Fight following arises only from imposing one’s own bad habits on others, because you only see what is your nature, right, like that. So the point is, is if it’s not connected to Krishna, then it’s going to be a fault, so you’re imposing your faults on others.
This should be given up in all respects. Speaking falsehoods is another form of useless talk. I’m going through the list. Fault finding. Speaking falsehoods. Okay.
It’s another form of useless talk. Worldly talk is completely rejected by renounced devotees.
Haltos may accept some worldly talk that is favorable to devotional topic, devotional service. If topics like archaeology, zoology, astrology and geography are devoid of God-consciousness, they should be rejected, right? So whatever is connected to Krsna, that discussion, that has some value. If it’s not connected to Krsna, then it’s not of any importance.
Page 11. The conclusion of this essay is this. Whatever prajapas not favorable for devotional service should be carefully given up by Vaisnavas who are cultivating bhakti. One need discuss only whatever is auspicious for oneself and others. If one wants to discuss topics of others, it will simply be useless speech, right? So we have to be able to catch here, this is, this is, you know, we get, we can get confused on these things, is that here he’s saying only what’s favorable, right? So that’s, that’s meaning that the prajapa itself is not of any value, right? But if it’s, if it’s favorable, then it can be used, right? And so if one wants to discuss topics of others, it will be useless, right? Because there is just a desire to talk about others. That’s useless. It is already defined before that talk connected to Krsna consciousness, of value to oneself or others, that has some purpose. So then here it means that just talking about others doesn’t have a validity, right? If it’s connected to Krsna, then only it has validity. Does that make sense? Because otherwise we’ll figure, it’s talking about others, that’s our right, that’s what we can do. We’re doing this, we’re doing that. You know, we have to manage, we have to do this. But that’s all part of talking about others. It’s all prajapa, right? Even if it’s your managing, you’re doing your occupation, it’s all prajapa, right? Only when it connects to Krsna, then it has value.
Is that, does that make sense? You know, two grhasas are sitting talking about, you know, business and different things and economics and all that. But if they’re not connecting it to Krsna, it’s prajapa, it’s useless, right? But if there’s some discussion about its connection to Krsna, then it’s of value.
Does that make sense? One wants to know, okay, you’re doing big business, how do you do that and, you know, take care of the family, do everything else? So those kinds of discussions, you know, is how can you be Krsna conscious while you’re doing all this economic, and there’s some discussion on that or, does that make sense? You know, there’s some way of how, it’s seeing it in relationship to the Lord, right?
Then it has a value. Otherwise then it doesn’t have a value. Right? Yes. It seems that it requires a lot of practice. Practice, yes. So therefore it’s called sadhana-bhakti. Yeah, but will it be, will there be a time when it comes naturally? Of course.
And you won’t feel aversion? No, you will. You will feel aversion. But aversion is not a bad thing. means, aversion is not advisable either. What you’re looking for is there’s no interest, right? Because it’s just like this. Let’s say you have an aversion to something.
Aversion means like a hatred for something, right? So therefore, an aversion, because attached to an aversion, they’re just two sides of the same thing. That’s someone you like, you’ll talk about. Someone you don’t like, you’ll talk about, right? But someone who you neither like or don’t like, you know, there’s just no interest. You never talk about them.
Does that make sense? So what’s trying to get it to the neutral state is that, in other words, if you have no attraction or attachment for it, but if it’s useful in Krishna consciousness, then it will be discussed. But if there’s no use in Krishna consciousness, you wouldn’t discuss it, because there’d be no purpose, right? But now let us say the topic is not useful, but because of our attachments, we’re inspired to talk about it, right? So we’re inspired, but it’s still useless, right? So the point is that if it’s connected to Krishna, that becomes useful. And if we have no attachments, then it’s easier, because if we’re only attached to Krishna, we’re only going to discuss things in connection to Krishna.
Does that make sense?
That work?
OK. It’s practice. All of it’s just practice. You just take it, and you try. And as we were discussing this morning, then you try. And then if it works, great. And if it doesn’t, then you keep trying. Because the point is the desire to do it, if it’s whatever it is, if it’s devotional service, that’s what’s devotional. The technical point itself, that’s the medium to express it. Because otherwise, how would you express your devotion unless you’re trying to do it? Does that make sense?
So that continues. So there is no failure there. That you made the endeavor, that’s not failure. That you didn’t get the result, then you can say materially it failed, or technique-wise it failed.
And since the result we want for Krishna, therefore we’ll keep attempting to do it so that we get the proper result.
So the point we’re making here is that he said it’s favorable if it’s connected to devotion, but he’s saying it itself is useless. One need discuss only whatever is auspicious for oneself and others. One wants to discuss topics of others, it will simply be useless speech. Because discussing topics about others, that’s not useful. Discussing topics that are useful for yourself or others, that has a value. And useful means it’s connected to the Lord.
Does that make sense?
Let us say there’s a pile of potatoes. Right? There is a pile of potatoes. So is this pile of potatoes devotional or not? Depends. It depends on what? Are you using it for Krishna or not? That’s all. The potatoes themselves are just potatoes. Right? So that’s the point, is topics of others is just topics of others. So that is, as per se, is useless. If there’s some value for yourself or others to discuss that, then it’s all right that that value means it’s Krishna conscious.
Therefore, in the Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.28.2, Lord Krishna instructed Uddhava as follows. Whoever indulges in praising or criticizing the qualities and behavior of others will quickly become deviated from his own best interest by his entanglement in illusory dualities.
So in other words, if you’re involved in the process of duality, it will increase duality. If you’re involved in the process of Krishna consciousness, it will increase Krishna consciousness.
Because duality means Krishna conscious is the one thing, and what you’re thinking or doing is another.
Does that make sense? But if what Krishna conscious and what you’re doing are not, then therefore, it takes on the same quality.
Indulges just means, I’m not sure that it would mean overly. Indulges just means that you get involved.
You can indulge yourself by even a small amount. Let’s say the person is not supposed to eat sweets, and it’s a feast, and everybody else is eating. So they indulge themselves, and they just taste it. So they’re not actually eating much. So an indulgence just means that it’s not necessary.
So if one indulges in praise, it’s not necessary to praise or criticize. My definition, it means that there’s a desire behind action. There’s a desire behind action when there’s indulgence. In other words, so they’re pointing out, so he indulges if he’s using praising or criticizing the cause of behaving as others, because it will be a benefit for themselves or someone else in Krishna consciousness. That’s not what he’s talking about.
Yeah. Does that make sense? Because he’s not acting in his best interest, he’ll be deviated from his best interest. If you’re acting your best interest, you won’t be deviated. So in other words, one doesn’t talk about others unless there’s some Krishna conscious value.
Praising the good qualities seen in Krishna consciousness of the devotees is always. Yes, but that’s, you’re there, but you can also praise because you’ll get something from it. Does that make sense?
Yes, so if you’re praising because you’re going to get something, then that’s what he’s meaning here. Because then you’re going to be deviated from your best interest, because then you’re going to get materially involved.
And this statement from Bhagavata that one should not praise nor criticize refers to qualities seen not in connection to Krishna. Yeah, because you’re praise, why would you praise somebody if it’s not in connection to Krishna? You want some material benefit. Telling the boss, I was so great, and this and that. And then when he goes away, Alice, he was so stupid, this guy, and this.
So it’s materially based, so you get a material result.
If it’s spiritually based, then you get a spiritual result.
It’s very direct. That’s the thing. Krishna consciousness is so simple and so direct that it kind of gets freaky, because the mind has so many attachments and all these things. Therefore, there’s this desire to deal on that kind of complicated platform, because the mind is so complicated. Krishna consciousness is very, very simple. Oh, I did hear water. I was wondering, I said, what is that? And I look around, there’s no water. I’m thinking, what are they doing? Are they deep frying something upstairs or something like that? Now we see that it was water.
Srila Prabhupada describes prajalta as follows. Another impediment is prajalta, unnecessary talking. When we mix with a few friends, we immediately begin unnecessary talking, sounding just like croaking toads. If we must talk, we should talk about the Krishna consciousness movement.
Those outside of the Krishna consciousness movement are interested in reading heaps of newspapers, magazines, and novels, solving crossword puzzles, and doing many other nonsensical things. In this fashion, people simply waste their valuable time and energy. In the Western countries, old men retire from active lives, play cards, fish, watch television, and debate about useless socio-political schemes.
All these and other frivolous activities are included in the prajalta category. Intelligent persons interested in Krishna consciousness should never take part in such activities.
So he’s kind of caught most everything. Yes.
At the beginning of our movement, reading newspapers and the activities mentioned here were obviously forbidden and socially not accepted. Nowadays, it’s very much vague and like, you can do it, and nobody minds, and nobody will tell you No, but the point is that people don’t mind prajalta. That doesn’t mean that it’s still not prajalta.
See, it’s because there’s the element that Prabhupada expected that the leadership should know what’s going on. Otherwise, the temple president was there. They’re all doing the things. There’s some big festival happening in the city, some big news. He doesn’t know anything about it, so how will he take advantage of that for the preaching? So Prabhupada expected he would be up to date on the news, on looking at it, what could be connected to the Lord. And I’m not sure if it’s from there. It filtered down. Now, everybody reads just in case, so they know how to involve themselves in Krishna consciousness during the American presidential election, stuff like that. So what is the idea? I’m not sure. Or if it’s just come because they used to read newspapers anyway, and so now they’re reading newspapers, and so that’s the point. I wouldn’t be sure.
Any more questions? I have two questions. One is that Prabhupada is very prepared to speak only about the Krishna consciousness movement.
And outside of this movement, it’s mainly in respect to our own life. So is it, you can say, a preaching technique? A preaching technique. So can we take this, because this outside of the movement? Means what would be the preaching technique? It’s good outside of the Krishna consciousness movement. No, but let’s say if you are preaching to somebody, and you’re discussing something in the news, so is that outside the preaching movement? Outside of the Krishna conscious movement?
Why not?
Right, means is the person you’re talking to necessarily relating it? No, but you are. And you’re in the movement. The movement is preaching. So you’re preaching, but you’re using that as a medium at some point to discuss. So it’s not outside the Krishna consciousness movement.
Does that make sense? Yes, in that way. But you are more like, there is the, you can say, this kind of movement, and there are other. No, no, it’s saying the Krishna consciousness movement. So that means, you know, Krishna consciousness. Ramanujacharya is also in the Krishna consciousness movement. You know, anyone who’s bona fide connected to Krishna, that’s bona fide. You know what I’m saying? ISKCON is the, you could say, organizational manifestation of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions.
Does that make sense? But the movement of Lord Caitanya is bigger. The Krishna consciousness movement is bigger than that.
Does that make sense? And like when we say Vaisnavas, Vaisnava means worshiper of Visnu, right? So technically, it means any Visnu-tattva. But that’s the broadest term. So that means everybody in the spiritual world are Vaisnavas. Right? Does that make sense? But now, of Vaisnavas, only those in Goloka are karsanas. It means worshippers of Krishna, right? Because Krishna in Dvaraka, Krishna in Mathura, Krishna in Vrndavana. So they’re all karsanas, right? But of the karsanas, then only a smaller group, they’re gaudias, which means they worship Krishna, but by worshiping Radharani.
Does that make sense? So they’re worshipers of Radharani.
Does that make sense? So that is very specific. So here, the Krishna consciousness movement means anything connected with Vaisnavism, right? Does that make sense? But it also has to be a benefit to you and others. If it’s not a benefit to you or others, then it’s also not of value. You know what I’m saying? Does that make sense?
No, indulges in praising. Like you said, indulgement means that there is an endeavor with material desires. Is that what you said?
That one tries to fulfill his wishes by it. You try to fulfill your own wishes. So are you praising him because you actually have those sincere feelings, or you’re praising because then he’ll figure you’re a great disciple and now, next time you see him, then you’ll get some benefit, or you’re trying to get him to arrange something or give something, so you’re praising and hoping that will.
Can you tell the difference there?
So that’s it. Because he uses the word indulgence. He doesn’t say, whoever praises or criticize the qualities. And then even if that is there, that means others, in this case, just means you’re dealing on the material platform.
Does that make sense? So the point is this. If you’re functioning on the material platform, that’s going to be a problem.
Your professor says people simply waste their valuable time. He’s looking at the perspective. Self-realization is so important. So that time will be extremely relevant to achieve that. And we don’t see that because we are not sometimes seeing this perspective of what is there for us. So we think that Prajapada has a place because. Yeah. Yeah, good.
Because simply waste of value means human life is valuable. So they’re wasting the human life because it’s not connected to the Lord. Like that.
So then one’s asking whether, what if it’s a Christian conscious crossword puzzle?
Sometimes when we preach to people in the beginning, we kind of try to build up a relationship, like kind of a friendship. So we talk with them about seemingly superficial things because it’s interesting for them. So would you say this is? No. Because what’s your purpose of doing that?
No. It means if the purpose is Krishna conscious, yes. Then it’s fine. But if your purpose is just you want to be liked by these people, so they don’t think that you’re a weirdo, then that’s still mundane. But if the point is that if you talk, so therefore then they feel comfortable, they can relate like that, then you can get around the Krishna conscious discussion, then that’s not a problem.
So that’s when we deal with the devotees.
And some of them are on the level that you have to encourage. You have to encourage. Encourage and also say like to be on their, not level, but kind of deal with them. What are they doing, encouraging the aids or whatever. But after that, you feel kind of empty.
Would you believe that the whole thing was just an interruption?
It’s not the question of should we do that. Yeah. But the point is, what was the consciousness while you were doing that?
You know what I’m saying? Because it may be that the technique is important and fine, but you have to see is that why would you be encouraging them? What will be the Krishna conscious benefit by encouraging them?
Yeah. But what you’re trying to encourage them in is Krishna conscious. Yeah. So then there shouldn’t be a problem. But it just may be the consciousness is not, you know, focused properly or something. You know what I’m saying? We get distracted ourselves by the conversation.
Whatever is necessary.
You know what I’m saying? It’s not more or less, you know. It’s just however much, like, how much time, you know, should we prepare, you know, the cooking?
Yeah. It’s the best point. It depends what you’re doing.
Okay.
Four. Summary of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s essay on niyamagraha, too much attachment to or too much neglect of rules and regulations.
Niyama, or rules, are of two kinds, viddhis, or prescriptions, and nisedhas, or prohibitions.
Whatever is enjoined as one’s duty is a prescribed rule. Whatever is enjoined as restricted is a prohibited rule. Both kinds of rules are auspicious for the living entity.
The conditioned souls are able to obtain very exalted position from a very low position. Between these two extremes, there are many other positions, which are distinct levels of advancement. Each level has its own prescriptions and prohibitions. When the soul is on a certain level of advancement, he’s obliged to follow the rules and regulations for this level. By doing this, he advances to the next level. By not doing this, he degrades to the lower level. Right? So, in other words, there’s something that will be good for you to do and something not good for you to do. Right? Does that make sense? As you move through, then it has meaning.
So, but, as we said before, the principle is the same. That’s why you can move through it without having any difficulty. Right? Because it naturally connects from one to the other.
Does that make sense? What are those processes from the same level?
It’s basically attachment, because I would expect as it comes up, he’s going, yeah, no, he goes for some time. So, he’s going to bring out how the attachments get involved in this. It’s just like the others. If you’re attached to it, that’s where the problem is. Right? It’s connected to Krishna. That’s where it’s not the problem. Right? So, one may ask, well, if I’m attached to the thing, but I’m talking about a connection to Krishna, is that not Prajapati? Means, technically speaking, overall, the effect would be devotional, but at the same time, one will be restricted by that aspect that’s not.
So, it means, in other words, our attachment for it is going to restrict us, but its connection to Krishna, that’s what’s going to elevate us. All right?
To properly follow the precepts of one’s own level is called, quote, one’s prescribed duties, end quote. Right? So, in other words, he’s defining whatever we see, you know, where Krishna and in the Gita or in the Bhagavatam we see that the different instructions by the sages are always about performing one’s prescribed duties. So, prescribed duties means the duties at the level that you’re at. Because they may have been your duties before, but now they’re not. Right? Does that make sense? It’s what fits into the… Does that make sense? The person before was managing everything, but now he’s retired. So, therefore, to do those duties would not be his prescribed duties. Right? Now his prescribed duties will be in another direction.
Does that make sense? And they naturally come as he progresses.
Does that make sense? Yeah. All right. This prescribed duties is dharma. Prescribed duties is dharma, yeah. How do I say we have problems of dharma? Because it means authority. We have a problem with anything that means I’m not personally, hands on, the controller and enjoyer.
That’s all. You look into it, that becomes the difficulty.
You know what I’m saying? Someone else is serving, then you’re dependent upon them. They serve nice, don’t serve nice. If it’s a buffet, you’re in control. You control the spoon. You control it. You know, like that. You know, that kind of thing. So, it’s control. It’s not culture. It’s control.
You know what I’m saying?
Huh? Where it comes from. Where it comes from. Probably lack of culture.
No one wants to serve. Because that way then, no one’s the servant, right? Otherwise, some people are sitting, some people have to serve. But if it’s buffet, no one’s the servant, right? Seemingly. But it means everybody’s the servant.
You know what I’m saying? Because the point is, is someone who’s actually, you know, enjoying the meal, they sit down and eat. But if you have to eat, get up, go get something, come back, you’re not technically the enjoyer. That’s what servers do. Servers go get something in there. So, you keep going back and forth between the enjoyer and the servant. So, you have to serve anyway, but you can’t get away from it. Right? We’re thinking that by the way, then we get rid of that. No, you don’t. Now you just make everybody enjoy instead of somebody designated.
You know, it’s just, it’s just these things come up. And we’ll say, oh, it’s practical. But why it’s practical? Because others don’t, nobody wants to serve. You know what I’m saying? If you have a situation where everybody’s means coming basically at the same time, then by sitting it down and serving, that’s more efficient. But if you’re having a thing over many hours, people are, you know, trickling in and all that, then you could say, and if there’s less people, then you could say, okay, the buffet works. You know? But it’s not an ideal. It would still be better to have somebody serving like that. That would be proper. But if that, then you could say, but where everybody’s there at once and it’s buffet and everyone’s standing in a line, how is that of any benefit? You know?
Because the point is, it means the others, you’re sitting in a line and, you know, they start down the line. You get something. You know? But this other one, you have to wait in the line. Then only you get something. You know?
So, so it’s, it’s not, it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s just lack of understanding, you know, the culture and all those different things. You know? We don’t understand what, why the rules are there. What is the particular benefit?
Does that make sense? If you’re eating in a line and you, and you get up from the line, technically that means you’re not involved in that eating process anymore. Because whatever comes down the line, being served, is something you could take from. But once you get up, you’re not taking from that anymore. So that means whatever’s left for that line is technically what’s called satya. Satya means it’s not contaminated, but it’s leftovers.
You understand?
So, therefore, everybody’s getting up. And so all that’s happening is everybody’s eating leftovers. And everybody’s the servant.
You know? So seemingly it seems, oh, this is so practical. This is so nice. But it’s, it’s, it’s one of the lower grades of, of, what do you call it?
Yeah. Interaction of culture and all that. Does that make sense? But just because it’ll be popular on some certain levels because, you know, nobody’s come to eat anyway and things like that. But you have something out. So it’s there. And if people want, they go over and take and like that. That gives that freedom. So it has that, you know, informal element. But you’ve set it up nicely so it has that touch of formality. So you have all these blends of all these different kinds of things. But we should know that that blend is specific for those people exactly at that time.
Does that make sense? Because you adjust it a little bit and it doesn’t fit those people, but it fits somewhere else.
You know what I’m saying? So it’s, it’s, it’s, it’s specifically, you know, materially focused. It’s not, it’s not, it’s not technically very cultured.
You know what I’m saying? But you can make, there can be more culture of the uncultured, right? Means you have a bunch of, you know, how you say, you know, plastic ghee buckets sitting there. And with, you know, a variety of soup ladles or not, you know, like that. And some of them have, some of them don’t. And they’re just kind of sitting on the floor over at the side like that, you know. And, you know, I don’t want to upset anyone if we’re getting too close to home. And that would be that. I bet if we have these nice tables with claws and all these nice, you know, things of displays. And it’s lighted well, you know. And it’s very, you know, spread out nicely. There’s very, you know, sophisticated ways to, you know, pick it up or get it and everything like that. So it’s very sophisticated of that, but it doesn’t mean that culturally it’s not at the same level. You know what I’m saying? We make that mistake. If it’s sophisticated, then it’s, it’s human. No, it means, you know, it’s just sophisticated animal, that’s all. It’s gentle, organized animal. Does that make sense? Instead of being, you know, get in there and go for an animal. Why is this the next stage down the trough? The trough, yeah. But it’s popular, you know. There’s probably more living entities using the trough than using the buffet system, you know. Trough.
After finishing in the house and all that, all the potato skins, all that are put into a bucket, right? Then you go out into the back and there’s a, there’s a, like a shed out there. And you go in, and when you go in, you’re very enthusiastically greeted by the residents of that shed. And you take the bucket, holding the handle and grabbing the bottom of the bucket, and you shake it out along this very long kind of, yes, trough.
And then all the residents there are very happy and make all kinds of happy squealing noises.
Right? Does that make sense?
Maharaj, how do you experience the buffet down the trough?
It just comes up to mind why I think it’s funny I went to that detail there is because when I was in, I think it was, when was that? It was a long time back. I’ve been in Poland.
Then the local leaders at that time, we were sitting and taking the shot. But, you know, as normal, because it was a bunch of brahmacharis, you know. But as typical, they forgot the spoons, right, for serving. So then, which is also typical, somebody just picks up the bucket and just shakes them on the plates, you know. Like that. And so then, and they just happily go on eating. No one really, you know, OK, there’s no spoons, so that works, you know. And then one of the devotees there was very expert at making authentic pig noises. You know how they, like this. So then when they do that, he’d make these noises, you know. So then it would be even more funny because, you know, at least in that time, it was just after the communists, you know, went down. You know, so people having their house, backyard, and pigs was pretty standard. You know, kind of everybody had them, you know. And so then it was, it was just really funny because it was so, you know, how do you say? Contemporary to the environment, you know. Like that. So that’s why I explained it that way, because I figured he might appreciate it. Because of it not being so socially distant from, you know, the present environment, right.
But, you know, some cities, you know, they’ve never even seen a pig, let alone a trough. You know, so it’s like, hey, you know.
Yeah, so going back to the question. So I’ve experienced the buffet and these other systems, and you can see it, like, very nicely, with all the culture. You know, you’re taking into consideration how much you want to, or want to see. And it gives such a complete bliss, you know, to see the group who are just jumping down the road happily. And so my question would be, is it this culture experience which gives a superior taste? Yeah, because one’s human. So therefore, there’s a lifestyle that goes with a human. You feel more human, right. And humans take up Christian consciousness. Otherwise, you see, is the buffet, is that. Because what happens if you sit down and you’re served like that, nicely, the interactive, it’s all done nicely. Are you going to be thinking of most anything else? No. But now let’s say I’ve just come out of a meeting. You go into the, you know, kind of the, you know, the kind of open area or something, the mingling area. I’m not sure what they call it. The lounge. The lounge and all that, you know. And then you’re there and you’re, you know, everyone’s, and then you go and take somebody to eat. What are you going to be talking about? Meeting. Meeting. It’s not going to stop. So therefore, if your idea is just, you know, how you say, eat meeting, sleep meeting, drink meeting, then it’s great. But the point is, is if, but human life, there’s more to life than eating, sleeping, meeting, and defending.
Right. So that’s, that’s the thing. There’s more. So that’s why then, even though one may be doing so many things, then one stops and one takes Prasad, associates with devotion. This other, you’re not associating with devotees, technically, on that higher devotion.
It’s practical. It’s in connection with your service. So you could say in that way it’s devotional, but it still doesn’t have the flavor, the cultural flavor, because the other one is simply pragmatic.
Right. And if it’s pragmatic, then what varna does that drop it to? Shudra. Shudra? Vaisya.
You know what I’m saying? Because the Brahmins, you would sit like that. Kshatriyas, even if they’re going to do it, it’s going to be very elaborate. So you’re not going to be standing around and picking off some plate, you know, like that. Does that make sense? You know, if you’re doing a high class buffet, there would be people that are serving you from the buffet.
You know what I’m saying? But devotees generally don’t go for that because if you have people that can, at that sophistication, do that, they could also serve prasad regularly. So since you don’t have anyone to regularly serve prasad, you don’t have anyone to do that with a buffet either. You know what I’m saying? So you are working at a lower grade of it. You can be very sophisticated. It may be they’re all millionaires and billionaires and all professionals, but it is a bourgeois culture. It’s not a Brahmin culture or a Kshatriya culture. Right? You know, it’s you’re dealing at a sophisticated Vaishya culture.
You know what I’m saying? So you’ll only get that much experience because the whole talk is about that. They’re only profiling. They’re social. They’re power. They’re networking. That’s all that you’re doing.
Does that make sense? Or you drop it down to it’s just intimate like a family. You just take something, sit down and eat. It doesn’t matter where you sit and all that. You know what I’m saying? Because that’s also what goes with it. That’s informal. So seating is informal. But if the seating is formal and then you have to get up from the formal seating, go over there, get something, come back and sit down, then that’s really not understanding the whole mood of it. So you can’t get intimate between who you’re talking with. But at the same time, it can’t be properly formal.
So the idea is that if you know what is going on, then you’ll be able to make a proper decision. Otherwise, if you don’t know, then one will act whimsically.
Does that make sense? Because there may be a situation where the buffet does work better, like we said. But there’s another situation where it could work, but it’s not actually necessary.
Yes.
Because there’s service. You’re doing service. Otherwise, how do Vaishnavas associate?
Right?
Offering and accepting. That’s where interaction is. But picking up some food and sitting there and eating and talking and all that, that’s not bhunte bhojayate. That may be guhyamakati preacchati, like that, revealing some secrets about others that they don’t know and then revealing secrets about others that you don’t know. But that was covered in the last essay.
You know what I’m saying? But it doesn’t come to there. So the problem is, is when you have, you don’t have a way of eating to interact. You know, there’s no basis of, there’s no food culture. Right? And there is, and you can’t speak confidentially because, you know, everybody is, you know, how you say, public property and everything’s on the Internet. And, you know, you don’t want to give gifts because they’ll be puffed up and all that and why they don’t do like that. So where is the Vaishnava interaction? And having a meeting and discussing management isn’t that. That’s your occupation.
But association is within ashram. So the problem comes is that there is no Vaishnava association other than sitting in the class or in the kirtan, one of those things like that. But when that’s over, they’re doing, engaged in devotional service, but there’s no sadhu-sangha.
Normally you would be doing that, but then in the interspace, these other aspects are there. It’s not that someone who’s expert won’t be able to be friends and have those things, but that’s the individual doing it. It’s not inherent in the, you know what I’m saying?
You know, not especially if you’re using Western models of meetings. It’s not inherent.
Does that make sense? So that’s the difficulty is culture is cut out, right?
And then their digestions are no good, right?
That’s why the culture, that adds some wetness.
So now one could say, well, if we served lassi during the meeting, then we would be having the culture and the practical.
That make sense?
No, these are fancy because these are discussing general points. It means you may have devotees who, they can have meetings and interact very nicely and things like that. I have seen them, two of them, one at 26 2nd Avenue when a whole bunch of professional devotees got together and worked out a park program.
And once in one of the TOVP meetings.
Yeah, that’s it.
Oh, BBT was good. Yeah, BBT was good. I haven’t been for so long. I forgot about those. BBT was good. They get together and discuss them. It’s very, very, it’s, you know, it’s to each other. It’s not, it’s not that I’m here and we’re discussing this point. It’s that they’re relating to each other and how to best do it like that. That’s quite good.
So that increases it to five.
Yes.
But it’s not a meal. You’re having a discussion or meeting that’s added to it. But we’re talking about, it’s lunch. So the point is the meal. But it doesn’t really become a meal. Right. I was just, I was using these higher end examples so that someone wouldn’t try to get over, you know, go around it by, you know, oh, but, you know, but these, you know, on these professional levels, they do it and all that. But if you have those, those same professional people will also go out to a dinner that’s properly served and all that and has all these etiquettes and all that. So they can’t function. But I’m talking about where people don’t know how to serve, don’t know how to eat. And so one wouldn’t be able to use those.
You know what I’m saying?
I like that.
So the idea is that, means, what it means, we’ve gotten into this, is that if one performs one’s prescribed duties at the level one’s at, it will work very nice. Without understanding, if we reject, right, or make up our own, we’re going to have problems.
Does that make sense?
The conditioned souls are able to obtain, oh, okay.
Okay. To properly follow the precepts of one’s own level is called one’s prescribed duties, or steadiness in one’s own position. Right, because there’s steadiness there. That was the thing we were discussing this morning, is that there’s steadiness and therefore in relationships, because you know your prescribed duties, so you function at that level, it’s steady. But if you don’t act on that platform, it won’t be steady.
Yeah, it’ll only be sentiments, so therefore the sentiment’s there, it’s nice interaction, sentiment’s not there, it’s not nice. Like that. You know, it’s just like you meet somebody and it’s a very nice interaction. You’re expecting next time you meet him it’ll be the same kind of quality. But now if next time it’s not very much, you know, then you start to worry about how, what’s the quality of the relationship. But if it’s always the same, then you know it’s what it is.
Yeah, yeah, like that. Or if it’s, you know that’s what it is. It’s always like that. They’re just an acquaintance. When you see them, you chit-chat a little bit and move on. You know what I’m saying?
Lord Kṛṣṇa spoke these instructions to Uddhava. Steadiness in one’s own position is declared to be actual piety, whereas deviation from one’s position is considered impiety. In this way the two are definitely ascertained. O saintly Uddhava, in order to restrict materialistic activities, I have established that which is proper and improper among all material things, including time, space, and all physical objects. Right? So this is Kṛṣṇa speaking to Uddhava. So it’s not, you know, some expansion of Viṣṇu off in a corner somewhere that we have nothing to do with. And He’s defined all these things. Kṛṣṇa is saying, I’ve done this. I have, in order to restrict materialistic activities, I have established what’s proper and improper amongst all, He doesn’t say some, all material things, including time, space, and all physical objects. Right? Because what it is, is the modern culture is trying to say, no, no, we are outside of this Vedic. That was 5,000 years ago. But the point is, is the material things, the time, the space, and the physical are still the same.
You know what I’m saying? We’re discussing things about husband and wife. Are there no husbands and wives now? Right? And even if they say, oh, we’re not legally married, we’re just living de facto, it is not the same things expected. Right? The people are living de facto in the same house. They have a kid. They’re not married. They’re not planning to get married. Now, is it all right for one of them to be off with a different partner? Would they consider that cool? No. So then what’s the difference? Okay. The man speaks roughly of the woman. Well, she thinks, wow, this is great. You know what I’m saying? You know, she, this is not interactive with him. He’ll say, this is fabulous.
So what’s changed? Nothing’s changed. You’ve just changed the label of it. You know, instead of calling it a rock, we call it a stone. And so when I say rock, no, no, no, it’s not a rock. It’s a stone.
You understand? That’s all that’s happening. Nothing’s changed. Do people not breathe air, eat food, drink water? Do they not live in houses? Do they not have families? You know, they’re not parents and children. Right? That’s so old fashioned now. You know, the kids are born immediately. That, you know, they’re already grown up. You know, like that. As that way works. Or you just go down and buy them, you know, at the local store, right? Or the shop, you know. Like that, you know. Hey, you know, how do you say? Marcie’s having, you know, the birthday party. I wonder if you could pick up a few more kids at the local shop and all that. You know, get the cuter ones and all that. No, but they cost more. Yeah, well, splurge. It’s her birthday. It only comes once a year. You know, like that. Okay, cool. Like that, you know. You want the ones with the, you know, the buck teeth? Or do you want the ones with the pig tails? Like that. You know, so that’s not what’s happening. You understand? So what has changed? All that’s changed are the people’s willingness to follow authority or not. Be religious or not. That’s all. The situation hasn’t changed. It’s just your mentality in the situation. But it’ll be claimed it’s not practical because, you know, it’s all on the mental platform. That’s the meaning of the manorata. It’s just, it’s on the wrath of the mind. It’s not actually real. Manorata. The chariot of the mind. Like that. You know, sounds great. Good book. The chariot of the mind. You know, like that. But the point is, is it’s not a great ride. That’s why people join Krishna consciousness.
You know?
So here, and this may even be, be that verse that I was talking about this morning. On Sunday. Oh, it’s on Sunday? I didn’t say this morning. Oh, it’s on, yeah, on Sunday. Yeah. This may be the verse. Because it’s Krishnadevata. Eleven, twenty-one, two. Eleven, twenty-one, two. Okay. Sahaja Maharaj really liked this verse. But this is the point. Steadiness is, is actual piety. I mean, steadiness on position means, on position means one’s prescribed duties. And as a soul, that means Krishna conscious duties. Right? One’s activities and connection with Krishna. So that is considered piety. And not to be, is impious.
Right? Does that make sense? So this is, this is the real fun contradictory. Is that we won’t accept the Vedic con -definition of piety. Right? But we’ll accept the, you know, Western concept of piety. You know, morality and these ethics and justice and all these different things. But, but according to Krishna here, those are impious. If they’re not your prescribed duties, they’re not connected to the Lord. Right? So impiety is called piety, and piety is called impiety. And in Gita, what does Krishna call that?
Hmm? Dvaya, but he, it’s religion in what mode? Ignorance. That’s all it is. Right? And one should say, no, but these are devotees. But that the point is, is sadhana-bhakti means there’s some anarthas. Right? Bhava-bhakti, we don’t expect these anarthas. But in sadhana-bhakti, there will be these anarthas. So this is someone’s anartha.
Is religion in the mode of ignorance.
You understand? That’s all. That’s their anartha. What becomes unfortunate is when people take that as standard.
Yeah, yeah. Of course, if we take, if we take the, if we take the lack of standard as standard, then that’s always what we’re saying, like before, with the prasad service. The lack of anybody knowing how to serve, knowing how to eat, knowing how to cook, and we take that as standard. Because that’s generally how it’s, this is my experience. That could be wrong. Or maybe other places not. But my experience is because you’re dealing with people who have no idea of any of those three. Like that. I’ve seen it nicely applied. You know, like that. But I’ve only seen it applied nicely in one place. But if anybody else takes that and transports it to their place, it doesn’t come out nice. I’ve never seen it come out nice once.
Does that, does that make sense?
Okay. So in this way, the two are definitely ascertained.
So Krsna is saying, it’s very clear. You’re doing in your own position. That’s piety. You’re not, that’s impiety. That’s all. In other words, what’s favorable to Krsna consciousness, that’s piety. What’s not favorable, that’s impiety. Then one could say, no, but it’s favorable to do this way. It is, but the point is, it’s in prasad, it’s favorable for a meeting, but it’s not favorable for Vaisnava association honoring prasad. Because prasad’s not the point. But then we’ll say, no, but engaging the senses is maya. So therefore, we don’t mind that it drops here.
You know what I’m saying? Because you don’t want to waste time taking prasad. You could do valuable things, but why do they not waste time on email? You know, take prasad properly.
You know what I’m saying? Why taking prasad, which is directly Krsna, why would that be maya? Sense gratification. But the point is, is that’s prasad. Right? That’s direct devotional service. You know, while having the meeting, it’s engaging your conditioned nature in the Lord’s service, and because it’s connected there, that’s where it becomes engaged. So it’s not direct.
Right? But it’s counted as a part of devotional service. But the other one’s directly devotional service. So somehow or another, that’s maya, but the other one is just being practical. And that’s solid service. You understand? These are how the mind tricks us.
Yeah.
It’s what, you know, we’ve been discussing before that was all the Tattva-sutra. Is that the mind tricks us into what our conditioned nature values as important. Right? Then we take it that therefore that’s the primary devotional activity. And what’s not so important to us, that becomes secondary. You know? So management is primary, and Deity worship becomes the secondary thing. You know, maybe for us it’s not as prominent, but Deity worship is considered direct devotional service. Management is only if you’re managing something connected to Krsna. Right? But Deity worship means it’s worship of Krsna. It can’t be something else. Tantra-ratra won’t be anything else other than worship of Krsna.
Right? That’s what it means. If it’s worship of someone else, that’s the Upasana-khanda, the Vedas. You’re worshiping someone else. Right? Tantra-ratra means you’re only worshiping Visnu. That’s the difference.
Yes?
It means no, but then they’ve engaged it in the Lord’s service.
Do you understand?
No, not necessarily. It means, see, importance means based on what? Development. Can that manager just go to meetings all day and not go to Mangala-arthik, take Darshan of the Deities, take Charanamrita, take Prasad, hear Bhagavatam? That’s all Deity worship. You understand? It means up to 1970, this program we run now wasn’t there. Devotees went to bed at 11, 12 at night, sometimes 1, depending on doing Harinam. Right? They’d get up at generally 6. I think 7 was the latest you could get up.
5 and 7 in the morning. They’d chant their Japa, like that. I think there’d be some, you know, maybe just some discussions of philosophy or reading or stuff like that. Like that. And then, yeah, Prabhupada’s there. He was speaking. If he’s not there, then something would go on. They’d take Prasad, they’d go out on Harinam. Then they’d come back, like that. Be some little free time and reading and resting or that. Take Prasad again and go out and come back, you know, late at night. That was the program.
And that went until 1970 when Prabhupada figured out no one knew the philosophy.
Right? So then he established the morning program with the two classes, which was standard because that’s what Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur had established. Right? So it has a very strong pancharotic basis.
You know what I’m saying? So my point is, is they’re advancing nicely. One, body, mind and words are engaged, which is part of the devotional process. Right? According to pancharatra, doing your duties during the day is part of the pancharotic process.
You know what I’m saying? So you can’t say that that part of the pancharotic process is more important than the more direct activities.
Does that make sense? It may be. It’s very necessary. Someone has to med, but if it’s so important, why not have everybody do it?
I mean everybody, the whole congregation. Why not? Because that’s where you’re really going to advance.
But you don’t mind having everybody in abhishek.
Right? So now you have to manage the abhishek. But the point is, in managing the abhishek, if the abhishek doesn’t go so great, the mood is really bad, was it a great management?
You know what I’m saying? You’re so fixed on it that was it a good abhishek?
Yes or no?
It’s your question.
You understand what I’m saying?
Right? My question was more if the manager tries to make the situation for the others to advance. Yeah, but that means he’s making it for them to advance. So the management is only an assistant to them advancing. But when the management becomes the prominent and everything else has to circle around management, that means they’ve missed the point. The point is, your prescribed duty is to see that everyone is Krishna conscious, not that everything went nicely. In the temple, the bills are paid. We’re talking a fairly okay temple. The bills are paid. Right? There’s someone there doing the aratika and all those things like that. The accounts are being turned in. The government’s not grumpy and all that. Like that. Did I miss something?
Anything else?
Yeah, there’s food.
Okay. And one would say that’s a good temple management. What about the standard of cleanliness in the temple? I haven’t seen it. And I’m not joking. Standard of prasada. Is it even offerable to the deities? You know, the arrangements for the devotees. Devotees knowing how to dress like Vaishnavas, right? You know, they can somehow dress like Karmis, okay, but very few actually even know how to dress. Right? Like here in Mayapur, you see it because everyone’s living here. Standard you wear every day, but you go to the West, they don’t know how to dress at all.
Like that. Interactions, Vaishnava interactions, don’t know much. Do they know how many bhakti-shastras are there? Every temple’s supposed to be doing practical things, and practical means collecting money. So you can pay the bills. And if that’s done, you’re a great temple president. But that’s my point, is where is the quality of the spiritual development of who’s there? Spiritual development is simply defined on they just do what the president says.
Where is that a support to the spiritual? That’s not. And if you go around, there are tons of temples like that. And then you come to one that’s inspiring because the manager understands that Krishna consciousness is the prominent, and he’s a good organizer, but it’s seamless. All you notice is one spiritual thing going to the next. But the other one, you walk in, and unless it’s an arti going on with the old lady offering it, the place is dead. I mean dead. If you wonder where the president is, you’ll never see him. He’s in an office somewhere behind a computer. And he’ll go home at five, and he came at nine, if you’re lucky. And that’s five days a week.
Right? And I’m just talking straight what I’ve seen.
I’m not saying Hitler was on acid.
You know?
You know what I’m saying? When I’m talking these things, I’m thinking of exact temples.
It’s just the way it is.
And the sad thing is other devotees are nodding. It means they’ve also seen it. You understand? So, see, we’re taking it for granted that because we’re doing it, it’s automatically for Krishna. Yes, but the point is, if that’s there, then why do we have complaint about the devotees doing it for Krishna? You know what I’m saying? Why do we have complaints about the gurus and sannyasis and other things like that? Because we’re pointing out what parts weren’t for Krishna. So the same way there’s parts that the management is not for Krishna. The guy is the temple president. Is he the temple president? Because that’s his conditioning. And so that’s the best way body, mind and words he could be engaged in Krishna’s service. Or it’s because he likes to control. Which is also his conditioning. But which is the prominent? Body, mind and words in Lord’s service or engaging in conditioning because that’s what you want to do? There’s a difference. The point is, either of them, if it’s connected to Krishna, it’s glorious. But one has to admit that one’s more glorious than the other. And so this discussion is how to find what’s more glorious and distinguish it from what’s less glorious. And to be able to distinguish the factors that make it more or less glorious. So Krishna said it here, right here. In this way, the two are definitely ascertained.
That’s all. You’re performing your prescribed duties, which means following the precepts of one’s own level or not. But there’s one level for everybody. So is it actually prescribed duties? The new bhaktas, they do the same thing. Somehow the senior man demands more respect than that. And then the bhakta gets bhupkas.
Is it bhupkas or bhupkas?
I don’t know. You’ve never heard this?
Bhupkas or bhupkas?
Is it bhupkas? Bhupkas. Okay, that’s it. Bhupkas. Means nothing.
You know, you get zero. Zilch.
Right?
You understand? You understand? So this class is not trying to to say that the performance of whatever you’re doing in connection to Krishna is fine. That’s already taken as standard. That was last year in the third chapter of Bhagavad Gita.
This year, then, it’s a matter of how to see what in your engaging your conditioned nature in Krishna’s service, what part of it is actually favorable and what part’s not. Does that make sense? So we’re not discussing here that management connected to Krishna is bona fide because we just said that.
But the problem is, because of attachment, we want to make it more prominent than it deserves in the devotional sphere. It doesn’t mean that you’re not managing all day, but you know that you’re organizing Krishna consciousness.
But sometimes in a meeting when two people go out after each other’s throats because this one’s senior and I’ve done more service, you try to convince me that that’s based on Krishna consciousness. You go ahead, knock me out.
You know what I’m saying? And therefore, if you go into the zone there, the temple’s not working together, the devotee’s not working within the temple, the temple not working with community, you go ahead and tell me that’s solid management based on Krishna consciousness principles. It’s not even based on material principles.
We’re talking about simply the need to control, that’s all. No understanding of the science of management, no understanding of the science of Krishna consciousness. In relation to that, not that they don’t know Krishna consciousness, not that they’re not advanced, we’re talking about where is the weakness.
Does that make sense? You know, we’re washing the pots, okay? So now the standard is the sink is full of pots and when the pots are gone, the sink itself has been cleaned and everything’s been put away. That that’s the job description, okay? Now, if I come in and there’s still some pots sitting in the sink and there’s a whole bunch sitting on the counter that have been washed, and then I ask about, well, what about finishing these? No, no, but we’re washing, we’ve done so much, why don’t you appreciate that? No, but the job is you finish it all. And that was supposed to be two hours ago also. You know what I’m saying? So is it wrong?
Is it a great job? He’s done the job 90%. So is that now what we’re going to say? That’s the standard, that’s good enough. Or are we talking about what is 100 % how to get it there? We’re not saying that anybody’s there, but it has to be accepted that it’s not there and what is the part that’s not there? Because we’re also in other sections discussing how much is there, but when we’re discussing this kind of thing, because this whole section is on what’s wrong in devotional service. So by nature, we’re looking at how the glass is half empty. Six ways the glass is half empty.
Does that make sense? So it’s not a matter of no, but it’s important. But the point is, that’s true, the management, the management of conscious activities. Where in this whole social system that you have the general devotee, then you have the manager who’s organizing so that all those general devotees can be Krishna consciousness.
So that’s higher. What’s the stage higher than that?
You understand?
You have the general devotees, then you’re organizing them to be in Krishna consciousness and that’s the management. What’s above the management?
Leadership.
That can be leadership.
Self-motivated. So even if they’re self-motivated, like that, there are a handful. But what is above that?
In culture.
The Brahmins, means the senior Vaishnavas, gurus, GBCs, you know, senior devotees in the zone, or preachers who pass through, or ones that are living there.
Right? And even if the person himself is senior, unless you are associating with senior, then how are you following Krishna consciousness? Rupa Goswami says you have to associate with those of same nature, but are more advanced. You understand? So if we only see a two-tier program, then we’ve seen two-tier programs tried to be implemented. They didn’t work so good. I think it lasted 70 years in Russia.
Two tiers. No Brahmins, no Vaishyas.
How long does it last?
You know what I’m saying? And so then, you know, China’s doing better because they added Vaishyas. So they have money. You know what I’m saying? But the point is, there’s a culture there. Management is never the top.
It can’t be. Because management simply means organizing the situation.
But the mood that’s exchanged in operating the situation, that very rarely anyone deals with.
So that mood is what you get from these higher authorities.
Does that make sense? So that’s why it’s not actually enough.
But what we’re saying is the bourgeois culture, that’s all it is. Because what did the bourgeois want? Did they want to be like the priests? The teachers? They wanted to be like the nobility. So for them, the goal is to be like the nobility. So the Kshatriya is the top of the pile.
And how are you going to get there? Through good qualities? No, through money.
You understand? That’s the conditioning we’re working with.
Does that make sense? Because that’s what the Western, when we say the Western culture, that’s what we mean.
You know? Eastern, then we’ll think, you know, Eastern, you know, it’s more farming and educated, you know, like this kind of end. You know what I’m saying? Does that make sense? Like that, OK.
Is that OK? Can we move on? OK.
OK. I have established what is proper and improper among all material things, including time, space and physical love. That means Krsna’s done it. So if we don’t understand it, this is why this is in the section of Niyamagraha.
Too or too much neglect of rules and regulations. So if you’re too much attachment for, you’ve missed out that one’s position means performing one’s duties connected to Krsna. Right? So you think the rule itself is the Krsna consciousness. Right? It goes both ways. And the other is that we don’t understand so we throw it out. Right? And there’s not necessarily a consistency of what you keep to be consistent. They’ll keep all the rules, throw out nothing, but miss Krsna. Right? Liberals will completely throw out all the rules. Right? And still miss Krsna. Right? Does that make sense? And then everybody else, then according to their position, they keep a few and throw out a few and this and that. So there is no universal. There’s talk of a universal. It’s only Krsna consciousness.
Okay? So then understanding that, then it moves on.
Prescribed and prohibited rules are… Okay. So now we’ll start going into that you’ve understood the point. Now we’ll go into farther in constitutional, conditional. Right? What is your prescribed duty that’s constitutional? Generally that’s what devotees are good at. Right? It means they’re engaged… This is what Prabhu was talking about. By constitutional, they’re engaged in Krsna’s service. They’re preaching. But conditionally, that’s where the problem comes in.
You know what I’m saying? It’s constitutional. It is connected to Krsna. Each thing is better than the other. There is technically no higher or lower. But when you deal with the conditional nature, there is higher. Brahmins are higher than sattvis. That’s the way it is. Sattvis are higher than vaisyas. Vaisyas are higher than sudras. That’s the way it is. But, there is no discussion. I mean, you can discuss it, but there’s no… It can change. But within the principle of asrama and developing that, then it doesn’t… Constitutional, that’s not… Then it’s how much you’re thinking of Krsna and not and all that. It’s how much… But it’s the same principle. You’re connected to Krsna, varma is good. You don’t connect it, it’s useless. You’re sadhana. How much is connected, it’s better. How much is not connected, that’s the problem.
Does this make sense?
Okay. So then we’ll continue on Thursday. Yeah.
Om Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare
