
Read More...

The post Dealing with insecurity Mahabharata San Diego appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

The post Prayers inspired by Bhagavad Gita – Part 2 by HG Chaitanya Charan Prabhuji appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

The post Prayers inspired by Bhagavad Gita – Part 1 by HG Chaitanya Charan Prabhuji appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

The post Resentment into retirement Gita 2.6 Los Angeles appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

His Grace Patri Prabhu has emerged as one of ISKCON’s most influential and transformative leaders. His remarkable journey from Ukraine to Nepal exemplifies a profound dedication to spiritual service and humanitarian causes. As the recipient of Nepal’s prestigious Suprabal Janasewa Shree award and the architect of ISKCON’s extraordinary growth in Nepal, Patri Das has touched
Read More...

The day known as Akshaya-tritiya occurs on the third day (tritiya) of the waxing moon in the month of Vaisakha. Every second of this blessed day is completely auspicious, and so there is no consideration of any one period (muhurta) being better than another. Akshaya means “inexhaustible”—anything a devotee undertakes on the day of Akshaya-tritiya is bound to succeed, especially the performance of devotional activities, which guarantee inexhaustible benefit.

It is said that Akshaya-tritiya is the day when Treta-yuga began and the river Ganges descended to earth. Also, the festival known as Candana-yatra starts on Akshaya-tritiya.

In the Madhva-sampradaya, Akshaya-tritiya is celebrated as the day of the incarnation of Lord Vishnu as Parasurama. In the Sri Krishna Mutt monastery a special festival takes place during which the aksaya-patra, the marvelous pot gifted by the sun god to Draupadi, is worshipped. Srimati Draupadi was given the benediction that her pot would provide unlimited food at each meal, until she herself ate from it. It appears that the pot came under the custody of Sri Madhvacharya, and on Akshaya-tritiya it is worshipped and prasada is lavishly distributed throughout the day.

An interesting incident took place on Akshaya-tritiya in Nandagrama, where Sri Krishna enjoyed His childhood pastimes with Nanda Maharaja and Mother Yasoda. When Nanda Maharaja established his residence there, he excavated a large lake, then known as Nanda Sarovara. Nanda Maharaja, his family members, and all the Vraja-vasis used to bathe in that lake. And it is said that while Nanda Maharaja and his family bathed at one end of the lake, Vrsabhanu Maharaja would occasionally come and bathe with his family at the other end. And according to local tradition, Srimati Radharani and Krishna used to swim underwater to the middle of the lake and engage in pastimes.

One day, little Krishna noticed that instead of cooking the usual meal of rice, dal, sabji, and chapatis, Mother Yasoda was making all kinds of fried preparations with dal, noodles, and flour. When Krishna asked her why she was cooking those things, she replied that Nanda Maharaja was going on a pilgrimage the next day and that the fried things she was cooking would last for several days without spoiling.

Krishna then asked where His father was going, and Mother Yasoda replied that he was going to Prayaga. So, Krishna went to Nanda Maharaja and asked him where Prayaga was and why he was going there. Nanda Maharaja explained that Prayaga was the sacred place where the three rivers Ganga, Yamuna, and Sarasvati met and flowed together and that to take bath there was most auspicious.

The next morning was Akshaya-tritiya, the perfect day to start on a long journey. As usual, Nanda Maharaja got up early and went to take bath in his lake. When he got there, however, he saw a man he had never seen before—an imposing, regal person—rolling in the dust and laughing loudly. Every now and then he would get up and dive into Nanda Sarovara, and then again he would come out and roll in the dust and laugh, and again bathe in the lake.

Nanda Maharaja approached the kingly man and asked, “Maharaja, who are you?”

“Baba, I’m Prayaga,” the man replied.

“Prayaga? I don’t know anyone in Nandagrama with that name.”

“No. No. I’m not from here. I’m Prayaga Raja, the king of all the holy places (tirthas)!”

“And why have you come here today, Maharaja?”

“Baba, all year long people come and bathe in my waters and leave their sins there. So, every year, on Akshaya-tritiya, I come here, roll in the dust of Vraja, and bathe in this sarovara, because this dust and this lake have the potency to purify (pavana) one from all sins.”

Nanda Maharaja was amazed. Suddenly he noticed that on the other side of the lake were many beautiful ladies in silk saris embroidered with gold and silver threads. They were also bathing in the lake. Approaching them respectfully, Nanda Maharaja asked who they were.

One lady replied, “Baba, I’m Ganga.” Another said, “I’m Sarasvati.” And yet another said, “I’m Godavari.” They all responded with the names of different holy rivers: Kurujangala, Kaveri, Narmada, Brahmaputra, Mahananda, etc.

Then Nanda Maharaja asked, “And why have you come here today? I’ve never seen you before.” The ladies explained that all year long people put their sins into their waters and that every year on the Akshaya-tritiya day they came to Vraja to roll in its dust, bathe in the sarovara, and become purified (pavana).

After taking his bath, Nanda Maharaja went back up the hill to his residence. By that time, little Krishna was awake. Coming before His father, He asked, “Baba, are you going now?” “No, Lala. I’m not going.” “Why, Baba?” “Because today, all the places I wanted to go came to take bath in our lake and become purified (pavana). So why should I take the trouble to go to them when they all came here?”

And from that day, Nanda Sarovara became known as Pavana Sarovara.

The very word Akshaya means, “that which never diminishes”. Any service or charity one performs on this day will be paid back many times over. Most devotees know it as the beginning of Candana-yatra, but actually many of Lord Krishna’s other pastimes also took place on this day, specifically those which highlight Krishna’s generous and intimate reciprocation with his devotees.

Draupadi was protected by Krishna twice on this day, once when He provided her an unlimited sari at the dice game in return for a tiny piece of cloth, and later, when she needed to provide food for Durvasa muni, the Lord took a single grain from her pot and satisfied the hunger of all the sages.

Akshaya Tritiya, according to the Vedic calendar, is a day considered to be conducive to success in any significant endeavour. Traditionally, those aware of Akshaya Tritiya’s benefits schedule major life events—marriages, initiations, and business ventures, establishing a new place of residence—on this day.

Traditionally, this is the best day for starting important endeavours. Vyasadeva and Ganesa chose this day to start writing the great epic Mahabharata, for example, and every year construction of the huge Ratha carts in Puri also starts on this day.

ISKCON’s Govinda’s vegetarian restaurants form a unique blend of outreach and entrepreneurship, nourishing bodies and souls alike. Established at temple sites worldwide, these cafés serve sattvic (pure vegetarian) prasadam at fixed prices, with devotees and visitors encouraged to “eat to their heart’s content.” The profits from Govinda’s underwrite temple operations – from cow protection to
Read More...

📣 Relaunch of the London College of Vedic Studies (LCVS) Fresh Courses, Timeless Wisdom — Serving the Community with Heart ISKCON London is delighted to announce the relaunch of the London College of Vedic Studies (LCVS) — a new chapter filled with fresh, innovative ideas and a wide array of courses, all shaped by the
Read More...

Today is the most auspicious occasion of Sri Gadadhara Pandita’s appearance day. As many of you know, Lord Chaitanya is Krishna Himself in the role of His own devotee. He is Krishna, but with the complexion and in the mood of Srimati Radharani. There are different purposes for the Lord’s advent. The internal reason for Lord Chaitanya’s appearance is that He wanted to experience the glory of Srimati Radharani’s love for Him, Her relishing of the wonderful qualities in Him that She alone experiences through Her love, and the happiness She feels when She experiences the sweetness of His love for Her—which only She can experience. And the external reason (not that it is any less significant) was to propagate the yuga-dharma, the recommended method for God realization in each particular age (yuga).

To assist the Lord in His pastimes, four principal associates descended with Him—Nityananda Prabhu, Advaita Prabhu, Srivasa Thakura, and Gadadhara Pandita. Together with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, they constitute the Pancha-tattva. In Sri Caitanya-caritamrta (Adi 1.14) the author offers his respects to all five together:

panca-tattvatmakam krsnam
   bhakta-rupa-svarupakam
bhaktavataram bhaktakhyam
   namami bhakta-saktikam

“I offer my obeisances unto the Supreme Lord, Krsna, who is nondifferent from His features as a devotee, devotional incarnation, devotional manifestation, pure devotee, and devotional energy.”

Krishna appeared in the form of a devotee (bhakta-rupa), as Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu; as the expansion of a devotee (sva-rupakam), as Nityananda Prabhu; as an incarnation of a devotee (bhakta-avataram), as Advaita Prabhu; as a devotee (bhakta), as Srivasa Thakura; and as the devotional energy that inspires a devotee (bhakta-saktikam), as Gadadhara Pandita. Together they all came to propagate harinama-sankirtana as the yuga-dharma for the present age.

We are now in Kali-yuga, the worst age. But although Kali-yuga is the worst, it affords us the best opportunity to realize God, through the chanting of the holy names. At the end of Srimad-Bhagavatam Sri Sukadeva Gosvami says, kaler dosa-nidhe rajann: this Kali-yuga is an ocean of faults. An ocean—you cannot measure the length or breadth of an ocean. Asti hy eko mahan gunah: but within Kali-yuga there is one great opportunity. What is that? Kirtanad eva krsnasya mukta-sangah param vrajet: by chanting the holy names of Krishna, one becomes liberated from material association and attains the supreme goal of life.

Sanga—association. Sangat sanjayate kamah. Desire comes from association. Generally, people in the material world associate with the three modes of material nature: sattva-guna, rajo-guna, and tamo-guna. Because of their association with the three modes, they develop material bodies made of the three modes and mentalities influenced by the three modes. And it is very difficult to overcome the influence of maya, which consists of these three modes.

daivi hy esa guna-mayi
  mama maya duratyaya
mam eva ye prapadyante
  mayam etam taranti te

 In the Bhagavad-gita (7.14) Lord Krishna says that this material nature, which consists of the three modes, is very difficult to overcome but that one who surrenders unto Him can easily overcome it and become free from the influence of these modes.

Lord Chaitanya and His associates in the Pancha-tattva came to taste love of Godhead and to distribute love of Godhead—to taste the holy names of Krishna and to distribute the holy names of Krishna. Sri Caitanya-caritamrta describes that the storehouse of love of Godhead had remained sealed but that the members of the Pancha-tattva broke open the seal, plundered the storehouse, ate the contents, and became intoxicated with love of God. But they didn’t want only to enjoy the contents themselves; they also wanted to share the contents with others. And that was their life—tasting ecstatic love of Godhead and distributing it.

The main method by which they distributed love of Godhead was through the chanting of the holy names of God, in particular in the maha-mantra: Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare / Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare. The members of the Pancha-tattva would become so intoxicated chanting and dancing that they didn’t know whether it was day or night. They didn’t know where they were. Once, Nityananda Prabhu led a party of devotees from Puri, and they were chanting and dancing all the way. They were trying to make their way back to Bengal, but they were so intoxicated with love of God that they didn’t know which way they were going. They would start in one direction and days later would realize that they didn’t know in which direction they had gone. They would have to ask someone to set them in the right direction. Again, days would pass in chanting and dancing. They wouldn’t even eat or sleep. And after some time, they would realize that again they didn’t know where they were. This was the high level of their kirtan in ecstatic love of God.

So, that is what they were tasting, and that is what they wanted to distribute. And reciprocally, that is what they wanted us to accept: the great gift of the holy name, the great treasure of love of God. Golokera prema-dhana, hari-nama-sankirtana: the great treasure of love of God has descended from Goloka Vrindavan, the spiritual world, as the congregational chanting of the holy name. The holy name is not a material sound vibration. Krishna’s name is Krishna Himself. It is completely spiritual.

nama cintamanih krsnas
  caitanya-rasa-vigrahah
purnah suddho nitya-mukto
  ’bhinnatvan nama-naminoh

Nama cintamanih krsnas: the holy name of Krishna is a transcendental touchstone that bestows all spiritual benedictions. Caitanya-rasa-vigrahah: it is the form of all transcendental mellows. It is complete (purnah), pure (suddha), and eternally liberated (nitya-muktah) from the influence of maya, the modes of material nature. ’Bhinnatvan nama-naminoh: the holy name of Krishna is in all respects the same as Krishna Himself.

When we chant Hare Krishna, we are associating with Krishna. Srila Prabhupada has explained that in the material world the name of a thing and the thing itself are different. If you are thirsty and you chant “water, water, water, water,” just chanting “water, water” will not quench your thirst, because the word water and the substance water are different. But in the spiritual world, the absolute world, the name of the thing and the thing itself are the same. So when you chant “Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna,” Krishna is personally present, dancing on your tongue. And great devotees who realize Krishna through the process of chanting want to do nothing but chant. Srila Rupa Gosvami prayed, “With one tongue and two ears, what can I chant, what can I relish? If I had millions of tongues and billions of ears, then I could begin to chant.” That is the stage of relishing the holy name, when one is able to chant purely.

We, unfortunately, have no such attraction. In the second verse of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s Siksastaka, we find the word durdaivam, which means “misfortune.” We are unfortunate. Of course, we are also fortunate, because we have come in touch with Srila Prabhupada, who served the Pancha-tattva by executing their mission, traveling all over the world and distributing the holy name of Krishna. So, we are fortunate, but at the same time we are unfortunate, because we do not experience ecstatic love when we chant—because we commit offenses. The great value of the holy name can be realized only when we chant without offense.

But here too the Pancha-tattva help us, because they do not consider offenses. They are so liberal and magnanimous that they do not take any offense. Thus, if one chants the holy names of the Pancha-tattva with enthusiasm, with complete absorption, one will feel ecstatic, and when one feels ecstatic, one can chant the holy names of the Hare Krishna maha-mantra without offense.

But we have to work; we have to practice. As Srila Prabhupada said, chanting is easy, but the determination to chant is not so easy. We have to be determined to chant with attention, without offense. And if we can chant without offense, we will obtain the great treasure of love of God. Chanting is so important, as Lord Chaitanya instructed:

tara madhye sarva-srestha nama-sankirtana
niraparadhe nama laile paya prema-dhana

“Of the nine processes of devotional service, the most important is to always chant the holy name of the Lord. If one does so, avoiding the ten kinds of offenses, one very easily obtains the most valuable love of Godhead.” (Cc Antya 4.71)

There are ten offenses mentioned in the Padma Purana. Srila Jiva Gosvami has discussed them in detail in his Bhakti-sandarbha, and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has also discussed them, in Sri Harinama-cintamani. In Srila Prabhupada’s books we find lists and explanations of the ten offenses in different places. The list in The Nectar of Devotion is often read in temples as part of the morning program after mangala-arati, as devotees prepare to chant their rounds. Just reading or reciting the list, hearing it and praying, can help us to avoid the offenses. The last offense in this list is “to not have complete faith in the chanting of the holy names and to maintain material attachments, even after understanding so many instructions on this matter.” Devotees often add, “It is also an offense to be inattentive while chanting.” Actually, at the end of the Sanskrit for the eighth offense, we find the words api pramada. Pramada means “inattention.” In the Hari-nama-cintamani, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has taken pramada as a separate item, as the ninth offense—inattentive chanting. He states that by attentive chanting, one can destroy all other offenses but that inattentive chanting allows the other offenses to grow and flourish.

So, we have to make a concentrated effort to overcome this offense (pramada) and chant and hear with attention. As the Bhagavad-gita (6.26) says,

yato yato niscalati
  manas cancalam asthiram
tatas tato niyamyaitad
  atmany eva vasam nayet

“From wherever the mind wanders due to its flickering and unsteady nature, one must certainly withdraw it and bring it back under the control of the self.” So, that is our work.

When we observe the activities of the mind while we are chanting and really consider what is happening—“What is going on?” “Why is my mind always wandering? What is it thinking about?” “Why am I having all these other thoughts when I should be hearing the holy name?” (There is a whole list of things we think about.)—we find (at least in my experience) that it basically comes down to thinking that we are the doers, the controllers, the proprietors, the enjoyers. Actually, the holy name is Krishna, and He is the controller, He is the proprietor, He is the enjoyer. So let us surrender to Him. Let us surrender to the holy name, surrender to Krishna in the form of transcendental sound, and let Him take over.

When we are chanting, at least our sixteen rounds, those two hours—or however long it takes—are our time with Krishna. At least in those two hours we should have no other thought but to be with Krishna, to associate with Krishna. Srila Prabhupada has explained that the chanting is a prayer to Radha and Krishna. The name “Krishna” refers, of course, to Krishna, and “Hare” is a way of addressing Radha. Thus Hare Krishna means “O Radha, O Krishna.” When we call people’s names, we want to get their attention, and when we get their attention they may respond, “Yes, what do you want? What can I do for you?” So, when we get Radha and Krishna’s attention by chanting Their holy names, Hare Krishna, what are we going to ask? A pure devotee will ask for only one thing: service—“I want to serve You. Please engage me in Your service.” That is our prayer when we chant.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has written much about the Siksastaka and the holy name, and in Sri Bhajana-rahasya he explains that the eight prayers of the Siksastaka correspond to the eight pairs of names in the maha-mantra. So, when we are chanting the Hare Krishna maha-mantra—Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare / Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare—the verses of the Siksastaka are included. And if we are really concentrating, we can focus on each pair of names and know that the corresponding prayer of the Siksastaka is included. We should not be racing through our rounds, just to finish them—“Oh, God, okay, Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna . . . Okay, one down, fifteen to go.” Not racing through. This is our time with Krishna—in one sense the most important time of the day—and we should give ourselves to Him. Of course, we serve Him throughout the day—in principle, twenty-four hours a day—but this is our special time to associate with Him, with hari-nama, directly.

Our godbrother Gopala Bhatta Prabhu owns a large business and has many responsibilities and projects, but he told me that when he chants his rounds he takes off his eyeglasses and his wristwatch. That is his time with Krishna, and he will not think about anything else. Of course, he is very organized. He makes long lists of what he has to do, so when he is chanting he doesn’t have to worry about remembering or forgetting things. That is a common fault, a common form of inattention—while we are chanting, within our minds we are making to-do lists. If what we have to do is important enough, we will remember it later. But we have to hear; we have to let go of all other thoughts when we chant, and just hear. Sometimes it may be that in that purifying process of chanting, Krishna is trying to tell us something, trying to remind us of something. And it really builds up. Even though we try, we just can’t let it go. Then it might be better to make a note of it, and then our mind might settle down. Otherwise, in principle, whatever it is, just let it go and hear—tac chrnu—hear the holy name of Krishna.

This is the great mission of the Pancha-tattva—to propagate pure chanting of the holy name, and through it, ecstatic love of Godhead.

Gadadhara Pandita appeared one year after Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. And in their childhoods, the two were inseparable; they were so attached to each other. Together they attended Gangadasa Pandita’s tola, school, and as classmates they enjoyed many pastimes with each other. In His childhood, Lord Chaitanya was called Nimai, because He was born under a neem tree. So, Nimai and Gadadhara would go to Ganganagara and attend class together. They would walk home together. They would study together. They would take bath in the Ganga together. They could not bear to be separated from each other for even a moment.

Later, when Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu took sannyasa and went to reside in Jagannatha Puri, Gadadhara Pandita followed Him. Most of Mahaprabhu’s other associates in Navadvipa remained in Bengal; they came to Puri only once each year, for the four months of the rainy season, to attend the Ratha-yatra and to see Mahaprabhu. But Gadadhara Pandita couldn’t bear to be separated from the Lord, and the Lord couldn’t bear to be separated from him. So he was permitted to stay with Mahaprabhu in Puri, and there they engaged in pastimes. Gadadhara Pandita accepted ksetra-sannyasa, which means he took a vow never to spend a night outside the dhama, Jagannatha Puri. And he engaged in the service of the Deity called Tota-gopinatha.

The first time Chaitanya Mahaprabhu left Puri to travel to Vrindavan, Gadadhara Pandita followed Him—even at the cost of his ksetra-sannyasa and his service to Gopinatha. And when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu finally compelled him to return to Puri, Gadadhara fainted. He could not bear the separation. For Mahaprabhu too, the separation was difficult, but Mahaprabhu tolerated it because He wanted to keep Gadadhara’s vow and service intact.

Gadadhara Pandita and Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had many intimate, loving pastimes together in Puri, which are described in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu would come regularly to relish Gadadhara Pandita’s reading of Srimad-Bhagavatam. And it is said that in the end Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu entered the Tota-gopinatha temple and never came out, that He entered into the Deity of Gopinatha to return to His eternal pastimes.

After Mahaprabhu left, Gadadhara Pandita felt such intense separation that his body began to age very quickly—although he was only forty-eight years old. In time, he was unable to stretch out his arms even to offer a garland to the Deity. So the Deity, to facilitate Gadadhara’s loving service, sat down (one can still visit Tota-gopinatha and see the sitting Deity), and soon Gadadhara himself entered into the Deity to join Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in His eternal pastimes.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta states that Gadadhara Pandita was an incarnation of the pleasure potency of Sri Krishna. And Sri Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika confirms that Srimati Radharani appeared in gaura-lila as Gadadhara Pandita. When the Lord descends, He doesn’t come alone; He comes with His eternal associates. Thus, when Lord Krishna came as Sri Krishna Chaitanya, in the role of a devotee, His eternal associates accompanied Him, also as devotees, to assist Him in His pastimes. The Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika, written by Kavi-karnapura, another associate of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, explains what roles the associates of Krishna in krsna-lila played in gaura-lila. Sri Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika (147–149) states, “Srimati Radharani, who is the personification of pure love for Krsna and who is the queen of Vrndavana, appeared as Sri Gadadhara Pandita, who was very dear to Lord Chaitanya. Srila Svarupa Damodara Gosvami has also confirmed that the goddess of fortune, who appeared in Vrndavana and was very dear to Lord Krsna, appeared as Sri Gadadhara Pandita, who was filled with love for Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.”

Gadadhara Pandita is an incarnation of Srimati Radharani, the internal potency of Lord Krishna. But because Lord Chaitanya is Krishna acting in the mood of Srimati Radharani, Gadadhara Pandita did not act in the mood of Radharani—because there can be only one Radharani. He understood, “This is Krishna’s time. This is Krishna’s opportunity to relish the loving ecstasy of Srimati Radharani, so I will keep my mood of Radha in the background and just support Him in His experience of radha-bhava.” It is also said that if Gadadhara Pandita had manifested the nature or feature of Srimati Radharani, then Krishna, who was trying to absorb Himself in the mood of Radharani, would have become attracted to the Radha outside of Him and wouldn’t have been able to maintain His inner mood as Radha. So Gadadhara Pandita, to facilitate Lord Chaitanya in His pastimes, played the perfect role to complement and support the Lord—that of a perfect brahman, very gentle, very submissive, very scholarly, very sober.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta (Antya 7, 166, 163–164) concludes,

panditera saujanya, brahmanyata-guna
drdha prema-mudra loke karila khyapana

“Gadadhara Pandita is celebrated all over the world for his gentle behavior, his brahminical attributes, and his steady love for Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.”

panditera bhava-mudra kahana na yaya
‘gadadhara-prana-natha’ nama haila yaya

“No one can describe the characteristics and ecstatic love of Gadadhara Pandita. Therefore another name for Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Gadadhara-prananatha, ‘the life and soul of Gadadhara Pandita.’

pandite prabhura prasada kahana na yaya
‘gadaira gauranga’ bali’ yanre loke gaya

“No one can say how merciful the Lord is to Gadadhara Pandita, but people know the Lord as Gadaira Gauranga, ‘the Lord Gauranga of Gadadhara Pandita.’ ”

On this auspicious occasion we can pray to Gadadhara Pandita, a most intimate associate of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and a member of the Pancha-tattva, to be merciful to us and help us to taste and distribute the nectar of the holy name, the nectar of Krishna consciousness, as humble servants of his devoted servants.

Thank you very much.

Hare Krishna.

Sri Gadadhara Pandita ki jaya!
Sri Sri Pancha-tattva ki jaya!
Srila Prabhupada ki jaya!

[A talk by Giriraj Swami on Sri Gadadhara Pandita’s appearance day, April 17, 2007, Dallas]

Nandagram: A Living Lab Blooming in Brazil Nandagram is pioneering a groundbreaking approach to sustainable agriculture through its innovative living lab concept. This dynamic space serves as a hub for experiential learning and scientific research, demonstrating the harmonious integration of native vegetation and diverse plant species.   At Nandagram, the focus is on understanding how
Read More...

Krishna Kripa Prabhu stands as a remarkable figure in the modern landscape of Krishna consciousness, tirelessly traveling the world to share the Hare Krishna mantra and spiritual wisdom. His dedicated service, enthusiastic outreach, and genuine connection with people of all backgrounds exemplify the true spirit of a devotee committed to spreading spiritual knowledge and love
Read More...

Sri Gadadhar was the consant companion of Mahaprabhu from the time of their childhood. His father’s name was Sri Madhva Misra and his mother’s name Sri Ratnavati-devi.

They lived very near the house of Sri Jagannatha Misra in Mayapura. Ratnavati-devi thought of Saci-devi as her own sister, and always used to visit her.

During their childhood, Sri Gaura Hari and Gadadhara would play together, sometimes at Mahaprabhu’s house and sometimes at Gadadhara’s house. They both studied together at the same school.

Gadadhara was a few years younger then Nimai. Nimai couldn’t remain without Gadadhara even for a moment and Gadadhara likewise couldn’t stand to be separated from Nimai.

In the Gaur-ganoddesa-dipika, it is described that that person who in Vraja was the daughter of Sri Vrsabhanu Raja, namely Srimati Radharani, is now celebrated as Sri Gadadhara Pandita.

In Sri Caitanya-caritamrta we find:

“The emotions and expressions of Pandita Gadadhara are not possible to describe. Another name of Lord Gauranga is the ‘Lord of the life of Gadadhara.’ Who can understand what mercy has been bestowed upon him? Their glories are sung by everyone as Gadai- Gauranga.”

Sri Gadadhara Pandita would regularly recite Srimad Bhagavatam. Sri Gaurasundara, along with His associates, would listen.

Then one might ask a question, if Lord Chaitanya is Radha and Krsna combined, where is the necessity for the appearance of Gadadhara Pandit?

The answer to this is that it has been explained that Mahaprabhu is Krsna in search of the loving sentiment of Radha for Krsna. Sri Gadadhara Pandita represents that bhava personified, and thus he has appeared to be at the side of Mahaprabhu to assist him in his search. In this explanation, Gadadhara gives his unalloyed love to Lord Gauranga willingly.

It has also been explained that Krsna has stolen the bhava of Radha and appears as Mahaprabhu, Radha Krsna combined. Gadadhara represents that which is left of Radha after Krsna steals her bhava. 

Sri Gadadhara pandit appears on the new moon and leaves the world on the same day. New moon means no moon – dark moon or Amavasya tithi.

The Bhaktivedanta Hospital & Research Institute stands as a shining example of ISKCON’s commitment to holistic healthcare in India. Established as a tribute to Swami Prabhupada (founder of ISKCON), this tertiary care facility has grown from humble beginnings to become a comprehensive healthcare institution serving communities across Mumbai’s western suburbs. Combining modern medical expertise with
Read More...

Diary of a Traveling Sadhaka, Vol. 21, No. 16

By Krishna Kripa Das

(Week 16: April 16–April 22, 2025)

Tampa and New York City

(Sent from Utrecht, The Netherlands, on April 26, 2025)

Where I Went and What I Did

For the sixteenth week of 2025, the first day I continued chanting Hare Krishna at the University of South Florida in Tampa with Vivasvan Prabhu and Bhakta Bill. We made videos of two pairs of students participating in the kirtan with us that day, with one student even chanting the Hare Krishna mantra. As before, we met favorable people who joined our Bhakti Yoga Society and accepted a small book for free, one even asking for a Bhagavad-gita. I also led the kirtan at the USF Bhakti Yoga Society in the evening and gave the evening lecture at Vivasvan’s temple. The next day I flew to Islip airport on Long Island, and I chanted with NYC Harinam devotees for almost three hours at Jackson Height / Roosevelt Avenue. 

I stayed in New York City for the rest of the week, chanting with Rama Raya Prabhu’s NYC Harinam in four other venues as well. It was wonderful to be in the association of devotees who are very enthusiastic about kirtan. Sunday we did a walking harinama around Brooklyn with the Gita Life devotees for over an hour.

I share a quote from Srila Prabhupada’s Srimad-Bhagavatam, The Nectar of Devotion, and Perfection of Yoga as well as a few quotes from a Srimad-Bhagavatam lecture in Vrindavan. I share quotes from Sri Caitanya-bhagavata by Vrindavana Dasa Thakura and its commentary by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. I share notes on classes by Hansarupa, Arcita, Uttama, and Partha Prabhus in New York City. I share a point made in a conversation by Maithuna Prabhu. I share a post to a Hare Krishna Facebook humor group.

Thanks to Vivasvan Prabhu for letting me stay at his temple, for coming on harinama on Wednesday, for giving me a hat, and for his kind donation. Thanks to Bhakta Bill of Tampa for driving me to and from the University of South Florida to Vivasvan’s temple and for chanting with me at the campus. Thanks to Dustin for his ride to the Tampa airport. Thanks to Hari Vilasa Prabhu for getting me at the Islip airport and giving me lunch and a place to rest before harinama.

Itinerary

April 26: King’s Day in Amsterdam
April 27: Liege harinama
April 28–May 1: Paris harinamas
May 2: Sarcelles market harinama
May 3–4: Amsterdam Kirtan Mela and Sacinandana Swami seminar
May 5: harinama in Amsterdam
May 6: harinama in Rotterdam
May 7: Flight from Amsterdam to New York City
May 8–June 15: NYC Harinam
mid June–mid August: Paris
– June 22: Paris Ratha-yatra?
– July 11: Amsterdam harinama?
– July 12: Amsterdam Ratha-yatra?
– July 13: Netherlands harinama?

Chanting Hare Krishna in Tampa

I was having interested students scan the QR code to sign up for our Bhakti Yoga Society club at University of South Florida, and as a promotion, I would give a small book to any who did.

Sahasra said she was just thinking of starting to read Bhagavad-gita and wondered if we had one. Bhakta Bill had brought one, and I had encouraged him to save it for a special person.

Sahasra appeared to be that special person so we gave it her, and she happily received it. A bull, the mascot of USF, appears behind her.

Vivasvan Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at USF, and I play the drum. The recording ends when the wind blows the phone off the tripod onto the sidewalk (https://youtu.be/hDW9KfkWyO0):

Vivasvan Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at USF, and Bill plays the drum (https://youtu.be/Nkec3Sn75L4):

Just as on the previous day, students were happy to participate in our harinama. This guy and girl were doing interviews with students about saving Tampa’s historical buildings, but they took a break to play the shakers and dance with us (https://youtube.com/shorts/JB_Q7kcWXRQ?feature=share):

Later the girl chanted the mantra (https://youtube.com/shorts/1cpe2eW0Fxs):

Two guys, who were advertising the bands they were performing in, were happy to see us doing music. When we stopped to talk to them, they said, “Keep playing.”

Later they also played the shakers and danced with us (https://youtube.com/shorts/xZCQ-ygxmTQ?feature=share):

Vivasvan Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at the Wednesday evening program at his place (https://youtu.be/8VKmWsmzWbw):

Chanting Hare Krishna in New York City

Several young devotees from India, or places nearby, led the chanting at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue.

Hrith chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue (https://youtu.be/Tnbtyt_JI6g):

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

Druti chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue (https://youtu.be/GMEaMDz2KcU):

Hadai Prana Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue (https://youtu.be/qW8M4ycVxPE):

Kishan chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue (https://youtu.be/KS9BqqmunBA):

Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue (https://youtu.be/Ec2juHUQmNM):

While Rama Raya was chanting there, a guy danced (https://youtube.com/shorts/LhoavzL6a7E?feature=share):

Narada Muni Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Columbus Circle (https://youtu.be/kw4VnLBfufs):

Sevika Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Columbus Circle (https://youtu.be/bR0MrEK332Y):

Braja Sakhi Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna at Columbus Circle (https://youtu.be/oMsH04w36TE):

Vraja Mohan Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Columbus Circle (https://youtu.be/37Aw1zW1GwE):

I also chanted at Columbus Circle (https://youtube.com/shorts/YY5H2K1l-dI?feature=share):

Columbus Circle is at 59^th Street.

While chanting there I saw this sign which has an abundance of 59s!

The number 59 is important for me as I was born in 1959. More important for the world was that Srila Prabhupada took sannyasa in 1959.

We decided to do six hours of harinama instead of four on Saturday, and I led the chanting of Hare Krishna for the first two and a half hours, with the assistance of Ahaituki Prema Prabhu, who came early to reserve the spot.

While I was singing, a student from Florida State University, who was visiting home for the weekend, recognized me from chanting on Landis Green, behind the main FSU library. I shared with him the details of our Krishna Lunch at FSU, and he took a selfie of us with both his camera and mine. He was the most recent of three students from FSU who remembered me singing there that I encountered in Washington Square Park in the last two years.

Jayananda Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Washington Square, and a guy plays shakers and dances (https://youtu.be/JeaX3gcDv38):

Later as Jayananda Prabhu continued to chant Hare Krishna, others also began to play the shakers and dance (https://youtu.be/3h__Y0bKhBs):

Maya Cabrinha chants Hare Krishna at Washington Square (https://youtu.be/u7XxTGC3Fj8):

Hrith chants Hare Krishna at Washington Square (https://youtu.be/F_IirSTH4Ow):

Meru came by the harinama at Washington Square Park. He has a fascination for selfies. He is on the left of this selfie, next is me, then Janmastami Prabhu, who taught me book distribution forty-five years ago when I was Bhakta Chris, and finally Bhakta Conner, a new book distributor on NYC Harinam.

Narada Muni Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Washington Square Park, and two women play shakers (https://youtu.be/o4b4G8zRjF0):

Jaya Goracand Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Washington Square Park, and many play shakers and dance (https://youtu.be/djA1kSUBFg8):

Srikar chants Hare Krishna at Washington Square, and onlookers play shakers and dance (https://youtu.be/PaFXDZ2rKHA):

Ananta Govinda Prabhu and friends chant Hare Krishna at Washington Square and devotees dance (https://youtu.be/VTHGc75POyc):

Aditya Devi Dasi chants Hare Krishna on Brooklyn walking harinama on Sunday afternoon (https://youtu.be/7uYMc9q1TWA):

Later Abhay chanted Hare Krishna along Court Street (https://youtu.be/E9j78fCMfas):

For the first time Hadai Prana Prabhu was inspired to bring the harinama party through Carroll Park, and many children and a few adults were attracted (https://youtu.be/cH4WcVcX2x4):

Nityananda Chandra Prabhu and friends chant Hare Krishna at ISKCON NYC Sunday Gaura Arati (https://youtu.be/36olVe9S4kg):

Conner swings a Jew as Natabara Gauranga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna in Fulton Street Station in Manhattan (https://youtube.com/shorts/unxjeRC_I9g?feature=share):

Nityananda Chandra Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street station in Manhattan, and a kid plays shakers (https://youtu.be/Owq36J1_8iA):

Natabara Gauranga Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street Station in Manhattan (https://youtu.be/Q0wZWZjxkHQ):

Nimai Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street, and kids play shakers and dance (https://youtube.com/shorts/rnysgQCnkoc?feature=share):

Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Fulton Street Station in Manhattan (https://youtu.be/kq8Q9wisTwU):

Sometimes Radha Govinda look more beautiful than usual, like Tuesday morning.

Hadai Prana Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Union Square (https://youtu.be/btiW_B3hZmo):

Rama Raya Prabhu chants Hare Krishna at Union Square (https://youtu.be/kf12KZ23YK4):

Photos

Vivasvan showed me this humorous card in Tampa.

Insights

Srila Prabhupada:

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.7.53:

“A person with average intelligence does not think the head and other parts of the body to be separate. Similarly, My devotee does not differentiate Vishnu, the all-pervading Personality of Godhead, from any thing or any living entity.”

From The Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 21, Religious:

“Simply professing a kind of faith is not a sign of religiousness. One must act according to religious principles, and by his personal example he should teach others. Such a person is to be understood as religious.”

From The Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 22, Liberal:

“A statement by Uddhava after the Syamantaka jewel plundering confirms that Krishna is so kind and favorable that if a servitor is accused even of great offenses, Krishna does not take this into consideration. He simply considers the service that is rendered by His devotee.”

From The Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 22, Protector of Surrendered Souls:

“Some enemy of Krishna’s was enlivened with the thought that he needn’t fear Krishna, because if he simply surrendered unto Him, Krishna would give him all protection.”

From The Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 22, Happy

“Any person who is always joyful and untouched by any distress is called happy.”

From Perfection of Yoga:

“As explained in the Bhagavad-gita [2.20], na jayate mriyate va: ‘The living entity never takes birth, nor does he ever die.’ Similarly, God is also eternal. Nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam (Katha Upanisad 2.2.13): ‘God is the supreme living entity among all living entities, and He is the supreme eternal person among eternal persons.’ So, by practicing Krishna consciousness, by purifying our senses, we can reestablish our eternal relationship with the supreme eternal person, the complete eternal person. Then we will see God.”

From a class on Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.5.25 in Vrindavan on August 6, 1974:

“The topmost atma-rucih, topmost means that is real atma-rucih, to be attracted by the self or Superself. That is atma-rucih.”

“Just like father and son: however there may be misunderstanding, but if the father and son come together and their affectionate dealings is began, immediately original relationship is revived. It does not take much time. Similarly, we are already related with Krishna, because Krishna says, mamaivamso jiva-bhutah [Bg 15.7]: ‘All living entities, they are My part and parcel.’ Aham bija-pradah pita [Bg 14.4]: ‘I am the seed-giving father.’ So how this relation can be broken? That is not possible. That is already there, eternally.”

“We are eternally related with Krishna, nitya-siddha krishna-bhakti, and we’re eternally very affectionate and obedient servant of Krishna. That is our position. Somehow or other, it is covered. So that garbage that’s covering has to be moved. Therefore Caitanya Mahaprabhu said, ceto-darpana-marjanam [Cc Antya 20.12].”

“This Krishna consciousness movement means cleansing the heart of all the dirty things that is accumulated life after life. It is not an artificial thing we are learning to become devotee of Krishna. We are already devotee of Krishna, but we have forgotten, or the consciousness is covered. Now, by this process, devotional process, especially by kirtana, by chanting, glorifying the holy name of the Lord, the cleansing process is accelerated. Very soon it takes place.”

“Something belongs to somebody, and if you make a plan to possess that thing, is it not criminal? . . . Actually Krishna is the proprietor of everything, He is the enjoyer of everything. Then why I shall desire to enjoy and own the property? This is criminal.”

Vrindavana Dasa Thakura:

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 13.349:

“Advaita and Nitai again engaged in water fighting. They are one, but for the purpose of sporting They have become two.”

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 13.387–88:

“Gauracandra will deliver everyone except those sinful persons who blaspheme Vaishnavas. According to the Srimad-Bhagavatam (5.10.25), even if someone on the level of Lord Shiva blasphemes a devotee, he will soon be destroyed.”

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 13.392–93:

“One who honors the following confidential words of the Padma Purana will attain ecstatic love of God. To blaspheme the great saintly persons who are preaching the glories of the Hare Krishna is the worst offense at the lotus feet of the holy name. The Nama-prabhu, who is identical with Krishna, will never tolerate such blasphemous activities, even from one who passes as a great devotee.”

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 13.394:

“One who hears this narration regarding the deliverance of the two rogues [Jagai and Madhai] will be delivered by Sri Gauracandra.”

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 13.396:

“The Lord’s supreme mercy is as vast as a thousand oceans. He sees the good qualities of others and never finds fault in them.”

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 14.40:

“Lord Shiva danced without clothing, which he forgot in his ecstatic love for Krishna. He is the foremost Vaishnava; he makes the entire universe glorious by chanting the name of Rama, which delivers one from material bondage.”

Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura:

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 14.34, commentary:

“The phrase suryera nandana refers to Yamaraja, the son of the sun-god. From the material point of view, he gives reward and punishment to the uncontrolled and materialistic persons. As he heard the ecstatic kirtana, he had the opportunity to forget his mundane position as a demigod. He thus became intoxicated with love of God and began to dance emotionally in the loving mellows of sankirtana.” 

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 15.7, commentary:

“Harmony is inevitable when everything is considered enjoyable to Krishna.”

From Caitanya-bhagavata, Madhya 15.19, purport:

“Sri Nityananda Prabhu was full of ecstasy and most gentle. He concealed His actual glories as He visited the houses of all classes of persons in the city. On seeing His ideal character, many persons in this world gave up their duplicity and attained the good fortune of becoming prideless.”

Mukunda Goswami:

From Miracle on Second Avenue, Chapter 33 (“London is Hell”):

“When they’d asked him if the chanting got monotonous after a while, Gurudas gave a memorable answer that ended up as the interview sound bite on the news that night. 
“‘What’s nice about these words,’ he’d said, ‘is that you can chant them over and over again, and you’ll never get tired of hearing it. But if you chant Queen Elizabeth, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Elizabeth, over and over again, you’ll get disgusted!’”

Jayadvaita Swami:

From a class on Srimad-Bhagavatam at ISKCON NYC on April 18, 2025:

Srila Prabhupada makes the point that when you want to build a house you hire a contractor and when you want to tear it down you hire a contractor, but maintaining it you do yourself.

The volume of sound is measured in decibels, which a measure of pressure. The wind is also pressure.

Even the words that we use to describe things are also Krishna.

In the mode of passion we divide the living entities according to their characteristics and fail to see the oneness in quality of all living entities.

We do not see the one world as Krishna’s property. We divide it. This is my part of the world. This is your part of the world.

The Mayavadis only speak of the oneness, and the dualists only speak of the difference, but we speak of both the oneness and the difference.

The madhyama, the devotee in the middle position, sees that the living entities are one, but they are manifest with different characteristics.

Kevala advaita, absolute oneness, is hard to make sense of because there are real differences like the difference between an open door and a closed door. You can only walk through one of them not both.

Individually, corporately, nationally, and internationally, we are all claiming proprietorship over what is actually Krishna’s.

Your boss gives you money, and you give him your body and your mind.

Q (by Abhay Prabhu): When we offer food to Krishna, it appears the same, so how can we understand that it has been transformed?
A: You can tell by the effect. If people eat the offered food, they become devotees.

Hansarupa Prabhu:

If one maintains doubt, he will not get the full benefit of reading the Srimad-Bhagavatam.

All Krishna’s paraphenalia is not different from Krishna. When we treat it in that way, we can realize it.

To understand the future of this movement, you have to know its history. This movement is going on by the strength of what Srila Prabhupada gave us.

Some people are disturbed by the book changes, but the essence always remains the same.

Some people say they cannot participate in the mission for this reason or that reason. That is what people call whining.

In all the old temples in Bhubanesvar, the doors are so low so you have to bow down and thereby show humility to get in.

The yogi realize paramatma after meditating for thousands of years, but the devotees surpass that in a few years simply by serving the deity in the temple.

Maya intrudes by introducing doubt.

There was a ghost on the fourth floor of the Henry Street temple. Srila Prabhupada gave us some rituals to deal with the situation.

Why don’t ghosts leave the haunted houses? Because they can’t. That is why they try to take over your body.

Srila Prabhupada has given us everything. Our challenge is if we can keep it.

We are making history even now.

This ISKCON NYC is the headquarters of Lord Caitanya’s mission, from 26 Second Avenue till now.

Srila Prabhupada said personal ambition will kill your spiritual life, and if it spreads, it will destroy the society.

We should think, “My only reason to be here is to serve the Supreme Personality of Godhead and our spiritual master.”

An instrument does not have its own independent activities. It is used by the expert carpenter.

Our daily prayer should be: “I am Your servant. Please engage me in Your service.”

We have to be honest with ourselves, with others, and with the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Comment by Janmastami Prabhu: Bhaktivinoda Thakura says the desire for fame is the root cause of all other anarthas. He says that we do not have the strength to remove our anarthas, but if we cry out to the holy name for several days, He will free us from them.

Arcita Prabhu:

Just like every good Muslim visits Mecca at least once in their life, every devotee should visit 26 Second Avenue and Tompkins Square Park.

You cannot put rascals in charge and hope to get good results.

If someone offers you a gift, accept it. It is not Vaishnava behavior to reject gifts.

The prasadam at Henry Street was fantastic, and there was always plenty for the hundred brahmacaris.

Devotees would eat prasadam left over by the guests. A devotee asked Srila Prabhupada about this. Prabhupada said we should stop because our motivation was not transcendental realization but lust.

People say I am attracted to this guru, but I am also attracted to that guru. I tell them to go to the deity and ask who you should accept as guru.

Do not tell everyone about your problems. Bhakti Tirtha Swami likened that to pulling up to someone and dumping your garbage in front of him. Tell a senior devotee you respect and follow his advice.

Devotional service means concentrating on whatever service you have been given at the moment. By doing that you will come to the bhava stage.

Navayogendra Swami says if there is no emotion, there is no devotion, simply commotion.

If you are a neophyte devotee, how are you going to tell who is a pure devotee?

Humility means doing what your guru told you.

One devotee used to say, “Seva will save yah.”

If you can get into kirtan, it will help you in your japa. It takes a while to get into japa.

Srila Prabhupada said, “Chanting, dancing, feasting, and philosophy.” All four of them should be there.

Uttama Mataji:

Lord Caitanya’s acintya-bheda-abheda tattva is a real contribution.

Some traditions consider only men have souls or only humans have souls.

As a little kid, I heard that if you didn’t act as they told you to, God would send you to hell forever. I thought, ‘My mother is not so bad. She would not punish me to that extent.’ Thus I became atheistic.

Bhagavad-gita tells us that every living creature is a soul of equal value.

Because of Daksa’s inability to understand this, he thought himself superior to others, and thus committed offenses.

That Daksa had the same personality although given the head of a goat shows that our personality is different from our body.

If we become rote followers, we will not understand how to apply the philosophy in different situations.

It is possible to interpret the Srimad-Bhagavatam according to a worldview coming from our study of history and not grasp the actual philosophy.

Srila Prabhupada honestly respected everyone.

Anuttama Prabhu, the car salesman, tells how that he felt such gratitude that he was being engaged in taking care of tulasi that he sent Srila Prabhupada some tulasi leaves as a gift. Srila Prabhupada replied profusely thanking him for his simple present.

Comment by Prabhu: I felt that I was a dog chasing his tail, but I found Srila Prabhupada’s presentation of acintya-bheda-abheda-tattva satisfying.

We have the association of Srila Prabhupada in the book, Bhagavata, so we always have the association of a self-realized soul.

It is interesting to me that Ramanujacarya wanted to take initiation from Yamunacarya, but wasn’t able to. He decided to associate with different disciples of Yamunacarya who manifested different qualities of Yamunacarya.

Comment by pujari mataji: A lot of people do not understand that going to hell forever means that if we do not take God consciousness, we take another birth, but because of our lack God consciousness in that birth, we will continue to take another birth. Just like a prisoner may get out of prison, but then commit another crime, and thus return to prison.

Comment by Janmastami Prabhu: Srila Prabhupada was asked by a devotee how they could increase their desire for book distribution. Srila Prabhupada said after a long pause, with emphasis, “Chant all your rounds at one time.” Thus the book distributors started getting up at 2:00 a.m., and chanting all their rounds.

Partha Prabhu:

Lord Vishnu told Laksmi not to give His remnants to anyone. Narada pleased Laksmi and she offered to give him a benediction. He made her promise to give him whatever benediction he asked for. She agreed. Then Narada asked for the maha-prasadam from Lord Vishnu. Laksmi was worried because she wanted to follow her husband, but she also wanted to keep her promise to the sage. Vishnu said she could take some of His maha-prasadam when He was not looking, and so she did. When Narada took the maha-prasadam, he experienced intense spiritual bliss. He shared his experience with his brother, Lord Shiva, and Lord Shiva asked him for some of the maha-prasadam. Narada said he ate it all. Lord Shiva was upset that Narada did not share any with Him. Narada found a little piece stuck under his fingernail, and he gave it to Lord Shiva who went into ecstasy. When Shiva’s wife Parvati saw the ecstasy of her husband, she inquired about the cause of it. He explained he had tasted the maha-prasadam of Lord Vishnu. When she asked for some, Shiva told her there was not any more. Parvati was upset, and worshiped Lord Vishnu, who appeared, and she requested the maha-prasadam of the Lord for not only herself but all living entities. That request was filled in Jagannath Puri, where the maha-prasadam of Lord Jagannatha is offered to Bimala, a deity of Goddess Durga, and she distributes it to all others.

One man who looked to be a big burly redneck became a devotee from prasadam. He got an orange from the Jagannatha cart. When he started to peel it, he started to cry.

I noticed that as the years go by the crowd waiting for the Vancouver Ratha-yatra free feast grows.

We can learn from the Daksa sacrifice the dangers of Vaishnava aparadha.

Comment by Janmastami Prabhu: Srila Prabhupada, as a guru, in some cases, would severely reprimand his disciples to correct them. Some leaders followed that, but it was counterproductive in most cases.

Yes. That is when people act out of their personal anger instead of compassion for the person.

Comment by Janmastami Prabhu: I found that when I am angry with someone, I just tell them I will talk with them later, after my mind is not affected with anger.

Comment by me:

A British neurologist, John Lorber, studied patients with hydrocephalus. In some several cases where over 90% of the patient’s head was filled with cerebrospinal fluid, the patient had an amazing IQ and many talents. That indicates there is more to consciousness than just the brain.

Regarding attaining the platform of goodness, Srila Prabhupada writes:

“In all spiritual affairs, one’s first duty is to control his mind and senses. Unless one controls his mind and senses, one cannot make any advancement in spiritual life. Everyone within this material world is engrossed in the modes of passion and ignorance. One must promote himself to the platform of goodness, sattva-guna, by following the instructions of Rupa Gosvami, and then everything concerning how to make further progress will be revealed.” (The Nectar of Instuction, Preface)

In the Gita the mentality of criticism is considered to be a symptom of the mode of ignorance.

Arcita Prabhu mentioned that Srila Prabhupada said the superior must continue to give guidance according to the direction of the scripture even if his subordinates are unable to follow them. As far as I recall, Srila Prabhupada also mentioned that that should be done without becoming angry.

Prabhupada would speak with an angry voice with one person to correct him and then immediately continue to speak with others normally.

A friend was moved to anger by a comment from his ex-wife. Before he could reply to her, the conch shell blew, signaling the beginning of the evening arati. After the kirtan, we were both amazed to see that all the anger my friend was going to unleash toward his ex-wife was completely gone.

Maithuna Prabhu:

From a conversation:

One of the advantages of the Krishna consciousness movement and the Gaudiya Vaishnava path is we have an actual method by which we can attain realization not just some interesting philosophy and some great quotes.

Krishna Kripa Das:

From Official Hare Krishna Humor:

“There are vans and there are ashrams, but there is no varnashram.”

[This attempt at humor is not meant to denigrate varnashram but to remind us that varnashram is an important part of Srila Prabhupada’s plan that is unfortunately too much neglected.]

-----

In Bhagavad-gita 13.25 Krishna tells how karma-yogis and the jnani-yogis come to realize the Supersoul. Then in the next verse He describes how the bhakti-yogis attain perfection, by hearing from authority. 

anye tv evam ajanantah
srutvanyebhya upasate
te ’pi catitaranty eva
mṛtyum sruti-parayanah

“Again there are those who, although not conversant in spiritual knowledge, begin to worship the Supreme Person upon hearing about Him from others. Because of their tendency to hear from authorities, they also transcend the path of birth and death.”

What do they hear? That is described in the purport: “Lord Caitanya, who preached Krishna consciousness in the modern world, gave great stress to hearing because if the common man simply hears from authoritative sources he can progress, especially, according to Lord Caitanya, if he hears the transcendental vibration Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare.”

Kashmir Terror Attack: What the Gita Teaches Us About Confronting Evil

The recent shooting of innocent tourists in Kashmir is a heartbreaking reminder of the relentless brutality some individuals are capable of. But beyond the shock and sorrow lies a question that refuses to go away: How long will we tolerate such acts without a strong and lasting response?

Too often, such targeted acts of violence are contextualized, softened, or dismissed. The global narrative bends over backwards to avoid identifying patterns, ideologies, or even communities from which such actions emerge. What we need is not communalization of the issue, but moral clarity—something that the Bhagavad-gita offers in abundance.

The Joy of Destruction: A mindset the Gita Warns About

In its 16th chapter, the Gita offers a sobering profile of the demoniac mentality. This is not mere rhetorical labeling. It describes individuals who don’t just do terrible things—they take pride in them. They consider acts of cruelty signs of cleverness. Such individuals are not guided by conscience, nor are they reachable through negotiation.

Even Krishnathe epitome of diplomacy—fails to make peace with Duryodhana in the Mahabharata. But His failure was instructive. It revealed the futility of reasoning with the unreasonable, and the necessity of action when all moral persuasion fails.

When Secularism Excuses Extremism

The purpose of secularism is to ensure that no religious group dominates or oppresses another. But today, it is increasingly misused to excuse and overlook minority extremism, even when it openly targets innocents. In doing so, secularism risks betraying its very foundation: the protection of the vulnerable and the upholding of justice.

Let’s be clear: this is not a religious issue. It is a civilizational issue. A law-and-order failure. And more deeply, a refusal to confront evil in the name of appearing tolerant.

What the Gita Really Calls For

The Gita is often misunderstood as a text calling for detachment. In truth, it calls for purposeful engagement with courage and clarity. After Krishna’s message, Arjuna doesn’t meditate in a cave. He rises to fight—not out of hatred, but because justice demands it.

The war that follows is not a celebration of violence but a necessity for peace. It shows that some forces must be opposed not with words, but with will. When faced with the truly demoniac, to withhold force is to empower violence.

We Must Act—and Pray

Yes, we must pray—for the souls of the victims. But we must also pray for those in charge. That they may find the strength to act decisively—to cut down those who glorify terror. Thoroughly. Irreversibly.

Evil that celebrates its evilness must not be reasoned with—It must be rooted out.

The post Kashmir Terror Attack- The Gita’s Message on Confronting Evil appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Did Bhaktiv know Thakur go through a phase where he was averse to the Bhagavatam and the Bhakti path, and was this a result of his reading of western philosophy and western literature?

Answer, yes. He did go through a phase like that. And from a transcendental perspective, if you want to consider it as a arrangement of the Lord, then just as Mahaprabhu exhibited a phase of a scholar and became highly respectable in the scholarly circles of Navadvip. And then he embraced the path of bhakti, thereby bringing respectability to the path of bhakti even among scholars who would otherwise dismiss it as a sentimental path.

The Lord arranging something similar for Bhaktinod Thakur also. At that time, the Bhartraloka was the term used for people who in Bengal who were very well educated and educated in terms of knowing English and educated in the Western in in this case, the British way of education and were employed and were quite well read. And Bhakkirath Thakur was the pioneer later became the pioneer in taking Gaudiya Vishnuism to that demographic. And so, he did become respectable among the Bhadraloka at that time through His writings, through His intellectual vigor and accomplishments and these were not devotional writings. He basically moved among elite circle, intellectual circles in Calcutta at that time And then thereafter when he embraced the path of bhakti, he brought the respectability of the belonging to the Bhadraloka to the path of Bhakti, specifically Gaudiya Vaishnav Bhakti which had fallen into disrepute because of various reasons.

So now that brings us to second part, did he was he averse to bhakti and averse to bhagavatam because of western education. That’s only part of the reason. And it is true that Christianity as well as western rationality, while they themselves were at war in Europe, both of them attacked Hinduism in India for different reasons. Christianity, because it was a pagan religion, considered Hinduism to be a pagan religion that had to be eradicated and Western rationality considered it to be irrational and superstitious and therefore that was their general attack on religion per se, not specifically on Hinduism. They were attacking Christianity in the West also.

So when we say West reading western thinkers led him to become averse. It is basically an inter religious dispute as well as a dispute between the rationality and the seeming irrationality. That was the issue. So, I think the bigger problem was that the reality of the Gaudiya tradition was itself quite reproachable at that time. Lot of people had become sahajaic and were doing immoral things.

Be it eating meat and saying the holy name could remove all sins. Not just the sin of eating meat, but others far worse sins also. Or be it imitating Krishna Dila with the gopis and saying that it is that the Avesh of Krishna has entered into them. The Avesh of the go of Radharani and the gopis has entered into the women they were polluting. So there was immorality and often that put off a lot of people who were moral and thoughtful and upstanding.

And also we know that Chetan Cherta Amrata which gives a theological understanding of Mahaprabhu’s teachings was not available at all. Chetan lila was known, but it was more through the past time oriented books like Chetan bhagod and Chetanamangal. So the Gaudiya tradition itself had lost both its moral and philosophical moorings or anchoring. So, my understanding is it was far more the state of the Gaudiya tradition that led Bhakti Vinod Thakur to not having any appreciation for it. And of course, there are valid western criticisms and Bhakti Natakur wrote essay on the Bhagavatam.

There he mentions three challenges with respect to understanding the Bhagavatam. The first is the cosmology which is a problem even till now. It just makes no sense to the rational mind And he tried to address that question in the Krishnasammita which itself became a controversial book and which is controversial even now. Although many devotees are moving towards some variant of that approach given by him, where basically he tries to separate the material knowledge in the Bhagavatam from the spiritual knowledge. It is a very simplified position, explanation of what he is doing.

The second was that the philosophy of the Bhagavatam seems complex and sometimes contradictory. Sometimes it seems to be supporting personalism, sometimes impersonalism and sometimes it seems to be a bit of a hodgepodge of Sankhya and other things. So, then he says that a great book will not be reducible to any particular way of reading rather than we trying to reduce the book to our frame of reference and evaluating whether it fits, we need to expand our frame of reference to see what the book is saying. Again, I’m paraphrasing. And the third question was about the immorality of Krishna’s dealings with the gopis and the subsequent immorality in society created by that example.

And it was when he read Chechen Charita Amrut and when he understood perkyurus from Krishna’s Guru, Rajaswami’s explanations and his own prayer to the lord that he was satisfied that this was transcendental. And again that problem is there even today. So overall my understanding is that rather than holding the reading reading western philosophy as being the cause of his negative feelings towards the bhagavatam and the bhakti path. It was the problems in both of these as they were practiced and the problems in these which are natural to any thoughtful mind that is rationally evaluating them. Those were the cause of the issue and he himself became an exemplar in demonstrating how these issues could be resolved.

That’s why Prabhupada also called him the founder of the modern day Krishna consciousness movement. And he said father of the modern day Krishna consciousness movement. And we also need to consider today that we face the same challenges and we also need to find out ways to address those challenges appropriately. Especially in today’s world telling people don’t read these books or and that will cause you to lose your faith is not the healthiest approach because people are anyway through the social media and Internet exposed to opposing views and we need to equip them to defend those views.

The post Did Bhaktivinoda Thakura go through a phase of being averse to Bhakti and the Bhagavatam, and was this aversion due to his reading of Western philosophers? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

His Holiness Trivikrama Swami stands as one of the most steadfast and devoted disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. At the venerable age of 84, he continues to exemplify unwavering dedication to spreading Krishna consciousness worldwide through his preaching, leadership, and personal example. His journey spanning over five decades of service demonstrates
Read More...

For each of us, discipline can sometimes feel like someone else is imposing rules on us, and we just have to follow them. Last year, I was in America, staying with a devotee family. Their son was a young adult—actually, a teenager who had just received his driving license. He was kindly driving me to various programs.

One day, we spent a lot of time talking about different topics. I have a deep interest in English literature, so we naturally got into that. During one of our conversations, he said something very striking: “I feel as if my parents don’t love me at all.”

I asked him, “Why do you feel that way? Don’t they care about you and take care of you?”
He replied, “Yes, they do—but I feel like they love a future version of me. And they’re just tolerating me until that version arrives.”

That was a very insightful point. Sometimes, parents can have high expectations, and while those expectations are meant to inspire growth, they can sometimes make a child feel unloved in the present.

But it’s not that parents don’t love their child as they are, right? And similarly, it’s not that Krishna only loves some future version of us—when we become pure devotees. It’s not that He’s merely tolerating us until then. Not at all. Krishna loves us as we are, right now. Of course, He also wants us to grow and become better, but His love is present even now.

If we visualize Krishna in the center, around Him are many concentric circles of love. At the core, there are the Gopis of Vrindavan, then the Vrindavan vasis, the Vaikuntha vasis, pure devotees in this world, and so on. Ultimately, every living being is within one of these circles. The journey of bhakti is about moving closer to Krishna—into deeper circles of love. But even in our current position, Krishna loves us.

Now, when it comes to discipline, we shouldn’t feel insecure just because we don’t meet certain external standards. Discipline is best understood not as a burden but as a negotiation—a negotiation between the present me and the potential me.

Let’s consider an analogy. Suppose we’re caught in a storm, and all supplies are cut off. We have food that could last for a week, but today, I feel very hungry and want to eat a lot. If I eat too much today, I may have nothing left for the future. But if I eat too little, I may not have the strength to survive until that future. So, we have to find a balanced way to care for both the present and the future.

If we care only for the present, we may stagnate or even degrade. “Let me just enjoy now—sleep in, relax, have fun.” But that might leave us with no future worth enjoying. No degree, no career, no foundation.

On the other hand, if we care only for the future, we may suffocate. That’s what this boy was feeling—his parents cared only for the person he should become, and not for who he was. That kind of pressure can lead to resentment and rebellion.

So, each person has to find their own way of negotiating between their present and potential selves. This balance looks different for everyone. Even parents with two children can’t apply the same disciplinary rules to both—each child is unique. Likewise, each of us must find what works for our spiritual growth.

For example, I may choose to fast one day. But if that leads me to fall sick and go to the hospital the next day, that’s not sustainable. Or I may decide to wake up early, but if I’m groggy and unproductive the whole day, it defeats the purpose. So maybe I need to sleep earlier, or restructure my schedule. If that’s not currently possible, I should ask: What is reasonable for me right now?

That’s why I find it helpful to look at standards in an analog rather than digital way. In digital terms, it’s binary: if you do this, you’re a good devotee; if not, you’re a failure. But in analog terms, it’s a spectrum.

On that spectrum, I can define two key points:

• What is desirable for me (what I aspire to)
• What is non-negotiable (what I will do no matter what)

Maybe I aim to read the Bhagavad Gita for one hour daily. On some days, that’s just not possible. So, maybe I read just one page—that takes five minutes. Or I might say, “If not daily, I’ll read for two to three hours over the week.”

When we see our spiritual life as a spectrum, it becomes more sustainable. We honor our present capacity, while steadily moving toward our potential. And that is a much healthier way to maintain long-term discipline and devotion.

The post How do we overcome guilt caused by our inability to practice spirituality seriously? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Nestled amidst the serene landscapes of Alachua, Florida, the New Raman Reti community stands as a vibrant testament to the enduring legacy of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). Established in 1977, this 127-acre spiritual haven has evolved into North America’s largest Hare Krishna community, blending ancient Vedic traditions with innovative sustainability practices. Through
Read More...

By Sukanti Radha devi dasi I had the wonderful opportunity to conduct a children’s programme at ISKCON Denmark, aimed at educating the young minds about the Temple of Vedic Planetarium (TOVP) during the TOVP Marathon EU Tour 2025. This initiative is crucial, as instilling an understanding of such significant projects at an early age helps
Read More...

Today is Srila Vrindavan dasa Thakura’s disappearance day. Sri Caitanya-caritamrta (Adi 11.55) states, “Srila Vyasadeva described the pastimes of Krsna in Srimad-Bhagavatam. The Vyasa of the pastimes of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu was Vrndavana dasa.” Srila Prabhupada elaborates in his purport: “Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura was an incarnation of Vedavyasa and also a friendly cowherd boy named Kusumapida in krsna-lila. In other words, the author of Sri Caitanya-bhagavata, Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura, the son of Srivasa Thakura’s niece Narayani, was a combined incarnation of Vedavyasa and the cowherd boy Kusumapida.” Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura was the last initiated disciple of Sri Nityananda Prabhu.

In Sri Caitanya-caritamrta (Adi 8.33–40, 42, 44) Srila Krishnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami glorifies Srila Vrindavan dasa Thakura and his book Sri Caitanya-bhagavata (then called Sri Caitanya-mangala): “O fools, just read Sri Caitanya-mangala! By reading this book you can understand all the glories of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Thakura Vrndavana dasa has composed Sri Caitanya-mangala. Hearing this book annihilates all misfortune. By reading Sri Caitanya-mangala one can understand all the glories and truths of Lord Caitanya and Nityananda and come to the ultimate conclusion of devotional service to Lord Krsna. In Sri Caitanya-mangala [later known as Sri Caitanya-bhagavata] Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura has given the conclusion and essence of devotional service by quoting the authoritative statements of Srimad-Bhagavatam. If even a great atheist hears Sri Caitanya-mangala, he immediately becomes a great devotee. The subject matter of this book is so sublime that it appears that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has personally spoken through the writings of Sri Vrndavana dasa Thakura. I offer millions of obeisances unto the lotus feet of Vrndavana dasa Thakura. No one else could write such a wonderful book for the deliverance of all fallen souls. What a wonderful description he has given of the pastimes of Lord Caitanya! Anyone in the three worlds who hears it is purified. Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura has written Sri Caitanya-mangala and therein described in all respects the pastimes of Lord Caitanya.”

In his purport to text 45, Srila Prabhupada writes, “Sri Vrndavana dasa Thakura’s Sri Caitanya-bhagavata was originally entitled Sri Caitanya-mangala, but when Srila Locana dasa Thakura later wrote another book named Sri Caitanya-mangala, Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura changed the name of his own book, which is now therefore known as Sri Caitanya-bhagavata. The life of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is very elaborately described in the Caitanya-bhagavata, and Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami has already informed us that in his Sri Caitanya-caritamrta he has described whatever Vrndavana dasa Thakura has not mentioned. This acceptance of Sri Caitanya-bhagavata by Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami indicates his acceptance of the disciplic succession. A writer of transcendental literature never tries to surpass the previous acaryas.”

And he writes in his purport to text 48, “The subject matter of this book is so sublime that it appears that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has personally spoken through the writings of Sri Vrndavana dasa Thakura”—Srila Prabhupada explains, “The secret in a devotee’s writing is that when he writes about the pastimes of the Lord, the Lord helps him; he does not write himself. As stated in the Bhagavad-gita (10.10), dadami buddhi-yogam tam yena mam upayanti te. Since a devotee writes in service to the Lord, the Lord from within gives him so much intelligence that he sits down near the Lord and goes on writing books. Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami confirms that what Vrndavana dasa Thakura wrote was actually spoken by Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and that Vrndavana dasa simply repeated it.”

How blessed we are to receive knowledge of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu through our glorious parampara—and to be engaged in their service.

Hare Krishna.

Yours in service,
Giriraj Swami

What is the Bhagavad Gita perspective or the Vedic perspective on IVF? I would say that the Bhagavad Gita offers us timeless principles and it is for us to apply them according to our time, place and circumstance. So it’s more that the Gita offers us a compass rather than a catalogue. A catalogue where exhaustively all choices and all circumstances are described.

So I will talk from both perspectives and then I will give my personal understanding. We could say that at one level it is the dharma of householders to have children and we have a debt to our ancestors and we fulfill that debt by having children, continuing the lineage. And we see that in the Vedic times, kings would often go to great endeavours and even extreme endeavours to try to have children.

Sometimes the yajnas would be elaborate, expensive. We can say that the yajnas also are falling within the purview of dharma and that is true. At the same time it’s an effort beyond the normal process of procreation.

So in that sense if one’s primary consciousness is that I want to do the dharma and therefore if I need some, in today’s world, yajna is seen as religion but yajna also that was technology in one sense. Even demons would perform yajnas and they did not do it in a dharmic perspective. They would perform yajnas to get power.

So yajna was technology at that time and today we may have a different kind of technology and we may use technology to fulfill our dharma. Now if we take it further, we are not just trying to adhere to dharma and fulfill our debt to our ancestors. We are also trying to practice bhakti where we would like to serve Krishna by being a medium for devotionally inclined souls to come into this world and to further facilitate their devotional journey so that they can do good in this world and also attain the ultimate destination beyond this world.

So this is the broadly the pro perspective from the perspective of dharma and bhakti. We take the precedent of whatever effort may be required according to context, we do that effort. Now the other side could be that one definition of dharma itself is boundaries.

The difference between devatas and dhanavas is not that the devatas don’t have material desires. Devatas also have worldly desires but devatas keep their worldly desires within the boundaries of dharma. So dharma means duty but dharma also means boundary.

So even for doing our duty we need to act within boundaries. So that’s why warfare was also meant to be fair. That yes you have to kill the opponents but you have to kill them in a fair fight.

So now from that perspective you could say that what boundaries are being violated over here, transgressed over here. So the main concern in IVF is that there are multiple embryos that are formed and when the embryos are growing it is natural to infer that there is a soul over there. Without that growth will not happen.

So those embryos often get wasted and sometimes they may be destroyed. Sometimes they may be preserved in the fridge for a long time to be used by one person or may be donated to others. But the point is there is a lot of wastage of embryos and sometimes the embryos may be considered unviable because they have certain biological deficiencies, neurological deficiencies whatever.

So there is certain amount of we can call it killing which may be a little harsh word. But certainly there is some damage, some serious damage is there. One may feel I do not want to go in that direction.

Now taking this perspective further we could also say that in every activity there is collateral damage. So even in the process of normal reproduction when the semen enters into the female body there are so many sperms over there. Now do all the sperms have souls? We do not really know.

We could say even normal reproduction itself is a wasteful process. So now we also say that depending on the consciousness of the couple at the time of union that kind of soul is attracted. But then we also heard that the soul is already present in the sperms.

So then one logical inference could be that there are many souls who are present in many sperms and depending on the consciousness at that particular time that particular sperm succeeds in reaching and ovulating eventually, contributing to ovulation. So the natural process itself to some extent involves some level of loss of life you could say or loss of the potential to gain embodied life for the souls who are in those particular sperms but which do not reach there. They perish on the way.

Now beyond that nature also has miscarriages. So now when we say we are interfering with nature or we are disrupting the natural process how do we define that? Because we could say that when it is hot and we use a fan are we interfering in the natural process? If we have got cough and we take a medicine, even if it is ayurvedic medicine are we interfering in the natural process? In one sense the very definition of human intelligence is to interfere with natural process that nature has made humans quite vulnerable and slow. It is by our intelligence that we have acquired, we developed weapons by which we could defend ourselves, by which we could become the most powerful species on the earth.

So is it that passively accepting everything that nature imposes on us is virtue? No it is not. It is said that the Pandavas converted the Khando Prastha into Indra Prastha. That is from a natural forest they made into urban place, not even rural, they made urban.

And that’s considered the mercy of Krishna. So here they were at one level destroying the environment. Of course they were doing something beneficial not just for corporate greed but for dharma and bhakti they were doing it.

So where do we draw the line? This is where interfering with the natural process is something which is objectionable. Now we could say that when our interference in the natural process causes harm to others but then destroying the forest caused harm to the living beings in the forest. We could say that those beings are demoniac living beings and who were killed over there.

That may be true but every single person was a demoniac or some beings were demoniac. There is always collateral damage and some people may accept that this is the collateral damage that I am ready to accept. So now if we take this further, when you go into consideration of karma, now my understanding is it is much more helpful to be Krishna conscious than to be karma conscious.

Of course a part of being Krishna conscious, Krishna conscious is like a big circle with that karma conscious is a smaller circle. We should be so karma conscious that we stop being Krishna conscious. Krishna conscious means how best can I serve Krishna in this situation.

Karma conscious is what are the karmic implications of the actions that I will do in this situation. So sometimes there may be some negative karma but if the service to Krishna is going to be facilitated by that anybody may accept that. So if there are less intrusive ways in which the problem of fertility can be addressed.

Say for example some hormonal treatment can be given and that solves the issue. Then that is definitely better than going for IVF. So now beyond that if there are embryos that are preserved and if we donate them to others then at one level somebody might say that we are failing in our responsibility to take care of that child which is our child.

Another way we could also say it is that we are blessing someone who does not have a child with a child. And generally those who are going to such extremes to get a child through this accepting as donation the embryo given by someone else they are unlikely to be careless parents. The fact that they are going through so much effort means that they are likely to care.

We cannot always control that. But then we can’t control how much caring we ourselves will be. We don’t know what we will be able to do in the future.

What condition we will be in physically, financially, emotionally. We can only based on the present knowledge that we have make certain decisions based on that knowledge. So in many ways let’s say if a couple or even a single mother who is not able to take care of a newborn child gives a child for adoption it’s a painful decision for her to let go of the child but then that may be the best for the child.

If she herself is not able to take care of the child. So I wouldn’t say that that necessarily means negative karma. Freezing the embryo for a long time will delay the souls acquiring a body.

Well yes that is true. But then to what extent do we draw that particular line? We could say that every time a man does not unite with a woman that opportunity for the soul that are there in the semen of the man are not getting the opportunity. We could take that further and say that somebody who is a celibate is depriving all the souls in their semen of having a child.

So once we start going in these directions we can go to any extreme in these directions. So this can lead to paralysis by analysis. Now of course there are answers over here that if somebody wants to follow celibacy there are other dharmas to be followed.

Giving a soul a body is one dharma. There could be another dharma of focusing on consciousness of Krishna and then inspiring others to come towards Krishna. So it’s not just that we are following one dharma.

We live in a world where there are many different dharmas and some dharma may be prioritized above another dharma. So it’s not just giving the soul a body. It’s also we have to take care of the soul afterwards.

And so if a couple decides to not have a child for some time that’s not depriving the soul of the body. That’s equipping themselves so that when they have children they can take care of the child properly. Now beyond all this if somebody wants to consider a more natural way that could be adoption.

With respect to adoption also there are different perspectives. For some people the idea is that we don’t know the karma of the child and therefore it may be very difficult if the child has very negative samskaras to actually take care of the child and help the child to grow up properly. That’s a valid consideration.

Now in the Buddhist tradition they also have the philosophy of karma although they don’t accept the atma but they accept the philosophy of karma. And there they consider adoption to be an act of great negative karma neutralization. That means their perspective is that when you accept a child whose karma you do not know you are taking a risk for the benefit of another living being.

And taking that risk for taking care of another living being is a laudable thing. So ultimately how karma works it could be read in different ways. In the Buddhist tradition as per I have seen the concepts of maintaining genealogical purity have not been emphasized that much.

In many ways Buddhism was a rebellion against the caste system and the caste discrimination. So that could be one reason. So you are saying traditionally it was not there it could have been added later as well.

No. And it became a rebellion toward the caste system. Yeah it was from the beginning itself.

One reason what we learn from the Vaishnava history is that it was to stop meat eating. But if you look at the secular history one of the reasons why Buddhism came separate was that Buddhism did accept the caste system. Oh I see.

So in that sense the idea of racial purity and preserving the racial purity is not that important in Buddhism. So among the various religions as far as I know Hindus have the lowest adoption rate. Christians have the highest.

And even then Hindus try to adopt from their extended family or from something like that so that they know the genealogy. So if that is a major consideration from us then that’s one cross for adoption. But if that is not a major consideration then the Buddhist perspective is not incompatible with the Vaishnava understanding.

It’s a service when we are also trying to do outreach. When we are trying to connect with people we don’t know what their karma is. And we are in one sense if we become mentors, counselors, somebody becomes a spiritual master they are taking responsibility of people whose karma they do not know.

Of course in that case those people have committed to a certain degree voluntarily and there is some indication of their spiritual seriousness. So there is some difference over there. But the point of whether the point of karma should be the sole criteria for deciding whether to adopt or not I would say that not the sole criteria.

Ultimately like I said it’s a compass not a catalogue. And each one of us may have to weigh which factor is most important for us. So there are two more points I will make with respect to this that when we are considering something like IVF it’s apart from the expense that is financial there is also a certain level of toll that it takes on the female body.

It’s not a very easy process many times. Sometimes there are much more complications than others sometimes it’s not that complicated. So I would say that there have to be some boundaries to how much one tries it also.

Otherwise repeatedly trying it can also create problems. And the other is that in general our movement is moving more and more towards a certain level of applicational decentralization. Applicational decentralization means that how devotees will apply the principles of Krishna consciousness in their life is something which devotees are deciding individually.

So for example when we were a monastic movement more or less with everybody staying in the temple. The temple authorities or the spiritual masters they were given guidelines for every aspect of life. But now as our movement is spreading different devotees engage with the world to different degrees.

And different devotees function in different ways. So for example what kind of food do we eat? We always eat food that is cooked by us offered in the deity. And then we eat some outside food which is offered mentally taken.

And we may say there are lower and higher standard that’s true. But it’s very difficult to mandate one standard. And some devotees may have a different priority.

Some devotees may consider the food is very very important. Some devotees may say okay I won’t spend so much time on cooking food. I can read scripture, I can talk with people, I can do so many other services if I don’t spend so much time on cooking.

So again within the bhakti hierarchy which particular principle a particular person prioritizes that may vary from person to person. So some people may adopt a more confrontational approach in their preaching because they say ultimately we want serious people. And some others may adopt a non-confrontational approach and they may say that we want people to at least take some steps towards bhakti.

Let them at least, even if they can’t go all the way, let them at least get some ajnansu, get some positivity towards Krishna. So who is right? I can’t really say only one person is right. It’s a matter of some people want to help people come all the way to Krishna.

Others will say at least let them take some steps. So ultimately I would say that we can consult others but it’s an individual decision. And as of now our movement is not intellectually or theologically at a place where it will come up with one statement on this issue.

I don’t see it happening for several years. And also because we are such a global movement, even if we come with one position paper, whether everybody will agree with that position is also open to question. So that’s why it’s something which we can deliberate, maybe pray to Krishna and write down our pros and cons and see what weighs more for us individually.

So in such situations where it’s not an absolute moral black and white, the moral weight of various parameters may be different for different people. So which parameter weighs how much for us is something which we will have to consider and based on that we can make a decision. Thank you.

The post What is the dharmik perspective on IVF or in vitro fertilization? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

What is the Bhagavad Gita perspective or the Vedic perspective on IVF? I would say that the Bhagavad Gita offers us timeless principles and it is for us to apply them according to our time, place and circumstance. So it’s more that the Gita offers us a compass rather than a catalogue. A catalogue where exhaustively all choices and all circumstances are described.

So I will talk from both perspectives and then I will give my personal understanding. We could say that at one level it is the dharma of householders to have children and we have a debt to our ancestors and we fulfill that debt by having children, continuing the lineage. And we see that in the Vedic times, kings would often go to great endeavours and even extreme endeavours to try to have children.

Sometimes the yajnas would be elaborate, expensive. We can say that the yajnas also are falling within the purview of dharma and that is true. At the same time it’s an effort beyond the normal process of procreation.

So in that sense if one’s primary consciousness is that I want to do the dharma and therefore if I need some, in today’s world, yajna is seen as religion but yajna also that was technology in one sense. Even demons would perform yajnas and they did not do it in a dharmic perspective. They would perform yajnas to get power.

So yajna was technology at that time and today we may have a different kind of technology and we may use technology to fulfill our dharma. Now if we take it further, we are not just trying to adhere to dharma and fulfill our debt to our ancestors. We are also trying to practice bhakti where we would like to serve Krishna by being a medium for devotionally inclined souls to come into this world and to further facilitate their devotional journey so that they can do good in this world and also attain the ultimate destination beyond this world.

So this is the broadly the pro perspective from the perspective of dharma and bhakti. We take the precedent of whatever effort may be required according to context, we do that effort. Now the other side could be that one definition of dharma itself is boundaries.

The difference between devatas and dhanavas is not that the devatas don’t have material desires. Devatas also have worldly desires but devatas keep their worldly desires within the boundaries of dharma. So dharma means duty but dharma also means boundary.

So even for doing our duty we need to act within boundaries. So that’s why warfare was also meant to be fair. That yes you have to kill the opponents but you have to kill them in a fair fight.

So now from that perspective you could say that what boundaries are being violated over here, transgressed over here. So the main concern in IVF is that there are multiple embryos that are formed and when the embryos are growing it is natural to infer that there is a soul over there. Without that growth will not happen.

So those embryos often get wasted and sometimes they may be destroyed. Sometimes they may be preserved in the fridge for a long time to be used by one person or may be donated to others. But the point is there is a lot of wastage of embryos and sometimes the embryos may be considered unviable because they have certain biological deficiencies, neurological deficiencies whatever.

So there is certain amount of we can call it killing which may be a little harsh word. But certainly there is some damage, some serious damage is there. One may feel I do not want to go in that direction.

Now taking this perspective further we could also say that in every activity there is collateral damage. So even in the process of normal reproduction when the semen enters into the female body there are so many sperms over there. Now do all the sperms have souls? We do not really know.

We could say even normal reproduction itself is a wasteful process. So now we also say that depending on the consciousness of the couple at the time of union that kind of soul is attracted. But then we also heard that the soul is already present in the sperms.

So then one logical inference could be that there are many souls who are present in many sperms and depending on the consciousness at that particular time that particular sperm succeeds in reaching and ovulating eventually, contributing to ovulation. So the natural process itself to some extent involves some level of loss of life you could say or loss of the potential to gain embodied life for the souls who are in those particular sperms but which do not reach there. They perish on the way.

Now beyond that nature also has miscarriages. So now when we say we are interfering with nature or we are disrupting the natural process how do we define that? Because we could say that when it is hot and we use a fan are we interfering in the natural process? If we have got cough and we take a medicine, even if it is ayurvedic medicine are we interfering in the natural process? In one sense the very definition of human intelligence is to interfere with natural process that nature has made humans quite vulnerable and slow. It is by our intelligence that we have acquired, we developed weapons by which we could defend ourselves, by which we could become the most powerful species on the earth.

So is it that passively accepting everything that nature imposes on us is virtue? No it is not. It is said that the Pandavas converted the Khando Prastha into Indra Prastha. That is from a natural forest they made into urban place, not even rural, they made urban.

And that’s considered the mercy of Krishna. So here they were at one level destroying the environment. Of course they were doing something beneficial not just for corporate greed but for dharma and bhakti they were doing it.

So where do we draw the line? This is where interfering with the natural process is something which is objectionable. Now we could say that when our interference in the natural process causes harm to others but then destroying the forest caused harm to the living beings in the forest. We could say that those beings are demoniac living beings and who were killed over there.

That may be true but every single person was a demoniac or some beings were demoniac. There is always collateral damage and some people may accept that this is the collateral damage that I am ready to accept. So now if we take this further, when you go into consideration of karma, now my understanding is it is much more helpful to be Krishna conscious than to be karma conscious.

Of course a part of being Krishna conscious, Krishna conscious is like a big circle with that karma conscious is a smaller circle. We should be so karma conscious that we stop being Krishna conscious. Krishna conscious means how best can I serve Krishna in this situation.

Karma conscious is what are the karmic implications of the actions that I will do in this situation. So sometimes there may be some negative karma but if the service to Krishna is going to be facilitated by that anybody may accept that. So if there are less intrusive ways in which the problem of fertility can be addressed.

Say for example some hormonal treatment can be given and that solves the issue. Then that is definitely better than going for IVF. So now beyond that if there are embryos that are preserved and if we donate them to others then at one level somebody might say that we are failing in our responsibility to take care of that child which is our child.

Another way we could also say it is that we are blessing someone who does not have a child with a child. And generally those who are going to such extremes to get a child through this accepting as donation the embryo given by someone else they are unlikely to be careless parents. The fact that they are going through so much effort means that they are likely to care.

We cannot always control that. But then we can’t control how much caring we ourselves will be. We don’t know what we will be able to do in the future.

What condition we will be in physically, financially, emotionally. We can only based on the present knowledge that we have make certain decisions based on that knowledge. So in many ways let’s say if a couple or even a single mother who is not able to take care of a newborn child gives a child for adoption it’s a painful decision for her to let go of the child but then that may be the best for the child.

If she herself is not able to take care of the child. So I wouldn’t say that that necessarily means negative karma. Freezing the embryo for a long time will delay the souls acquiring a body.

Well yes that is true. But then to what extent do we draw that particular line? We could say that every time a man does not unite with a woman that opportunity for the soul that are there in the semen of the man are not getting the opportunity. We could take that further and say that somebody who is a celibate is depriving all the souls in their semen of having a child.

So once we start going in these directions we can go to any extreme in these directions. So this can lead to paralysis by analysis. Now of course there are answers over here that if somebody wants to follow celibacy there are other dharmas to be followed.

Giving a soul a body is one dharma. There could be another dharma of focusing on consciousness of Krishna and then inspiring others to come towards Krishna. So it’s not just that we are following one dharma.

We live in a world where there are many different dharmas and some dharma may be prioritized above another dharma. So it’s not just giving the soul a body. It’s also we have to take care of the soul afterwards.

And so if a couple decides to not have a child for some time that’s not depriving the soul of the body. That’s equipping themselves so that when they have children they can take care of the child properly. Now beyond all this if somebody wants to consider a more natural way that could be adoption.

With respect to adoption also there are different perspectives. For some people the idea is that we don’t know the karma of the child and therefore it may be very difficult if the child has very negative samskaras to actually take care of the child and help the child to grow up properly. That’s a valid consideration.

Now in the Buddhist tradition they also have the philosophy of karma although they don’t accept the atma but they accept the philosophy of karma. And there they consider adoption to be an act of great negative karma neutralization. That means their perspective is that when you accept a child whose karma you do not know you are taking a risk for the benefit of another living being.

And taking that risk for taking care of another living being is a laudable thing. So ultimately how karma works it could be read in different ways. In the Buddhist tradition as per I have seen the concepts of maintaining genealogical purity have not been emphasized that much.

In many ways Buddhism was a rebellion against the caste system and the caste discrimination. So that could be one reason. So you are saying traditionally it was not there it could have been added later as well.

No. And it became a rebellion toward the caste system. Yeah it was from the beginning itself.

One reason what we learn from the Vaishnava history is that it was to stop meat eating. But if you look at the secular history one of the reasons why Buddhism came separate was that Buddhism did accept the caste system. Oh I see.

So in that sense the idea of racial purity and preserving the racial purity is not that important in Buddhism. So among the various religions as far as I know Hindus have the lowest adoption rate. Christians have the highest.

And even then Hindus try to adopt from their extended family or from something like that so that they know the genealogy. So if that is a major consideration from us then that’s one cross for adoption. But if that is not a major consideration then the Buddhist perspective is not incompatible with the Vaishnava understanding.

It’s a service when we are also trying to do outreach. When we are trying to connect with people we don’t know what their karma is. And we are in one sense if we become mentors, counselors, somebody becomes a spiritual master they are taking responsibility of people whose karma they do not know.

Of course in that case those people have committed to a certain degree voluntarily and there is some indication of their spiritual seriousness. So there is some difference over there. But the point of whether the point of karma should be the sole criteria for deciding whether to adopt or not I would say that not the sole criteria.

Ultimately like I said it’s a compass not a catalogue. And each one of us may have to weigh which factor is most important for us. So there are two more points I will make with respect to this that when we are considering something like IVF it’s apart from the expense that is financial there is also a certain level of toll that it takes on the female body.

It’s not a very easy process many times. Sometimes there are much more complications than others sometimes it’s not that complicated. So I would say that there have to be some boundaries to how much one tries it also.

Otherwise repeatedly trying it can also create problems. And the other is that in general our movement is moving more and more towards a certain level of applicational decentralization. Applicational decentralization means that how devotees will apply the principles of Krishna consciousness in their life is something which devotees are deciding individually.

So for example when we were a monastic movement more or less with everybody staying in the temple. The temple authorities or the spiritual masters they were given guidelines for every aspect of life. But now as our movement is spreading different devotees engage with the world to different degrees.

And different devotees function in different ways. So for example what kind of food do we eat? We always eat food that is cooked by us offered in the deity. And then we eat some outside food which is offered mentally taken.

And we may say there are lower and higher standard that’s true. But it’s very difficult to mandate one standard. And some devotees may have a different priority.

Some devotees may consider the food is very very important. Some devotees may say okay I won’t spend so much time on cooking food. I can read scripture, I can talk with people, I can do so many other services if I don’t spend so much time on cooking.

So again within the bhakti hierarchy which particular principle a particular person prioritizes that may vary from person to person. So some people may adopt a more confrontational approach in their preaching because they say ultimately we want serious people. And some others may adopt a non-confrontational approach and they may say that we want people to at least take some steps towards bhakti.

Let them at least, even if they can’t go all the way, let them at least get some ajnansu, get some positivity towards Krishna. So who is right? I can’t really say only one person is right. It’s a matter of some people want to help people come all the way to Krishna.

Others will say at least let them take some steps. So ultimately I would say that we can consult others but it’s an individual decision. And as of now our movement is not intellectually or theologically at a place where it will come up with one statement on this issue.

I don’t see it happening for several years. And also because we are such a global movement, even if we come with one position paper, whether everybody will agree with that position is also open to question. So that’s why it’s something which we can deliberate, maybe pray to Krishna and write down our pros and cons and see what weighs more for us individually.

So in such situations where it’s not an absolute moral black and white, the moral weight of various parameters may be different for different people. So which parameter weighs how much for us is something which we will have to consider and based on that we can make a decision. Thank you.

The post What is the dharmik perspective on IVF or in vitro fertilization? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

All glories to the Vyas of Chaitanya Lila, Srila Vrindavan das thakur, a dear devotee of Shri Chaitnaya Mahaprabhu and the disciple of Shrila Nityananda Prabhu, who wrote the Sri Chaitanya bhagawat, a book greatly treasured by all the vaishnavas. 

All gloried to this auspicious day, on which Shrila Vrindavan das thakur took birth from the womb of Shrimati Narayani devi, the niece of Shrivas pandit and the recipient of Shri Chaitanya Mahraprabhu’s unlimited mercy. Shrimati Narayani devi would always be blessed with Mahaprabhu’s remnants, the leftovers after he had eaten, and once on Mahaprabhu’s instruction she danced and called out to Krishna in ecstasy at the tender age of 4. 

Due to Vrindavan das thakur’s father’s untimely departure from this world, while he was still in his mother’s womb, Malini devi, the wife of Shrivas Pandit, brought Narayani devi and Vrindavan das thakur to her father, Vasudev datta’s home in mamgacchi, where he was raised with great love and affection and was cared for as a valuable jem, as stated by Bhaktisiddhanta in his commentary on Shri Chaitanya Bhagwat. 

Thereafter, at the young age of 16, he took shelter of the lotus feet of Shri Nityananda Prabhu and is said to be the last disciple accepted by Nityananda Prabhu. While traveling with him and preaching, he was instructed to remain at Denur and continue preaching there, which he did and his deities of Shri Shri Gaur Nitai are still present at Denur, mercifully bestowing their mercy on all those who go take darshan of them there. 

Later onward he also attended the first Gaur Purnima festival in Kheturi dham organized by Narottam das thakur, where he went with Shrimati Jahnava Ma, the eternal consort of Nityananda Prabhu. He continued preaching and authored the great book Shri Chaitanya Bhagwat, describing the wonderful pastimes of Sri Chaitanya dev, the life and soul of all the gaudiya vaishnavas.

His Shri Chaitanya Bhagwat has been glorified by Shrila Krishna Das Kaviraaj Goswami in the Chaitanya Charitamrita, where he has stated that Shrila Vrindavan das thakur has delivered everyone by writing this masterpiece. 

He further glorifies Vrindavan das thakur, by stating that he is the incarnation of Shrila Vyasadev, as he has written this most glorious book. Shrila Vyasadev had written all the Vedas, Upanishads and the essence of all, Shrimad Bhagwatam, and by appearing again as Shri Vrindavan das thakur he has now written the Shri Chaitanya Bhagwat, which could not have been written by any ordinary human being and seems to have been spoken by Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu himself through the lips of Shrila Vrindavan das thakur.

The 1960s marked a spiritual and cultural awakening across the world, and one of the most profound moments of that era was the arrival of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada in New York City in 1965. With little more than his translations of ancient Vedic texts and an unshakable determination, Srila Prabhupada
Read More...

Today is Earth Day, and I think of a prayer that resonated with me in my youth. “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein. For He has founded it on the seas, and established it on the floods. Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord, or who shall stand in His holy place? He that has clean hands, and a pure heart; who has not lifted up his soul to vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. He shall receive the blessing from the Lord.” (Psalm 24:1–5)

Later, when I met Srila Prabhupada, I came across a verse spoken by the Lord Himself, Krishna, which confirmed and expanded the same principle. “A person in full consciousness of Me, knowing Me to be the ultimate beneficiary of all sacrifices and austerities, the Supreme Lord of all planets and demigods, and the benefactor and well-wisher of all living entities, attains peace from the pangs of material miseries.” (Bhagavad-gita 5.29)

How, then, should we deal with the earth and its resources? “Everything animate or inanimate that is within the universe is controlled and owned by the Lord. One should therefore accept only those things necessary for himself, which are set aside as his quota, and one should not accept other things, knowing well to whom they belong.” (Isopanisad 1)

Thus, one should be happy and satisfied in Krishna (God) consciousness.

Hare Krishna.

Yours in service,
Giriraj Swami

A discourse by HG Madana-Gopala Prabhu, 4/15/2025, on passages from the Bhagavatam that describe the churning of the cosmic ocean of milk. The speaker analyzes this episode as a metaphor for spiritual growth and managing one’s own consciousness. Key points: The narrative context: The demigods (celestial beings) have been defeated by demons and approach Lord
Read More...

It’s the example is given, say if there is a mountain and there’s an ocean. Now there’s a trickle of water, some water which is meant going to flow towards the ocean. So that ocean is Krishna.

Now the material world is in the mountain and that drop of water is me, the soul. Now each soul has to find its path towards the ocean. Each soul is like a river moving towards the ocean.

But the important thing is that while the river moves towards the ocean, along the way the river also does a lot of good to all the life forms that are on the side, on its backs. So like that, for us, based on our particular nature, our particular talents, our particular interests, our particular stages of growth that we have come to and not yet come to, we all have some karmic debts from our previous lives which we need to pay or neutralize. So we will have to find our individual path to Krishna and in that individual path towards Krishna, we will have to heal from particular wounds, we will have to grow in particular ways so that individuality is also very much a part of us.

If we consider the Pandavas, they’re all great devotees but each of them was an individual. You look at the Mahabharata, actually you cannot think of a pair of siblings more different than Yudhishthira and Bhima. Yudhishthira was like a Brahmin, they were all Kshatriyas, they were all going to be warriors and protectors but Yudhishthira was more like a Brahmin.

He tried to resolve everything with peace even if it is a great personal cost. Yudhishthira was a Brahmin Kshatriya, Bhima was a Kshatriya Kshatriya, he was Kshatriya squared. He was just looking for an opportunity to use his prowess.

Both of them were united in their devotional aspirations. So there is abundant room for individuality in the path of Bhakti also.

The post Does our soul have a specific purpose for this life apart from the universal purpose for all souls to love Krishna? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Bhaktivedanta Academy Coimbatore Celebrates Its Grand Silver Jubilee at ISKCON Coimbatore The auspicious evening of April 13th, 2025 marked a significant milestone in the Coimbatore Bhaktivedanta Academy, as its celebrated Silver Jubilee marking 25 years of unwavering dedication to spiritual education and devotional service. The grand celebration took place at the serene premises of ISKCON
Read More...