MAN WOMAN INTERACTION LECTURE #21 Budapest, Hungary, 10th Aug 2007 Part 1

The philosophy of Acintya-bhedabheda-tattva then affords an understanding that is hard to get within any other philosophy. You have the element that contradictory aspects can be reconciled with each other. So the point we will discuss is within this category of reconciliation is relationships. Relationships start at the spiritual realm, the concept of relationships is from there. So the relationships how they function in the material world in principle are the same as that in the spiritual world. Difference being that in the spiritual world Krishna is the center of all the relationships, but here in this place then we make our self the center. But the principle how it works is not different. The function of fire in the spiritual world is the same as here. The function of water, rain, sun, clouds, everything is the same. So living entity coming to the material world had no complaint about the social system of the spiritual world. The only complaint was, who is the center of it all? So in the material world means we convert (?) a relationship.

So the process that is given by the Acaryas is then how to connect one's relationships back to Krishna. But the formula of the relationship remains the same. Like Bhaktivinoda Thakura describes Rasa. You have spiritual, you have emotional, you have sensual. But they work on the same principle of Ashraya and Vishaya. The principle is the same. Everything has expanded from Krishna. So how they have expanded from Krishna, it will then reflect the nature of Krishna. So Krishna's whole creation then works according to His nature. So the thing is, how to find that nature? You see that Krishnadasa Kaviraja Goswami then explains that in the beginning there was One. And that One has become Two. So Krishna in position as One is Atmarama. So He exists, but in existence there is no interaction, but there is satisfaction. But there is only Him. When He becomes Two, then there is interaction. Meas, hen you have subject and object. According to grammar, the subject then is the one who performs activity and the object is who receives that activity. So the subject through the verb interacts with the object and then you get the result, the dative. So that result then is Krishna's happiness.

So this is a very important element to understand. Because then Sambandha, Abhideya, Prayojana becomes active. Sambandha can also be inactive. Just like we have transitive and intransitive verbs. Intransitive means, it just shows the state of existence. Krishna is. Then there is Krishna interacting. So then in Sambandha, Abhideya and Prayojana, means the relationship then becomes active. Then there is interaction with the feminine principle. So then Krishna is the masculine principle and His creation is the feminine. Masculine means independent. The masculine principle can either interact or not interact. It can either exist in a state of inaction or in a state of interaction. But the feminine can only interact. The feminine nature is not independent. Therefore without interaction with the masculine principle there is no existence of the feminine. Does that make sense?

So then that means that the state of Sambandha for the interaction of the masculine principle then must be in Pradyumna. You have 4 aspects of Krishna's personality, and when we are dealing with tattva, then that comes into Sankarshana, Pradyumna, Aniruddha and Vasudeva. So Sankarshana and Pradyumna will be Sambandha, Vasudeva is Abhideya and Aniruddha is Prayojana. So that means, Sankarshana means the field of activities, means any action is performed in a field. If there is no situation, how do you interact? Does that make sense? Like we are in the temple now, that's the environment. Or we may be in a house or in a car. But you have to have a field for the relationship. So the male principle establishes the field, that's Sankarshana. But still, there is only existence, there is no interaction. Only at Pradyumna then interaction starts. Pradyumna means the attraction to interaction. That will be Madana-mohana. Then Aniruddha then will be Prayojana, there is the desire or the need to interact. The mind works thinking, feeling and willing. You think about something means you are attracted to it. But you are thinking about a field. Being attracted, then you become attached to the idea of interacting with that field. That's feeling. Then one interacts, that's willing. So we see that how the mind works, is Sambandha-Prayojana-Abhideya. When we explain it according to intelligence, it's working in the logical Sambandha-Abhideya-Prayojana. But when you apply it, that means you have to apply it through the mind, because that's organizing the senses, we go Sambandha-Prayojana-Abhideya. Then that Abhideya will get you the final result, that Prayojana. Does that make sense?

Okay, so that means then, interaction means Pradyumna, Aniruddha and Vasudeva. The attraction to the field, that's Pradyumna. The need for interacting with the field or the experience gained from working with the field and then the actual interaction with the field, that's Vasudeva. So interaction is the central point. So Govindaji, He is the central Deity. Because that's where the attraction and attachment are actually expressed. Attraction is a feeling, attachment is a feeling, but interaction, or Govinda is actually the show of that, the external show. So then, if we look at this, then Sambandha is existence, so that's Krishna, Prayojana is the result or the happiness, that's the feminine, that's Radharani. So They meet or They interact through Vasudeva principle, or Abhideya. Does that make sense? In other words, Krishna and His energy are one. So you don't have to worry about interaction. But as soon as you expand, then you have to bridge that gap. That gap is Abhideya. And the attraction to interacting is Pradyumna. So the masculine principle in Pradyumna then interacts with the feminine principle in Prayojana.

Why the difference? Because we see that a very common mistake that a man will think, "I am providing everything for the wife. I have given house, I have given money, I have given children, I have given facility, and my job is finished." But according to philosophy, that's only Sankarshana, that's only the field. Where is the relationship with the wife and the family? Does that make sense?That's why even though the man is working so hard and he feels he is doing everything, he wonders why there is no relationship and it's falling apart. Because he is functioning in Sankarshana, not in Pradyumna. Means, Pradyumna is expanding from Sankarshana. From Sankarshana comes Pradyumna, from Pradyumna - Aniruddha. Does this make sense? So in other words, the principles that we see, the spiritual priniciples of relationship apply here. And the reason relationships here don't work is because we are not actually applying the  eternal principles on which they are based. Does that make sense?

So here we see that the important element is that the masculine principle is turning to the feminine  for the increase in happiness. But the feminine principle turns to the masculine principle for security. Because that's their existence. If there is no connection, there is no existence. Therefore we see that if there is a difficulty between man and woman is because the man is frustrated because in applying the activities on the female he is not getting the result expected. The principle of anger after frustration as described in the Gita. But feminine anger is the frustration of not finding the connection or experiencing that the connection is somehow or another compromised. So feminine anger stems from insecurity. Does that make sense? That's why in an argument, or let's say, an argument that comes up it doesn't appear that there is any logic for the feminine side. Because lady may have done something wrong, and then the man comments on that. But the words used, the mood used then is not in normal relationship, that creates insecurity in the woman. She gets angry. Man is thinking, "What did I do wrong? She is the one who did wrong." Yes, she was wrong in the skills of applying the material energy, but he was wrong in providing insecurity to the relationship. So then when the argument comes up, that means, first the man has to work out that security. Then only the woman can understand where she went wrong. This is the meaning of leading. Whatever the husband wants the wife to do, he does it first. Because he is the basis, he is the existence. So unless the existence is proper and connection is there with the feminine, then there cannot be interaction. Does that make sense? It's slightly different than the material masculine concept.

When the living entity comes into the material world, it's based on the concept that I am the controller and I am the enjoyer. So you have to control to enjoy. But the point is is that controlling has to be based on the relationship. Otherwise, the controlling and enjoying is not actually a relationship. You are controlling the field, you are enjoying the field, but you don't have a relationship with the field. The wife does service, okay, so you control the wife, she does service. But that's still just Sankarshana, the proper establishment of religious principles, that's Sankarshana. But where is the relationship with the person called "wife"? So therefore that security of relationship must be established.

So like that, there are so many ways that you can approach the Sambandha, Abhideya, Prayojana, or this masculine-feminine principle to apply it in any relationship within the cosmic creation. Does that make sense? Means, when you apply anything, all that's happening is male-female. There is subject and object, subject is masculine, object is feminine. We are talking in principle, not in gender. The principle also can be applied in the greatest variety and depth through male and female gender. But it applies to anything. Means, you want to put a nail in a piece of wood. So the wood becomes the feminine principle, the hammer is the masculine principle. The nail, or the action of driving the nail becomes the interaction, the abhideya. So then in this it brings up the principle that we look at it, Krishna in the Gita says that "I interact, I reciprocate with someone as they surrender to Me." Means, what relationship they feel towards Krishna is what He reciprocates. Krishna is unlimited, He is Rasa, He can be perceived of in any way, shape and form. So depending on how you approach Him that's how He will reciprocate. Does that make sense?

So Mother Yashoda, she sees Krishna as her son, He reciprocates as her son. The cowherd boys see Him as a friend, He reciprocates as a friend. The gopis see Him as a lover, He reciprocates as a lover. So then that means, the masculine principle deals with the feminine principle according to what is the nature of the feminine principle. Does that make sense? That's the actual platform of masculinity. Not like in the material concept that "I am the controller and enjoyer." So Krishna therefore considering the person He is dealing with, that's how He deals. So back to wood example, if the wood is soft, I can put the nail in in one strike or maybe two strikes, and I can hit the nail quite hard. But if the wood is very hard, then I have to hit the nail very softly, and it will take a long time. Or it may be so hard I should drill a hole first, then only put in the nail. Do you understand?

So everything we deal with, if you think about it, we deal with it according to its nature. But interestingly enough, when we deal with people, we don't. And especially in husband and wife. We just think it's supposed to do what we want. But nothing else in the material world works the way we want, we have to interact with it the way it can be interacted with. Does that make sense? That's masculine. That's why Krishna is able to work with anything in the creation, because He is masculine. And it works. So therefore then by applying the actual principles of our philosophy in our day-to-day life then the relationships we have with devotees will function smoothly. Smoothly functioning relationships then is very easy to connect to Krishna. And dysfunctional relationships are very hard to connect to Krishna. So we can say that many relationships in the world are Maya, which is true, but we also have to acknowledge in the same truth that we are in that same Maya. Marriage may be Maya, but you are married, so therefore how are you going to connect Maya to Krishna? Unless you deal with it according to the rules that Krishna gives how to deal with it? How do you talk with the wife and then it's Krishna conscious? Okay, that's nice, you are talking the philosophy. How many here talk philosophy all day with their wife and that's all they talk? No? Okay. So that means, when you are not talking philosophy, how is that connected to Krishna dynamically? Does that make sense? So therefore, means, if we talk philosophy, talk about Krishna, that's directly connected. But much of our time is spent indirectly, I mean, connected to Krishna indirectly. We are dealing with Krishna's potencies, energies. So now, if we deal with those energies according to the rules given by Krishna, we can purify that interaction. By correct dealings according to the scriptures then we Krishna-ize the mundane. We are making an altar for Krishna. The altar is made out of particular materials. We follow the rules meant for those materials. Then we make an altar. But our dealing with the mundane materials using our mundane hands and mundane brain and mundane techniques is is all mundane. What makes it spiritual is that it's connected to Krishna. It's Krishna's altar. And at the same time is, it's Krishna who set the rules of how do you deal with wood or metal, or plastic. His creation, His rules. So in the same way, He has created man, he has created woman, He has created how to interact. You follow the rules, it works nicely for Krishna. A functional marriage you can connect to Krishna, a dysfunctional marriage - not so easily. Or maybe it inspires for sannyasa, [Laughter] but that's if it works. But otherwise then it's actually quite amazing how the most complex of all relationships we simplify down more simple than driving a nail into a piece of wood. But everything that goes on in the male-female relationship we can take back to this principle of Sambandha, Abhideya and Prayojana and then connect it.

Let us take just some random examples. The woman gets angry. We will just take some random, occasional point to use as an example. [Laughter] So this anger, if you look at it from another aspect, is a symptom of attachment. If there is no attachment, why argue? Woman is not gonna waste her time with something that does not get any benefit. The male principle, working in Sankarshana, can deal with the material energy without getting a result. Ultimately you get a result, but the experience is not that good, because they are only interacting with the field, so it's not a personal relationship. If their experience is bad, it doesn't matter. I go to work, therefore riding on the bus for 2 hours is a part of field, it's not a relationship. The work, I don't like the work, I don't like anyone there, but I operate the field and I get my money. Does that make sense? But the female nature then, it is experience. Anything they deal with has to generate experience. And that experience has to be favorable to them. Does that make some sense? So that's why if there is a thought that there is not going to be any benefit from interacting with this field, they won't do it. That means, if the woman is upset with you, means she is attached to you. She is not going to get upset with something she is not attached to. Slightly different perspective. Because we think, when they are angry, they don't like, no, only because they like, they get angry. What causes this fighting? It's an inherent part of the nature. Because as we mentioned, it's based on the spiritual. So this fighting attitude can either be generated from someone else, means outside the family, it can be generated from themselves, or it can be generated from you. In other words, something that someone else said or something they thought or something you said or did made them feel insecure. So therefore it generates a fight. So then what's necessary? To assert that security. Not prove who is right or wrong. Fight between husband and wife isn't based on who is right and wrong. Because the man thinks right and wrong is properly performed activities to get proper result. While the woman looks at it - properly performed activities to give a positive experience, result is not important. Result expands the field, but now through that you can get more experience. But it itself is not the goal of the woman's action - getting result. Result means something tangible, observable. A woman performs activities for experience. Does that make sense? So in your argument, you argue about two separate things anyway. That's why you can never resolve a conflict based on logic. So it has to be based on relationship, or the emotion. That's why when the argument comes up, then the man becomes humble. The man wants the woman to surrender and see her fault. But for that to happen, the husband must do it first. Because by him doing it first, then it creates confidence or security, then one can interact. Only when woman is secure, she is willing to see her fault. So whatever the husband wants the wife to do, he does it first. That's real. Just sitting on the couch doing nothing and expecting the wife is going to serve, that's Sankarshana, there is no relationship. Common field, but there is no personal relationship. Does that make sense? That's why the women will say, "Why are you doing nothing?" And the man is thinking, "Hey, I worked all day, I  arranged all the facility, what do you mean I am not working?" But what she means is, you are not working means you are not interacting with her. Does that make sense?

All comments.