Oṁ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ Oṁ jaya śrī kṛṣṇa -caitanya prabhu nityānanda śrī-advaita gadādhara śrīvāsādi-gaura -bhakta-vṛnda Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare Page six.
Summary of Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s essay on prāyaśa, over-endeavoring.
The word prāyaśa means endeavor, useless labor. If prāyaśa is not given up, devotion will never arise.
Spiritual life means devotion. Devotion means full surrender and subordination unto the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord. Since this full surrender and subordination are the natural activities of the soul in one’s inherent occupation, there is no need of prāyaśa. Still, in the living entity’s conditioned state, there is a need for a small amount of prāyaśa in order to cultivate devotional service. Except this little prāyaśa, all other kinds of prāyaśa are unfavorable for devotional service.
So basically speaking, prāyaśa is useless. But a little bit is okay, but it will define what that little bit is. Because otherwise we have a tendency to have our own ideas of what little bit is.
Prāyaśa is of two kinds, jñāna-prāyaśa and karma-prāyaśa.
Jñāna-prāyaśa is characterized by feeling of oneness, kevala-dvaita or sayuja. Jñāna-prāyaśa is unfavorable to spiritual life, as it is confirmed in the Mundaka Upaniṣad, 3 .2.3. The Supreme Lord is not obtained by expert explanation. By vast knowledge or even by much hearing. Is it attained only by one whom He Himself chooses. To such a person He manifests His own form.
Therefore, devotion is the only way to attain the lotus feet of the Lord. Because before Kṛṣṇa being independent, He only reveals Himself to the devotee. He doesn’t reveal Himself otherwise. So, the ideas that means knowledge in connection to the Lord, hearing and chanting connection to the Lord. These are valuable. But just on their own, they’re not causes. Because here we even see is that we think the jñāna will be the cause of bhakti. So we’re looking at it like karma. But it doesn’t function like that.
So, it is said that He reveals Himself to devotee Kṛṣṇa. But He also has some independence. Do you have some example that Kṛṣṇa doesn’t reveal to Himself the devotee?
No, the point is Kṛṣṇa reveals Himself to whom He’s pleased. But it’s not that because He worked, that’s why He revealed. Because the Lord is pleased, that’s why He reveals. So, the Lord is telling how to please Him. That’s the idea. That if you serve in a particular way, Kṛṣṇa will be pleased. Therefore, He’ll reveal Himself to the devotee who pleases Him. That’s the bottom line. So, He tells the method, but you still have to do it. Like that. So, still it’s one sincere endeavor to try to please the Lord. And the Lord reveals Himself to that devotee. As far as jñāna not being the cause of bhakti. So, for example, you see, say, people in India, they’re naturally around Kṛṣṇa and everything. We’re trying to still cultivate them into devotional service. So, how do you understand that they need some knowledge? I mean, some is useful. But the point is, the endeavor for knowledge separate from Kṛṣṇa is useless. Like that. Because you may have it, but the problem we see that comes from it is a great pride. It means from endeavor on the platform of karma also, if there’s success, there’s pride. But we see that the person who has pride in what he’s accomplished basically his pride is in relationship to doing work that’ll get results. It’s not in relationship to knowing the Supreme or through intelligence being able to understand everything. That is coming from one is expert in knowledge. So, you’ll see is there’s probably you could say on one level of those who are successful on the material platform and those who would be recognized as successful on the intellectual platform. You’ll probably find there’s a lot more from the platform of karma that are surrendered than those on the platform of jñāna. You know what I’m saying? It’s not that someone who’s intelligent is not surrendering. One who is intelligent is surrendering. But one who feels himself very qualified intellectually, very rarely they are capable of surrendering because they feel that by their intelligence they’ll know everything. Because that’s their illusion.
Is that because they’ve studied they know so much, but they don’t actually know very much at all. Does that make sense?
Therefore, devotion is the only way to obtain the lotus feet of the Lord. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, 10.14.3, Brahmā says to Lord Kṛṣṇa, Lord Brahmā said, O my Lord Kṛṣṇa, a devotee who abandons the path of emphiric philosophical speculation aimed at merging the existence of the Supreme, jñāna-prāyaśa, and engages himself in hearing Your glories and activities from a bona fide sadhu or saint, and who lives an honest life in the occupational engagement of his social life, can conquer Your sympathy and mercy even though You are ajita or unconquerable.
So here he’s not saying that one is not learning something, but this idea of learning something separate from the Lord, then that’s the problem.
Right? That’s the problem. If the idea of the knowledge is that one will come to the Brahman platform, and this way then one will know God, but then the problem is one won’t, because God as a person is independent.
And God as Brahman is generic. So even though you know, you simultaneously know the Lord, but at the same time the Lord is still beyond, because His qualities are manifest.
Right? That’s the person. But in the unmanifest state, then those are all pervading.
So lives an honest life in the occupational engagement of his social life. Right? So here we’ll say we’re not the body, but the point is one’s position is because of how one identifies, and then those tools are available. Right? Does that make sense? Okay, let us say you have a devotee, and he has a hammer.
Right? And then another devotee has a saw. Right? Another devotee has a screwdriver. Okay, so now when it comes to serving Krishna, all of those three are good. Right?
A screwdriver is a drink.
But what if it’s a mocktail? Then is it technically called a screwdriver?
I’m sure that they would give it that flavor, I mean that name, just like you have your, they take the soybean and they make fake, you know, chicken or fake, you know, huh? Bacon.
Bacon, yeah, see, like that. That’s enough.
Is that okay? Okay, back to the tools. Okay, yes, back to the tools. So, he has these tools.
And so, now let us say you have a nail. Which devotee are you going to call? Hammer. And does that matter if it’s morning or evening? Or anywhere in the land? No. No, okay.
So, so then, now let’s say you have a piece of wood, you want to make it into two pieces. Now who do you call? Saw. But the person with the hammer could say, I could also make it into two pieces.
Why? You’re discriminating. But what’s the difference?
The refinement. So that’s the point. That’s why someone sticks to their occupation. You may be able to do it, but it won’t come out with the refinement that the Vedic culture expects, because that refinement is maybe your gross, but someone else’s fine.
Does that make sense? So that’s why one sticks to one’s occupational duty. So it’s not enough that you want to do it, it’s that you have that ability. Everybody wants to be the top of the pile. Everyone wants to be in control of all the men and money. That everybody wants to do. Right? But that doesn’t mean that one’s qualified. So that’s the whole point. One lives an honest life, means you are able to appreciate what your nature is, and you do that.
If you just say, no, nobody can do anything. Yes, it’s true, but at the same time, there’s also the element, do they know who they are by conditioning? They can say, oh, we’re not this body. That’s okay, but you know what kind of body you have. If you don’t know what kind of body you have, that’s not self-realization, because self -realization means the body, the mind, and the consciousness. You know, the soul.
Like that. So if we’re stuck on these lower ones, there’s also the chance that on the level of consciousness, on the level of the soul, we’re still interested in being the controller and enjoyer.
Right? So if we can’t tell what we can do, you know what I’m saying, then it works. Then you get the right thing. Like, let’s say, one time we were in the mid-90s, and Harikesh was, he had called all the educators within the movement together to work out some direction, some curriculum, and this and that. So everybody that’s there has degrees, runs schools, stuff like that. They’re all that. There’s no one else in the room. So then there’s a blackboard there, and there’s some discussions going on, so someone needs to write things down. So then he says, and so then, okay, anybody else? Then they raise their hand, and they go and do it. Does that make sense? So it’s not a matter of, he understands, I won’t do as good a job as someone else. Now, in a group of educators, not being able to write on the blackboard is not a good trait, you understand? But because they understood what their nature is, then they’re being honest about it, so they’re saying. They could have, oh, I’m called upon and all that and gone up there and done a bad job. Blame the blackboard, blame the chalk, blame something else, the acoustics in the room, something negative. But no, they just said, I won’t be able to do it as good as someone else. But at the same time, if there’s no one else and the only person to write on the blackboard is the dyslexic person, then he’ll write.
He’ll be qualified. And at the same time, because he’s humble, even he’s doing the job, he knows he’s not qualified, so he’ll actually do a fairly good job. The attitude will be right, though the expertise won’t. But if someone who can’t understand who they are, they have attitude about that, and they have pride, not only are they going to do a bad job, but the mood that they’re going to create is also going to be very bad. So even though they’re not qualified for it, even if it was, okay, we’re not this body, you can do anything, then they won’t do a good job because they’re not humble.
Does that make sense? So the person who can identify their nature and therefore see what things they shouldn’t be doing, at the same time, they’re the only ones that would be qualified that if there’s no one else, they could do it. You know, it’ll get by.
Does that make sense?
We can be this body, we can do anything. You only use that in emergency.
Does that make sense?
But the attitude of humility, tolerance, respect, that remains throughout. But if it’s a matter of prestige, then prestige means social position. Then one should act according to one’s mundane social position.
Right? But if one doesn’t have any sense of prestige due to social position, then he can do anything.
He can actually do what he’s actually good at. Does that make sense? So there’s no such thing as it going the way that the modern culture says it would go. Because people are doing anything, but we see what kind of mess it’s ending up in. That’s the point. If the modern liberalistic concepts worked, then things would be going really great.
Yes? There’s this concept of saranagati, surrender, to follow the direction of another. Yes. And this prayasya, is it implied that someone’s self-initiating a labor, a useless labor? No, the point is, if you’re working under authority and they’re engaging you in useless labor, as long as it’s not in becoming expert in Mayavada philosophy or something, then you get the benefit of doing the service. They have the problem with its uselessness. You know what I’m saying? That’s the point of authority. Right, but I’m thinking in terms of an ideal world. You have a spiritual preceptor or someone who’s got your best interest in mind to make you Krishna conscious. So under his direction we just find ourselves distanced from such a situation. No, but the thing is, distance means one is distanced by one’s own consciousness.
See, your advancement isn’t technically dependent upon others.
We seek out the association of the Vaisnavas, but it’s that desire to be in the association of Vaisnavas that you advance. Like Prahlada Maharaj is simply surrounded by demons, but he finds association.
He gives association, but he sees all living entities as servants of the Lord. So therefore, he’s just associating with the Lord’s associates.
They may not be so clear about their position in the Lord’s system. You know what I’m saying? So in other words, the ability to advance has nothing to do with anything else, because devotion is not, there is no karma or jnan that affects bhakti. Neither can it create, neither can it block. But there’s karma-misra-bhakti and jnan-misra -bhakti. That’s another thing, but that’s your own mentality. That’s your mentality. See, the point is, let’s say someone is doing karma-misra-bhakti.
So what do you see? The bhakti or the misra? So you see the bhakti, you advance. You see the misra, you don’t.
So the point is, at any time, in any circumstance, you could advance. Because you always have situations where someone doesn’t have much facility or much, but still they can advance.
But now if you can create an environment where there’s so much available, then that makes it even easier.
But one can always, if one wants, because the point is, is Krishna is the supreme control. He’s the guru. You want to know Him, He will come before you. You know what I’m saying? I heard once, I was shocked when I heard this, that even studying of Srimad-Bhagavatam can be karma. And the way I understood that thought is that, actually I have an example where I live in Hawaii, there’s this guy, Babaji Bab, he’s with the Ramakrishna Mission, and he decided to teach Srimad-Bhagavatam.
Yeah, because it’s not, it’s not in Parampara, so it’ll be. But within Parampara, it won’t be karma because it is the pure book. See is that, Babaji Bab will only end up with the letters of the Bhagavatam. He won’t actually get the Bhagavatam. Right? But, that’s what we were discussing this morning. The Pratibimba Namabhas means it’s not actually the name. It appears like it’s the name, but it’s not. But, but Namabhas is the actual name and it’s pure. We’re the one that’s not pure, so we perceive it as not pure. So, our perception is, is that, you know, and because of that, we don’t, we don’t get, we don’t make the advancement we would as if we understood that the name is pure. It’s our covering. You know, like the person with jaundice sees the whole world as yellow. You know, it’s not that the world is yellow. So, that’s the beauty of devotional service is that if one is sincere about it, then Krishna, one will always find Krishna. Same situation, one is, one person is, is very comfortable and happy. In the same situation, someone else is not because what they’re looking for from it. Right? The one is doing the service, is going nicely. No one recognizes or anything. They’re not getting any benefit. Maybe people don’t deal with them nicely, but they’re always seeing Krishna in it and so they’re happy. But someone else is that no one’s recognizing. They’re not getting the proper benefits. So, they’re very distressed.
It’s just a matter of you want Krishna, comes. That’s all. Because Krishna is the Guru.
You know, it’s like you have so many sankirtan stories, you know, like that. The devotee is there and he’s just doing the books. Nothing’s happening. Right? And he’s trying to think what’s going on and praying to Krishna and all that. And then, you know, he tries again and he goes up to some lady and, you know, tries to, you know, pitches lines and everything like that. And the lady just looks at him and goes, you know, if you were more committed, you would do better.
And then walks off. So now, was that a Karmi who said that to him? Or that was Krishna who said that to the Karmi?
You know. So, that’s the point is that there’s no problem. There’s no space or distance.
That’s the point is that devotional service is not created by karma and jnana and there’s no time and space. So, it’s always available. You know what I’m saying? Because the ideal world is called Goloka Vrindavan.
You know? Because even in in Gokul, you know, demons walk in. But the devotees deal very nicely. So, there’s no adjustment in their their Krishna consciousness. But it’s the situation isn’t as ideal.
And then, then, you know, like that. So, there is the idea that there is something perfect within the material world, that itself is a is a misnomer. Because Maya’s perfection is she creates disturbance so that you don’t get too comfortable.
Right? That’s that’s her job. So, there is there is no such thing as the perfect world. I mean, writers write about it. But how much do they write about? You know, it’s just like how do you say? What was that? One writer, the perfect world then will be every man according to his need, every man according to his ability. Sorry for disturbing the sentence here. Okay? But he doesn’t go about explaining how that will work. Right? So, it’s supposed to be you know, this egalitarian, you know, wonderful nice thing. And then, some guys who are good administrators, they pick this up and go, right. And then they decide, yes, everybody according to their need and everyone according to their ability. We will decide. Right? And so, this utopian philosophy then becomes known as communism.
You know what I’m saying? So, that’s the point is that the concept of their utopian is they only deal with a few things. You know, be nice. Or, you know, Charlie Chaplin, it was, you know, be in a nice little cottage and grapes are growing right outside your door. The cow walks up and you milk it and then it leaves. You know, it’s just, you know, that’s the perfect you know, thing like that. But, what about other things? You know, where’s the grass for the cow? You know, I mean, did you have to water those grapes? You know, did you even have to plant them? Did someone else plant them for you? I mean, you know, you know what I’m saying?
Basically, that’s what we’re trying to get. But, it comes by karma. So, what we’re saying is devotional service comes by good karma. If I’m good, I do good work, that’s good. So, if people aren’t good, that’s why we can’t get good results. There’s no nice people, there’s no pure people, there’s no knowledgeable people, that’s why we can’t advance in devotional service. It’s all someone else’s fault. You know, and then, what’s the result of that? Well, we have to be practical, therefore, you know, I have my job, I have my family, I do my independent thing, and what can I do? Because there is no ideal situation. If Iskcon was ideal, then I could take part. But, the point is, is that doesn’t, it won’t happen. It never, it never happens. Because, it’s, there’s always something wrong. Right?
Does that make sense?
But, you’re also applying it within the society. Otherwise, why would you come up with the example? Because everyone’s chanting, everyone’s connected to the bona fide guru, you know, so therefore, it is perfect. Because actual perfection means whatever’s connected to Krishna. What if somebody’s self-interested but they don’t see it? But, but the point is, is can you define what is devotional service? If you say mixed devotional service, define it.
No, that’s called, that’s called selfishness. I said define mixed devotional service.
Okay, so now, which, which, which, what’s real and what’s not real? Painting for Krishna or being the famous painter?
That’s okay. But, of the two, even if I’m Rembrandt, still, what is the, what is the, which one is the light and which one is the darkness?
Okay, and so, if I have one candle, how much, how big of an area can I see with one little light? So, that means that much ignorance doesn’t compare to that much. So, that’s why it’s glorified karma-misra-bhakti because, basically speaking, means minimum until, until you get to the platform nishta, that’s all you got. You don’t have anything else. It’s not like there is an alternative.
So, the point is, is you’re taking your conditional nature and engaging in the Lord’s service, but you identify with it. As you identify with it, that’s the problem. Or as you want some benefit from having performed the service, that’s a problem.
So, it’s better to have some disinterested service. In other words, I have no… No, that has nothing to do with it because the point is, is full engagement of the body, mind, and words in the Lord’s service. See, because then we’re thinking jnana is the cause of bhakti because by detachment, that’s what will make the devotion flourish. But it’s not. It’s by the results for Krishna that it flourishes because, why will I be inspired to get a good result if it’s an area that I have no interest in? It’s a nice theory, but people have minds and minds have to identify with something and feel that they can do something with those, those elements in an activity that will get a result. That’s how inspiration works. That’s why, that’s why jnanis sit in little chairs with arms on them in out of the way dusty rooms that no one ever hears about. Now and again, a book comes out because, because they don’t understand the actual workings of the world and rasa. So that’s, that, that is the philosophy of jnana. You know what I’m saying?
Yes, but why are we only looking at that side for the last ten minutes? We’ve only presented that half. Why not the other half?
You know what I’m saying? It’s important to understand the glass is half empty. Otherwise, how are you going to know how much more to put in the glass? But unless you’ve understood that the glass is half full, then you don’t know that it’s going in the right direction. So that’s my point, is that we have senior Vaishnava preachers, gurus, temple presidents, GBCs. If we only look at the half empty side, we’re going to be very, very miserable people for a long time.
That’s the point. If we can’t see that the point is that they’re trying to engage themselves in the Lord’s service, but the reason it annoys us is their conditioning is different from ours. Because if it’s our conditioning, we don’t notice it anyway, so we’re quite comfortable.
But it’s different. We wouldn’t do that. So that’s why it stands out. And so therefore, it’s a problem for us.
Yes, so look for that, and leave the rest. Vaisheshika has been distributing books on his own, with no support from anybody, anywhere, for the last 30 years. So look at that. You only need one. So just one example is enough. And so many thousands of miles of ocean isn’t enough to get in the way of the inspiration. And that’s one.
Right? You go down to Arizona. They’re down there. They’re preaching. They’re making devotees. No one’s ever heard of them down there. Right? Maybe the pastors. Like that. You know what I’m saying? Like that. You go here and there, all over. There’s devotees down there. I just read, I happened to be sitting in, I think it was Sydney. And they had this, you know, well-stocked library, you know, which is about, you know, ten BGGs, you know, from, you know, like a million years ago. So I was reading something, I don’t know when it was, but it was a long, old, old, you know, like six, eight years or something like that. And two devotees, I can’t remember if it was Charu or someone, him and his wife, out in the middle of nowhere, I’m saying out in Utah, right, Mormon country. He’s built this huge, it looks like, Kusum Sarova. And he has festivals where 50,000 people come. 50,000. The only other places that you have like that in the world are like Bombay here in Mayapur.
You know, that you’ll have more than 50 ,000. You’ll have, you know, four, five, ten times that. But other than that, you know, it’s like most temples are whoopee, ten people came, you know, for Arjan Mastami, like that. He’s 50,000. Like that. So, and that’s just him and his wife. So, these are the places you look. Leave the rest. That’s called Saragraha. You take the essence. You know, it doesn’t matter, well, there’s so much water here. And then there’s all these other, you know, things like that. And there’s only a little bit of cream. You know, you just take the cream. Leave the rest of it. If you do that, you’ll be inspired because by following that, then you’ll be able to. And then if you do that, because you’re inspired, you’ll be able to inspire others. And then you’ll always be surrounded by inspired people.
I think it’s Vaisheshika.
Something like that. His strength is his commitment to Buddha’s teaching. And I don’t think he’s going against Sanskrit. He’s just following the order of Guru. Yeah. So, he’s not, you know, it’s not like… So, isn’t that good? Huh? Isn’t that good? That is good. Okay. But I’m saying, he’s doing something for his Guru. So, then take that and apply it in your life. My point is, is that you just need one example like that to apply that in your life. It doesn’t matter that there’s a whole ocean around. This is the parting, the final instructions of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur. It says, he’s saying is don’t be worried that very few in the world are interested in pure devotional service. You know what to do. You do it. And Prabhupada would say, he’ll be happy that he’s done this whole mission if one person becomes a pure devotee. Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur said the same. Yeah. One. So, therefore, why look at what’s not?
You know what I’m saying? Because that’s kind. I mean, all the living entities in the material world, they’re all pure souls who are servants of Krishna. But they’re covered by their desire to be the controller and enjoyer. So, they’re all devotees. They’re just in various stages of, you know, material entanglement. So, those who recognize this, then they’re now doing, they’ll do better. But, just because by habit there’s a lot of you know, bad habits from the past, that doesn’t really matter. You know what I’m saying? Because, are we judging by what he’s done? Or, do we actually know the mentality?
Because the point is, is if they sincerely want to please Krishna, though they’re not doing a good job of it, and they may have all kinds of material desires mixed along with that, they’re still considered saintly by Krishna’s direction.
Even if they abuse?
Yes, even if they abuse other devotees.
Yes, because that’s called morality. And morality is not devotional service. And until you work that one out, you’re going to be here a long time. You’re going to be here a long time. It’s a big anarta. It’s a nice anarta. And their anarta of exploiting others is not a nice anarta, but it’s no less of an anarta. No less. Absolutely no less. Because the point is, is unless you’re pleasing Krishna, being moral does not please Krishna. Because it simply means that you think this illusion has value. So if I deal with the illusion nicely, therefore, I’m a good person. I put the rock down nicely. It’s just a rock. It’s a nice looking rock. Other rocks. So I don’t want to disturb the beauty of the pattern. So therefore, I put this very nicely. So I’m better than the guy who just throws it.
Hitler on acid.
Hitler on acid. Okay. Hitler on acid. But if you look at it, he’d probably be less of a problem on acid. I’m going to alienate all these sincere people that came to Krishna consciousness. The problem is, wait, wait, wait, wait.
I mean, just to get it, just for some fun, is when someone’s on acid, they’re so into their own head, they can’t affect anything anyway. So Hitler would have to be off acid to actually make a problem.
No, no. That’s my point, is that you’re trying to create this thing is that acid’s bad. Hitler’s bad. You combine them, it’s even worse. Why don’t you say Hitler on acid while he’s fornicating somebody he’s not married to, smoking a Havana cigar, and he’s just bent on, you know, on the roulette wheel. Why don’t we say that?
You know. You’d probably make a good movie, right?
So, yes, you’re just taking situations that are so out of the thing. We’re taking your life right now. We’re talking your life right now. It is just a morality. Because who defines that it’s not good? Who defines it’s not good? That he’s exploiting devotees. Why is that bad? What’s wrong with it? What’s really actually wrong with it? No, no, no, no, no. Don’t do this. Exploiting is one thing. No, but I’m saying, so what is the actual bad? Discouraging someone. But how is he discouraged?
How is he discouraged? I guess we’re speaking in broad generalities. Right, because that’s what you’ve been speaking up to now. You have a very specific point in mind. It’s unfair that you’re speaking in broad generalities. I give a general answer, and then you’re not satisfied, and there’s something wrong with my answer. You know what I’m saying? When you deal with personal issues, you either deal with them directly or be satisfied with general answers. I don’t know what your issue is. I don’t know who’s bothered you when, where. Like this, but I know lots of Godbrothers who have that problem, and I’ve never seen it’s done anything good for them. And I’ve seen Godbrothers who, it doesn’t matter what happens, like Prahlad Maharaj, they move on, and they do fine. So the thing is, is the basis of the Western mind of what is good and bad comes from their Western conditioning of what’s good and bad. Because what you’re speaking now is your standard, you know, educated, middle class, American democratic perspective. And that’s the basis of exploitation or not. It’s not based on Shastra. That’s why I say it’s mundane. It’s not, what is the Shastra quote that that’s not good? We have it. We can explain it from there. But the point is, it’s insensitivity to others. You think I’m the doer, so I’m engaging all these other people to get my work done. But the point is, it’s Krishna’s work. And you’re assistant in there, and if you take other assistants, you’re supposed to be nice to them, because you’re supposed to be, to those who are senior, you’re supposed to be respectful. Those who are equal, you work as friends. Those who are junior, you’re compassionate. They’re not doing that. That’s Shastra. I have not heard that come out of your mouth yet. Okay. That’s basically where we’re driving. I like the model of Madhyamadakara.
Right. As a standard for Vaishnav behavior. Yes. I take that over Varnashram. I take that over. You can’t, means you can, but the thing is, is what’s your position to take it over Varnashram, when Varnashram is what Krishna in the Gita is basically explaining, is how you’re going to engage yourself in His service.
So we understand it’s above Varnashram, but in application, Varnashram’s included. Being above doesn’t mean it’s not included. The cooking is more important than the pots, but your cooking happens in pots. But sorting out the problems. The problem is, is lack of Krishna consciousness. Why don’t we go to the standard of what is Madhyamadakara? No. What you have to do is go to the standard of what’s pure devotional service, and then be able to discern within that, because even the Madhyama is still not up to the standard. And even as we’ve been reading, even Bhavabhakti is still not up to the standard. Prema is standard.
You know what I’m saying? But that’s way over most everybody. The thing is, is this is the second year of a three-year course, and it’s not over the heads of everybody here.
You know what I’m saying? Because the point is, is that that’s what we’re discussing here. That’s the level on which we’re discussing. If this was the first time we’re opening this book on the first day, we’d be discussing differently.
It’s one option. But the point is, is that, that pure devotional, knowing the difference between pure devotional, what’s pure and what’s not pure, that’s the actual point. It doesn’t matter where you’re applying it, because in the neophyte, if the person has just started with Shraddha, now you could probably very easily, by analytical process, say most everything in that person’s life is not pure. But they’ve just bumped into the devotees, they’ve just discussed with the devotees, and they’ve just gotten that faith that, here’s something solid. I want to pursue this. So that Shraddha will drive them on to Sarasanga. Now how is it moving forward if the elements of pure devotion aren’t there? So the thing is, you have to see where are the elements that aren’t pure, are they getting in the way or not? Because the point is, the person’s absorption in his collection of knives and all that gets in the way of his actually cutting the potatoes in the kitchen, because he’s totally absorbed in the knives and the technique of the knives, so he doesn’t do as well as if he’d just focus on that he’s cutting potatoes for Krishna. So to be able to discern that, because what we’re trying to discern is what’s Karma Yoga and what’s Karma Misra Bhakti. They’re exactly the same thing. Karma Yoga means you’re seeing how karma is engaged in the Lord’s service and what is benefit for making you advance so that you get knowledge and detachment, and are therefore able to give up more and more of one’s attachment to that process. And Karma Misra, where you’re actually, you know, attached to a certain thing, and especially when you’re consciously attached. You know, conscious means you know you’re attached and you don’t want to give it up. It’s another thing is that you’re just attached, you don’t think about it.
You know, like the person, you know, collects his wife and family and goes off to the temple because it’s a festival. So he’s thinking about the festival. But the reason he collected his wife and his family is because he’s totally attached to them. So here, you’re talking Karma Yoga, because he’s not going to, the other things aren’t prominent. Though, by volume, they’re very great.
So, in other words, it’s a paradigm that is very much based on how the individual can actually understand where they stand in Krishna consciousness, how to move forward. And understanding that, how they can therefore apply that to help someone else. It’s a very different perspective than looking at it socially or economically or administratively.
Like that. Because that’s what we’re used to. It’s very, very different.
And so, therefore, at any time, no matter, even Hitler on acid, if he takes up devotional service, he’d just drop everything else.
You know what I’m saying? I’m sure that that, how you say that, particular committee in Israel may not, but, you know, everybody else. So, the point is, is that illusion doesn’t have any value. But we give value to the illusion. The lack of morality, the lack of good qualities, the lack, but the point is, is good qualities, if they’re not actually connected to Krishna, are temporary. So, therefore, they’re not real qualities. And anyway, the manifestation of the quality is through the modes and it’s Krishna and his internal potency interacting anyway in the dead matter that you’re able to perceive it.
So, then, only the devotee can manifest good qualities. That’s it. The karmis can’t.
You know, anything that we may be inspired by them, that’s still the Lord and his energy.
Is that? You said, to the Madhyama, we discriminate what is Yes. Yes. stimulating that. Because that’s what makes the Madhyama different than the neophyte is his ability to discriminate.
So, the Madhyama understands his position and so he’s able to discriminate what is a value and what’s not. And that’s why he can preach because he can see it in his own life. Therefore, he can preach and show others.
The difficulty comes is that, as we said, it’s not the karma which is pious activities which generate good qualities and good facilities. And it’s not knowledge that generates. So, therefore, it’s only the desire to please Krishna. Right? Then, but the point is, as we are conditioned, then dealing with these aspects of karma and jnana from our conditioned nature, we may still have some interest. So now, it just depends upon what is the problem. So, in this example is that the person is exploiting devotees. So, that’s going to be a problem because, why is it a problem? Because if he exploits, he’s not actually engaging the devotee to their best of ability necessarily in what would be the best for their advancement. That’s the exploitation. That someone else is getting benefit from it, someone else gets anyway. You’re doing work for Krishna, someone else is getting the benefit. So, for the individual, it doesn’t matter technically for their own advancement if they’re being exploited or not because the result is for Krishna. Right? Now, if that other person is claiming part of that result for themselves, the person who’s done the work gets no problem because he’s done it for Krishna. You know what I’m saying? So, Krishna accepts that. But now, because the devotee won’t be as engaged as well as he could be, then that’s the difficulty. But, even if it’s not the ideal, still one can, the individual, by their own discrimination, can advance. Yes? So, let’s say someone’s been exploited and at some point they become aware of that and then they feel betrayed. But the exploited, what does it mean, exploited?
You know what I’m saying? What do you mean by exploited? Well, they thought they were doing something for Krishna and then they find out that somebody’s taking the result for themselves. No, but they were doing it for Krishna and Krishna was accepting it. Because, is the service the thing itself?
Or is the service, in other words, is this material energy the service? Or is it only a medium for the service? The boy gave the flower to the girl out of affection. So, is the flower affection? Or is the process of giving the flower and the mood of it, that is the affection?
But that is the point.
Yes, because they don’t know the philosophy. That’s why. Because they’re a neophyte. So, we’re trying to point out here how to learn what is the discrimination so you don’t have that problem. Because they did that, that’s their conditioning, their leaders, their managers, that’s what they’re going to do. If they were karmis, they’d also be, you know, the guy in the pack that tells everybody what to do. So, that’s not going to change. So, their conditioning and someone else’s conditioning, it’s all conditioning. So, it doesn’t really matter. But, because you’re dealing in a social pattern, therefore, according to Varnashram, that’s where the problem lies. You say you don’t care about Varnashram, but Varnashram is the one that describes what’s the proper way to deal in those situations. So, that’s surprising that you would say you don’t care for Varnashram, it’s only the Madhyama. Because the Madhyama is only discerning between the different aspects of devotional service.
Prabhupada makes that. Yes, it’s true. Prabhupada makes that point. It’s the safe stage. It’s safe. Because they know how to properly fit into the social thing. The neophyte doesn’t. The neophyte, even in the six of them, it’s self-centered. So, if you’re the small guy and self -centered, or you’re the big guy and self -centered, it doesn’t matter. You know what I’m saying? The little German housewife, with the, how you say, Jewish skins on her walls and lamps, just has the same mentality as the SS officer who runs the camp that provided the skins. Like that. Just he’s a big manager and she’s not. So, she can make a lamp and he can make a concentration camp.
But the point is is the mentality, both of them have a problem.
So, the problem is they’ve lost faith, but why lose faith? You’re dealing with a spiritual organization and if somebody doesn’t do well, my devotion’s not based on their doing well. Otherwise, that’s karma. Only if everybody else does great, then I can advance. Notice, I can advance even if no one else. That’s why I gave the example of Prahlad. He wasn’t in an ideal situation. You know, I mean, you don’t get a more exploited father than what he had. You know, you don’t get more exploited teachers than what he had. So, the point is, yes, it’s not good. And because of that, that’s why, so the point is is because they lose faith, that’s the problem. Not because they were exploitive.
Because everybody’s exploitive. The man goes home, he expects his wife to greet him at the door and be nice and happy. That’s exploitive.
It is. Bottom line. You know what I’m saying? So, therefore, to exploitive, everybody is exploiting. So, unless Krishna’s the center, there’s no such thing as non-exploitive. That’s the meaning. You know, prema means non-exploitive. Anything below that means there’s some problem.
So, that’s what I’m saying is to take a generic quality because the point is it’s misapplying the Brahman platform because that quality of exploitiveness or non-exploitiveness, that’s Krishna. Krishna is the support of everything.
And so, we’re not seeing Krishna in this exploitive, non-exploitive dynamic. We’re looking at it as an ideal of the world, but it’s only an ideal of the world. It’s not spiritual. Spiritual means is that it’s seen in connection with the Lord. The Lord is spiritual and He is all -pervading. That means the only thing that’s material is our consciousness.
It means being in the material world is no less a spiritual opportunity than being in the spiritual world because the Lord’s everywhere, the living entities are everywhere, but the difficulty is that we’re in illusion that the Lord is not here. So even here, the exploitiveness, it’s like where does the power come from to be able to do it? Where does the authority come from? It’s still coming from Krishna. They’re misusing it. You know, it’s just like the kid steals the father’s car and then goes out for a joyride. He’s misusing, but the car runs because it’s his father’s. It has a license because of his father. It has gas in it because of his father. It runs properly because his father had it fixed.
So his ability to go out and have a good time is only because of the father, but he’s misusing it. So what happens in here is we start identifying that these qualities have a separate identity and separate life other than their connection to Krishna.
Then, in that state, then we will be disturbed.
So the idea is how to protect ourself. We want to protect ourself. Then the point is to be able to discern what’s good and what’s bad because otherwise, if we criticize technically, then we take on those same qualities that we criticize. That’s just the way it works.
You know what I’m saying? I’m just talking. I’m trying to stay philosophical. I am talking philosophy here. So, you know, that’s it.
I mean, excuse me, if we left the philosophical discussion, did we leave? You know what I’m saying is that when we’re dealing with these things, a lot of things, they affect the mind. So it’s emotion. So it’s a lot more difficult to deal with. If one doesn’t have that particular issue or what’s called, what Prabhupada uses, misgiving, right? That’s the longer term. It means what you can use over hundreds of years. Issue is the modern word for it. But misgiving means that it’s something in the mind. Doubt means it doesn’t make sense intellectually. You can’t put it together. You can’t understand it. Misgiving means you may understand it, but the feelings won’t allow you to deal with it intellectually. So they’re much deeper. So that’s what anartha nivritti is, is removing the doubts and misgivings.
So the point is that justice in the world is pranamoy.
It’s extended sense gratification. But one has to go beyond that to situate oneself minimally in dharma. That one just performs one’s proper duties with the purpose of doing naiskaranya. That will give you liberation. And you’ve done it to please Krishna, so that will give you devotion. But the platforms of artha and karma, unless they’re connected to dharma, then they don’t connect very well to devotional service. This is the mistake, because we think that artha and karma can function on their own, but actually without dharma, they don’t do so well, because Krishna descends into the material phenomena, but technically he descends just down into adhoksaja, means what is done for the purpose of, what’s done on the platform of naiskaranya without a desire for result. So the platform of liberation, the Brahman platform. But because dharma is the external manifestation of the activities of someone situated on the Brahman platform, therefore in form in that he can be there, but still you have to have the proper mentality. Otherwise the smarta has the right form, wrong mentality.
Like that. The performance and cultivation of the living entity’s constitutional duty is a natural and spontaneous activity, which is devoid of prayasa. Even if some small prayasa is found in devotional practices, it is not like that found in the paths of karma and jnana. If one takes shelter in the holy name, one’s constitutional happiness is reawakened within a short time.
On the other hand, practitioners of jnana prayasa face many troubles, as is stated in Bhagavad -gita 12.2-5. The Supreme Personality of Godhead said, Those who fix their minds on My personal form and are always engaged in worshipping Me with great and transcendental faith are considered by Me to be most perfect. But those who fully worship the unmanifested, that which lies beyond the perception of the senses, the all-pervading, inconceivable, unchanging, fixed and immovable, the impersonal conception of the Absolute Truth, by controlling the various senses and being equally disposed to everyone, such persons engaged in the welfare of all at last achieve Me. For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied. Because here it says, fully worship the unmanifested. The point is the devotee doesn’t fully worship because for him, Brahman, Paramatma, Bhagavan are one person.
But one person, not one Brahman.
So that means then, that being that they understand these other aspects, that’s why it says, by controlling the senses, being equally disposed to everyone, such persons engaged in the welfare of all, means in other words, explaining Krishna consciousness, at last achieve Me. So even if one is focused more on the jnan, then by following it properly, one comes to Krishna. Just like by following karma, one comes to Krishna. But if one is trying to make advancement without the personal aspect, like that, that’ll be very difficult for one embodied because the body means senses. And then what do you do with the senses? Yeah, because activity. So how will the one dealing with all -pervading, inconceivable, unchaining, fixed and movable, controlling the senses and trying to see everyone equally, how will he deal? How will he interact? That’s a big problem. That’s why you don’t actually hear of basically anyone on the Brahman platform.
Like that. And those on the Brahman platform are devotees, are incarnations of Godhead. Sugadev Goswami is a devotee and the four Kumaras are an incarnation. So then they can do it. But they take it from there into devotion.
This is not true.
Karma prayaksha is also not beneficial for the living entity. In the first canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, it is said, the occupational activities of a man, occupational activities a man performs according to his own position, are only so much useless labor, prayaksha, if they do not provoke attraction for the meshes of the personality of Godhead. So we’re saying that the occupational duties being performed in connection with the Lord, then that becomes useful in devotional service, because you have to situate yourself somewhere. You’re a human being. You’re in a social system. So unless you go to the forest, then you work it out with the monkeys. But otherwise, you have to take a position in the society. You’re part of the body, of the social body of the Lord. So you have to do something. You’re going to do something. You’ve got the head, the arms, that’s a waste of the feet. So you’re going to pick that. In those four, in ashram, those four in varna. And so you do. But if you do those nicely, but it’s not connected to the Lord, it’s just waste, useless labor. It’s a lot of work. It’s being acknowledged it’s a lot of work, that the person is good at their occupational duties, that they’re a nice person. It’s acknowledged, but it’s a lot of hard work, which is useless because it’ll be lost. But doing it in connection with the Lord. So the point is, is that if it’s connected to the Lord, it has a value. If it’s not connected to the Lord, it has no value. Right? So that’s the point, is that you have, within activities, you have pious and impious. The only reason pious are of any value is because that’s what’s given in Shastra. Right? Now, if we recognize this from Shastra, then that’s better than someone who is good, but doesn’t recognize it in Shastra. Right? But the point is, is good only has value if it’s connected to the Lord. If it’s not connected to the Lord, it’s just useless labor.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. Yes.
Because the activity doesn’t change. if you have the creations created by Krishna, he pervades it. So that means he is the seer. Right? So then, you’re being in a situation, you can assist in that situation according to what’s seen. Right? So, if you’re seeing it, that’s because that’s being seen by the Lord. Now, the point is, is your desire for seeing, then you can see through that the Lord has seen first. Now, in assisting in that process, then, you, means, what will please the Lord will be what are, what is the proper dealings with his energy according to how he likes his energy dealt with.
Does that make sense? So, in other words, how he would deal with the energy, that energy is there for you to use, you have to deal with it in the same way. He’s nice to mother, Jyotir. You have to be nice to mother, Jyotir. He’s nice to the cows, you have to be nice to the cows. Right? You’re not nice to the cows, you get trouble. You’re nice to the cows, you don’t get trouble. Right? So, it’s, it’s just the law, it’s what we call the laws of nature. This is the Brahman platform. Right? So, the, the laws of nature pervade everything, so if someone follows that law, it works nice. If you don’t follow the law, there’s a problem. Right? But, the actual point of it being a problem or not, is its connection to the Lord. Even if it’s unseen. So, the Karmi, he’s, he’s flourishing in his business. It’s because he’s following the laws of nature, that deal with economics, properly.
Therefore, he’s getting money. But he’s only getting money, he’s not getting devotion to the Lord, though he is dealing with the Lord and his energies. But, from dealing with the Lord on that platform, all he’ll get is money. You know, it’s like that, that old lady who’d go into the forest everyday and collect firewood. Right? And one day she’d collect a very big bundle, and she’s bringing it back, and she’s still out in the forest. And somehow it falls off her head. No matter how hard she tries, she can’t pick it up again. So she’s sitting down and crying, because if she doesn’t take it back, she doesn’t get money, she can’t eat, this and that. So she’s praying to Krishna and crying and all that, and it’s so sincere, that Krishna appears. And says, oh, you know, you called, what can I do for you? You know, she said, please can you put this on my head? So he picks it up, puts it on her head and disappears. And then she realizes that, you know, she called the Supreme Lord, and all he did was ask to put this bundle up, this burden, material bundle back on her head. Right? So the point is, is that, that’s the thing, is the karma is working hard, but those who follow the laws get the results. Those who don’t, don’t.
Right? But the, so the point is, is we look at it, well there’s the material world, then there’s what the devotees do. Actually, though, there’s what the devotees do, then you can do the same thing, not connected to Krishna, and we’ll call it karma jnana.
In other words, the world belongs to God and the devotees.
Right? And those who are not honest, don’t recognize God’s position, or their position in relationship to God. So they misuse the material energy.
But the action is the same. It means, God defines what economics is. God defines what cooking is. God defines what management is. God defines what knowledge is. And so, you come close to that, it works. You know what I’m saying? You don’t come, like in the West, you have a teacher. So that’s the law. Right? The law of nature is you learn from a teacher. Therefore, even your home school, you still have somebody who’s looking at your work. Right? And then, in the Western paradigm, when does it become, when does the academic experience become, what you’d say, serious and real?
Applying? Yes, but we’re talking just within the academic field. Yeah, when you start doing post-graduate. Why? What happens at that point? You get a mentor. It’s one-on-one.
So the point of him guiding you in the mentality, because before that, they didn’t tell you how to be an academic. They just have all this stuff, and tell you, what’s the technique of dealing with it. But they never told you how to be an academic. You know, how to perceive it, how to look at it. So now as a mentor, he teaches you the lifestyle of an academic.
So even in the West, then it’s considered, now these people are more developed. But what is Gurukul? Right? The place of the teacher. So you’re learning the lifestyle and mentality from the teacher. That’s more important than the knowledge.
You know what I’m saying? Because anybody can read the knowledge and put together a thesis. But it won’t be accepted, because they don’t have the mentality. So it’s not a matter of the actual academic skills. Even themselves, they’re accepting, though indirectly, that it’s the taking on the mood of the superior that creates superior knowledge.
Does that make sense? So, because they’re doing that, that’s the Vedic system. That’s why it’s working. Right? And the person wants to do anything on their own, they’re not getting anywhere, and no one’s recognizing. Why? Because they’re not actually following that system. Right? But, now let’s say we go into one of these amazing, how do you say, success stories. You know, the kid on the street has nothing, his father dies, and does the whole thing, and like that. But what comes out, and why is it he’s successful and as outstanding over other people? In light of what we just said. Yeah. Is they have people that they took their mood and instruction and applied it in their life very seriously. Just some old guy said one thing. The grandfather said something, the uncle said something. That’s it. They apply that and focus only on that.
Does that make sense? So, they’re following the laws of God. That’s why it works. But they don’t know it. They have no idea. And so by seeing those patterns, then we’ll develop, oh, there’s these things that we’ll try to write books and all that, but they miss the point.
It’s the law of God has been followed. They think it’s a technique. No, the technique is only the medium. There’s laws being followed. There’s also laws of technique, laws of, you know, positioning oneself, you know, like that. So, like we discussed before in Sambandhabade and Prayojana, there’s laws on all of them. You get that all right, it works very nicely. So, all it is is that by karma, by previous good work, then they’re doing something right, they’re getting the result, but because they’re dealing with it improperly, in the future they won’t get it. Right? Does that make sense? So, the person is doing well in business now, making lots of money, but he doesn’t live a proper lifestyle. He doesn’t use his money properly. So, it’s just a matter of time before he loses it. So, his getting the money now is not from his bad work now. It’s from his previous good work that he’s still following some aspects of the law of the money still comes in. But at some point, he’s going to get too proud and think he can function outside the laws. That’s when things will stop working. Does that make sense? So, the point is that how an activity is done, that’s actually defined by Krishna and the Vaisnavas. We’re thinking, Oh, no, but I’ve got to engage my condition. No, the condition of nature has already been defined by Krishna. Who said this? Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras. We didn’t. Krishna did. That’s why in every society, the four are there. Every society, the other aspects are there. Maybe scientifically or not.
You know what I’m saying? It’s just like you had the you know, 65-year-old lady, you know, her husband’s died and that, you know, and she’s, you know, there, lives alone, and you know, whenever the other members of the family come over, then she gives them some advice and all that, like that. What ashram is she in?
Vanaprastha. Did she plan it to be like that? It was up to her. She would have been Grihastha and, you know, all the way through. But it didn’t. She ended up as a Vanaprastha.
You know? Does that make sense? You know, the guy was having a great time, but, you know, his great time won’t continue in as consistent way as, you know, he’d like it, greatness, unless he is, you know, committed to this one particular girl. Right? And so, therefore, he ends up married. Right? But if it was up to him, he’d be bachelor forever. But there is no bachelor ashram. So, therefore, he ends up getting married.
Does that make sense? You know what I’m saying? The guy is at school, you know, he’s there, he focuses on his studies and all that, you know, maybe in the afternoon plays a little sport, but then gets back home, does his homework and all that. He gets a four-point average. The guy that’s at the party, you know, out with the girls all day and all that, he doesn’t do as well.
Right? Why? Because the student is supposed to be celibate.
Does that make sense? So, that’s the thing. The householder is fired up, gets out there and works and makes that deal and everything because he’s married.
If he was alone, well, that’s the big deal. Right? You know? He already has a, you know, car and he already has his, you know, his big, you know, how you say, high-powered computer he can play his games on. You know? And all these things. So, what else do you need? But the problem is his wife needs some stuff. So, that requires the new deal.
Does that make sense? So, for the student, it doesn’t work. For the grihastha, it works. So, these are God’s laws.
So, the point is, it’s the following of God’s laws that gives success. Not some other, not some idea of what material energy is and what’s good and what’s not good. We don’t define what’s good and what’s not good. Any idea of good and not good in the non-Vedic culture is actually just coming originally from some religious understanding somewhere. You know, whatever’s left, let’s say, in the Western, is left over from, you know, Christian ideals. And even those are breaking down. But it’s still left from there. It’s not, it didn’t come on its own. Right? Does that make sense? An atheistic philosopher is not coming up with a great idea that, you know, monogamous relationship between man and woman is the best thing for their happiness and for the children’s happiness and for the social happiness.
No? Right? All those, you know, guys, all those French guys, they definitely had a different idea of what was the best.
Does that make sense? Unfortunately, George, as you were saying earlier, that mentality and Vedic culture renders, as far as being a Christian, we are, we’re talking about this in Guggenheim, that we have been so conditioned by that Christian background of guilt and, you know, eternal damnation, so that when we come to such a high culture, it’s hard to… Yeah, that’s fair. I mean, that’s just the method because that’s the way, for those who are going to be sinful anyway, and without fear, there’s not going to… You know, in other words, the first point is Krishna likes it. Why do this? Krishna likes it. That’s the first rule. Second is that, you know, you’ll be able to elevate yourself to the transcendental platform. Third is by doing it, you’ll get good results, you know, in the future. Fourth is by doing it, you’ll get good results now. You know, fifth is that by doing this, it won’t work out good for you. Sixth would be, if you do this, you go to hell.
So, the thing is, is that generally, if we say, why do I have to be, let’s say, clean? If I say, well, Krishna likes it, it doesn’t fly. Nobody buys it. You have to bring out some, you know, something from some scientific journal and all that and say, oh, OK, that’s OK, or exclude it. Seclude it. Oh, seclude it. And they aren’t, when they’re in their house, they want us to come over and knock on their door right halfway through their favorite evening program.
It’s opposite.
The point is, it’s the other way around. We’re the only ones that are actually socially dealing properly. They’re the ones who are not. And any lack in our social dealings is because we’re still conditioned by that other mentality.
Because there’s this idea that Krishna and his creation are different.
So if Krishna and his creation is not different, that means all the different social aspects, you know, whatever’s there, dharma, artha, kama and moksha, it’s all in connection with the Lord. It’s because we don’t see it in connection with the Lord, therefore we call it dharma, artha, kama and moksha. If it’s in connection with the Lord, we call it bhakti.
You know, Arjuna is a ksatriya, but it’s still his service to fight on the battlefield.
Does that make sense? You know, he does all the different things properly. You know, by doing that he’ll be liberated. All these different things, they just come automatically. So dharma, artha, kama, moksha come automatically for the devotee. That’s why one doesn’t have to separately endeavor. It doesn’t mean one’s not doing it, but one doesn’t separately endeavor. You know what I’m saying? Like, to become humble. Okay, it’s good to be humble. Rupa Goswami says it. Lord Caitanya says it. So therefore, you know, I’m going to, you know, in front of the pancha-tattva extension because they have a big step there, I’m going to lie down there in front of the step where the mats are so when all the devotees come in they can step on me and wipe their feet and then go into the temple. Right? That way I’ll become humble. You know? You know, the devotees, and then the devotees don’t like it, so then that’s a problem. You know, what’s their problem? Can’t they see I’m trying to become humble? So then I can go outside and go lay down in a bus, you know, going to Krishnagar. They may like it. You know, so we might be more successful. But that’s a separate endeavor. Just the proper performance of one’s duties, one has to be humble anyway. Because there’s always a situation that somebody’s not going to recognize your good work or deal with you properly or, you know, it’s just a position you have to be humble because the other person has seen you. So humility is always, the ability to be humble is always there.
It’s just a matter of seeing it and taking it. So generally we start with the most obvious. But the point is, we see the great Acharyas can apply it anywhere. Because Krishna’s everywhere, the devotees are everywhere. So you’re humble in front of Krishna and the Vaishnavas. So since they’re everywhere, so therefore you can’t be everywhere.
Does that make sense? So to that degree that we’re not, to that degree then, like the conditioning, then there’ll be problems. But the point is, the standard is that pure unannoyed devotion. We understand that. Then we situate ourselves not too far forward, not too far back. You know what I’m saying? As I said before, if you push too quickly, then either you’ll become hard-hearted and have no inspiration or the thing that you’re restricting yourself from will come up so violently that it’ll just completely overwhelm you. So you move at the speed that you can handle.
The association of devotees, everything like that. But it has to be what you actually can handle, not what you would think.
What you wish you could handle. Yeah, yeah, like that. Yes, I can only handle getting up at four in the afternoon. Any more than that would be a real push. So things like that, that’s why there’s sadhana, because there’s certain things that we have a tendency to be too whimsical about. We’ll be too whimsical.
Okay, does that make sense? So all it is, is we’re looking at taking the different aspects, seeing their connections, but ultimately, it always goes back to its connection to Krishna. That’s what makes it useful, yes. What’s the…
that you’re interested in some part of the material energy, but then you recognize that it’s Krishna’s quality that’s there, so you’ve isolated… So now, what would be the appropriate way of dealing with that part of the Lord’s energy in connection to the Lord that would be service to the Lord and favorable to the Lord? Does that make sense?
