Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religion and predominant rise of irreligion, Kṛṣṇa descends to protect His devotees and to annihilate the demons. In this way He establishes the principles of religion. In the teachings of Queen Kuntī, Śrīla Prabhupāda reveals some of the esoteric reasons for the Lord’s appearance.
Now, the Lord comes to deliver the devotees, paritranaya-sadhunam, but it is clearly stated in Bhagavad-gītā, 14.26, that a devotee transcends the material qualities, sa guṇān samatityaitān. A devotee is in a transcendental position because he is no longer under the control of the three modes of material nature, goodness, passion and ignorance. But if a sādhu is already delivered, being on the transcendental platform, then where is the necessity of delivering him? The answer to this contradiction is that a sādhu, a devotee, does not require deliverance, but because he is very much anxious to see the Supreme Lord face to face, Kṛṣṇa comes not to deliver him from the clutches of matter from which he has already been delivered, but to satisfy his inner desire. Just as the devotee wants to satisfy the Lord in all respects, the Lord even more wants to satisfy the devotee. Such are the exchanges of loving affairs.
Okay, now when we’re talking about the religion and everything, then the decline in religion predominates of irreligion, right? We have the demons, the devotees. What is this? In this context, what is it? What is that subject matter?
Where would that be?
How would we define it?
Okay, forgetfulness of Kṛṣṇa. But now, people will be acting within that area.
Ignorance, okay. Ignorance, but then what does that have to do with if we’re discussing action?
Here is the point of dharma. Establishing dharma. So you want to establish dharma. Dharma means the performance of activities that are according to religious principles. So what kind of environment is there? What kind of environment is predominant?
Karma. And? Jñāna. Jñāna, but in relationship to this verse. Whenever there is a decline in religion and a predominant rise of irreligion, Kṛṣṇa descends to protect His devotees and to annihilate the demons.
So the environment is irreligious, right? So, in other words, we can see here that this is an aspect of sambandha. He’s establishing the religious principles, so that’s saṅkarṣaṇa. So He’s coming, establishing religion, destroying the demons, that’s saṅkarṣaṇa. But then He’s bringing out the point is that the devotee is unaffected by that. So He doesn’t need to come to do that for the devotee. So He’s coming for the devotee to interact because He wants to see Kṛṣṇa. He wants to be interactive with Kṛṣṇa. So that attraction to Kṛṣṇa is there. Does it make sense? Yes, so it’s prajumna. So, in other words, sambandha is being established, but we see that for the demons it’s one thing and for the devotees it’s another. Demons get saṅkarṣaṇa, the devotees get prajumna.
Right? So nectar of devotion, then we see is that the example of saṅkarṣaṇa is when Kṛṣṇa is dealing with Paundrika.
Right? Because Paundrika is saying that he’s Viṣṇu, right? And he put these false arms and everything like that, you know. And then Kṛṣṇa comes up to him and says, Oh, so, you know, like this, you know. What is all this? So Paundrika is then saying, Oh, you’re taking my disc and conch, this is not proper. You should give them back. Kṛṣṇa says, Oh, you want them back? No problem. Right? You know. But, you know, in the meantime he called them, you know, a frog and this, you know, black snake. Kṛṣṇa will come and swallow you up. You know, all these nice things, he says. Like that. And so then he says, Oh, you want the suruṣaṅa back? So he invokes suruṣaṅa and gives it back. Of course, he’s not able to hold, so he loses his head.
You understand? So this is saṅkarṣaṇa, he establishes the religious principles. What’s right, he corrects it and puts it into place. But prajumna, then the example is Kṛṣṇa with the gopīs. Right? This is, as dīra-lalitā, then he’s very attractive, very submissive. So like the devotees want to serve him, he more wants to serve back. That means submission.
You understand? So that’s why he’s saying that these are subtle reasons why they’re being brought out.
Like that. So this is what is there. You know, when they’re saying about, you know, relishing what’s in the scriptures, these are all, I mean, one is whatever it is, however much you take, but it’s down to, you know, Jīva Goswāmī’s mentioning, one syllable has so much meaning. Right? In the Tattva-sandarbha, to give the example, then he takes the first verse of the Bhāgavatam and breaks it down by syllables.
And in the syllables, in the progression, the chronological progression of the syllables, you know Sanskrit well enough, you know the dhātus and the root words and all that, then he takes everything back and it’s just the first verse of the Bhāgavatam is explaining all the pastimes of Kṛṣṇa from His appearance to His disappearance.
You know how He appeared and, you know, was taken to Vṛndāvana and He kills the demons and all the different things and all that going through.
So that’s his point, is that down to the syllable it’s talking about Kṛṣṇa.
Right? And then after that, then it comes back, you know, to, then you can take it in its more obvious form. Right? Because in every verse it has its direct meaning, its indirect and its hidden meanings. Right? Does this make sense?
So here, you know, your direct is that He’s coming to establish your religion, you know, to get rid of your religion, establish religion, protect the devotees. So you see it that way, just that element of saṅkhya-śāstra. So hidden is this element of prajumna. But we see when the ācāryas talk, they talk more, because establishing dharma, He doesn’t have to come Himself to kill the demons. Māyā is good enough. Everybody in the material world dies, so why, and Māyā arranges that, so why does Kṛṣṇa have to come to kill somebody? Right? Māyā can take care of it very easily. Right? And she’s shown as the biggest demons that the demigods can’t deal with, then she can kill.
Right? That’s the whole thing of the, you know, the Durga. You know, in Dasara, she goes out, kills Moishe, sort of. This big buffalo walks into heaven, kicks out Indra, sits on the throne. Right? And the demigods can’t do anything about it. So then she comes in and she kills him.
Right? So, like that, then there’s these, the point is, so why is He coming? He’s coming because of the devotees. So He’s coming because of the prajumna, because prajumna means that you are, is interactive, that’s the rasa aspect. Sankhāsana is establishing the field.
It’s not so much like that, it means He is a person and He has His relationships and all that. But we’re saying in comparison, the emphasis is on establishing the field. Right? Like Mahavishnu, He’s Sankarsana.
Right? So what does He do in the whole material manifestation?
He establishes the field, right? He breathes out, He makes all the universes and everything. Right? So the whole, you know, the creation, He glances. So He’s established everything. Then Hiraṇyagarbha, who is prajumna, He’ll create the attractiveness in this world of what’s going on. You’re attracted to anything here, that’s prajumna.
Right? So that’s Hiraṇyagarbha, that’s Garbhodakṣayi Viṣṇu. Right? And that, therefore, you know, attraction that there’s that value, where you actually want to obtain it, so you’ll perform the activity, that’s Kirodakṣayi Viṣṇu, that’s Aniruddha.
Right? So then He’s expanding and then makes, like that, so it becomes dynamic. But the field is set by Mahavishnu.
And that sequence is not there. Because this is just establishing. Vasudeva means then, what is the material world for?
So how do you go back to Godhead?
Surrendering, but more than surrender. By activities, but you’re remembering. Right? So you’re remembering the Lord because of His pastimes. So we’re attracted to Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes. We develop that, you know, that desire to serve Him, be with Him, to do the service. So that’s why Kṛṣṇa then comes in His pastimes.
That’s Vasudeva. You understand? But it may be expansion from, because for us, then we’re talking Svayamkṛṣṇa. But that’s once in a day of Brahmā. Right? So that means how many cycles of the yugas are there?
Right? There’s a thousand. So that means one in a thousand is Svayamkṛṣṇa. Nine hundred ninety-nine is Viṣṇu. So then they expand from Kīradakṣa to Viṣṇu. Right? Or they can expand from Saṅgha, like this. It doesn’t matter what’s the detail.
Does that make sense? So that’s why generally people think that Kṛṣṇa, Svayamkṛṣṇa, is an incarnation of Viṣṇu. Because all the other nine hundred ninety-nine are.
Right? And that’s when you’re talking about Kṛṣṇa and Dvapara-yuga. Right? But you have four yugas. So that means you have four thousand, you know, of the main, of the yuga avatars. Right? So, it means whenever Kṛṣṇa comes, then Lord Caitanya comes. So two out of four thousand are Svayamkṛṣṇa. The other ones are Viṣṇu-tattva. I mean Viṣṇu-tattva, the manifestation of the mood of Viṣṇu. Right? Then, that’s only those. Then you have all the other kinds of avatars.
So the seven kind classifications of avatars.
Does this make sense? So, generally people will see it that way. And so, for them to see like that, it’s not wrong, but it’s not, it’s not… You know, so Kṛṣṇa, you know, performing His Vṛndāvana pastimes and that, there are Viṣṇu-mūrtis who do that. Right?
So when the Vaikuṇṭhavāsis are talking about Kṛṣṇa’s Vṛndāvana pastimes, they’re talking about those. Because every Dvapara-yuga, there’s Kṛṣṇa, and His consort is Rādhā, and they live in Vṛndāvana.
You understand? But only once in a day of Brahmā is Svayamkṛṣṇa, Braja-kṛṣṇa.
Right? So, in other words, you’re seeing Kṛṣṇa that Rādhārāṇī sees, means the original, not who Lakṣmī sees.
You understand? This is what’s rare.
Does that make sense?
Yes.
Because that’s, that’s, that’s something unique. So it says, never been given before. But the Nimbārakas, they worship Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa. They practice spontaneous devotional service, Rāga-Nuga. In fact, one time they tried to make a court case against the Gauḍīyas that we were stealing their system.
Like that. At the time of, I think… You know, it’s a little, 5,000 years, it’s a bit late, but, you know. It’s expired. Yeah, it’s expired already. And so, so then, I think it was Keśamāraśa.
I think he, he, he took up the challenge and said, all right, we’ll discuss this, but you first, you know, you’re saying Nimbārakacārya, he’s established this. We believe in Nimbārakacārya. We don’t have any problem. But because you’re talking court, you go ahead and give us the evidence that proves Nimbārakacārya existed. Then we’ll, then we’ll go to court. So they walked away. Because there is, there is nothing, there’s no histories. You know, you never hear any histories of Nimbāraka in his pastimes. Because he was actually at the end of Dvapara in the beginning of Kali Yuga. He’s 5,000 years before. Like that, so you don’t really hear anything of him. You get a little bit of Viṣṇu Swami, who was later. Some thousands of years later. So, you know, Ramanuja Madhva, that we have very clear stories from. But at that time, then, they weren’t being, so if, basically speaking, if Vyāsadeva didn’t document it, it wasn’t documented because writing hadn’t started.
You understand? So that’s the problem. So they can’t give that evidence. Though they know from the Paramparā, he’s there. We all know.
You know, so then they had to drop the idea. But my point is, is that, so what’s unique?
Means, even if it is Svayam Kṛṣṇa.
It’s given very rarely, but why is it worth saying Lord Caitanya is giving something that hasn’t been given? If Nimbārka already gave.
It’s not in the same mood, right? Because they don’t believe in Vipralambha. They only believe in Sambhog.
Right? They say Sambhog is higher. They say it appears like Vipralambha, but it’s not actually happening. So they’re always together. Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa are always together. So it’s like our deity worship. Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa are always together, all day. You understand? So that is the kind of Vṛndāvana that they’re dealing in. Right? Which is higher than if it’s Viṣṇu, what they’re dealing in Vaikuṇṭha.
You understand? But it’s still not what Lord Caitanya is giving. Because there, the ability to appreciate Vipralambha, and that you don’t mind that. In other words, these others, they don’t want to go through the pain of the separation.
Does that make sense? So, if you don’t mind that, that brings out Draja Kṛṣṇa.
So that’s something unique.
He has the greatest freedom to do anything he likes. Because the other thing, he’s not actually free, because he can’t do any pastimes that cause any separation.
Right? Yeah, because the ashraya only wants to deal in that level. But here it’s that. That’s the point, the eighth verse of the Śikṣāṣṭakam. Right? That’s the culmination, the mood. It doesn’t matter what Kṛṣṇa wants to do. If it pleases Him, that’s perfect for us. So that’s what’s unique.
Does this make sense?
So, therefore, then, in this going back to here, is that Kṛṣṇa’s establishing the different things. Śaṅkarṣaṇa is there, Balarāma is there in the pastimes, so He’s nice and He’s very sweet. Like this. But He is, who’s expanded, the dāma is His potency.
Right?
Like that. So, that’s where everything’s happening. Yogamāyā will be taking that form. Expanding from… It’s svayam, but it’s coming from that aspect.
You know what I’m saying?
Yeah? So, all these things is you’re establishing the environment, but then you create the attraction within that environment. So that’s prajñūna. So we see here both of those elements. But the terms used protect the devotees. But what protects the devotees?
Yeah, remembrance of Kṛṣṇa, being absorbed, seeing Kṛṣṇa. Like that. Yeah? So, yeah. So, in other words, you’re establishing the religious principle. Protecting the devotees means by coming so that they can be absorbed.
Right? Because they’re not, you know, distracted by the irreligious principles and this and that.
Right? You know, it’s just like Vidura, he’s a devotee, but he has to sit there in the court of Duryodhana, you know, surrounded by demons. But he goes on with his service and remembering Kṛṣṇa. Right? You know, and then at some point they get just too, and, you know, he’s obligated, but when they relieve him of his obligation, does he beg forgiveness and roll on the ground? No, he just puts down his bow and leaves. Right? And then he goes out and then he meets, what is it, Maitreya? Yeah, and then there’s that whole conversation, I mean, I think, fourth canto. Is he doing Maitreya?
Right? So, he’s fine. So, Kṛṣṇa comes to inspire them. He doesn’t have to establish religious principles for them.
He does that because those means who surrenders to Kṛṣṇa? The pious or the impious? The pious. The pious. So, therefore, if the atmosphere is generally pious, there’s more likely people surrendering.
Whereas impious people will not surrender. Right? So, that’s why now, of all pious activities, what is considered the most pious, the highest of all pious activities? To give Kṛṣṇa. To give Kṛṣṇa. Okay. And what is the most direct method?
Chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. So, that means the Hare Nāma, you’re going out, and how many living entities hear the holy name?
Yeah, unlimited. So, that’s why it’s so important. But at the same time, it’s because people, that itself may not inspire them. Therefore, the books are there. So, they get the book and then they might read it.
Right? Not at least it sits on the shelf and gives out, you know, good vibes.
Okay? Does this make some sense? Right?
Verses 9 to 10. The benefit of understanding Kṛṣṇa’s birth and activities.
The benefit of understanding Kṛṣṇa’s birth and activities is liberation and love of God. Right? So, that’s the, you know, the particular of this. Right? You know, this is the essential point that’s being made now, explanation. The non-devotees attain liberation only after much trouble and many, many births. And even then, their liberation is only partial. And there’s every chance of returning to the material world. Right? Because the jīva has to be active. And if your concept of spiritual is no form, no relations, no emotions, no activity, then, since the jīva is conscious, you know, the samvid potency or cit potency, then, means consciousness and action. What’s going to happen with time?
Hmm? Consciousness will expand. The jīva is sitting in the brahmajyoti. What’s going to happen?
Right? Because that’s only sat. So, what do you do with the cit and ananda? I mean, they say ananda. So, yeah, okay, something, something’s there. But on the liberated platform, you know that there’s something more. There’s a source. So, what’s going to happen? You’re going to leave. Leave? Why would you leave? Because it’s expanding. You’re missing something. You’re missing something. So, therefore, since, in your mind, as a impersonalist or, you know, it’s, let’s, what it means, let’s say a Māyāvādī, what’s their idea of spiritual? No activity. There’s no activity, no form, no nothing. So, because they want to be active, what will the jīva remember? Material world. Material world. And according to, when the jīva leaves the body, right, then he’s free of the body. Then, where does he go? Whatever he remembers. Whatever he remembers. Right? So, he remembers the Brahman, he goes to the Brahman. Now, when in the Brahman, he remembers activity, where is that activity? Material world. So, where will he go? Material world. He’ll just come right back. Do you understand? So, that’s what’s happening. That’s technically what’s happening. So, now, let us say you have a demon. He was killed by Kṛṣṇa.
Right? So, he goes to the Brahman. He gets liberation, same as the Māyāvādīs.
A little easier. Of course, he had to become a very big demon to get that.
So, like that. You can’t guarantee you’ll become this big of a demon. So, therefore, this is not taken as a process. But now, he’s in the Brahman. He’s in the Brahman. Okay? Now, you know, so there’ll be that momentary, you know, happiness of being in the Brahman. Right? But how long can you sit, you know, with nothing? Like, I put you in a room that was so bright, light and everything, that you can’t see anything. There’s nothing. How long can you stay there? Right? A few minutes, and then you’re bored. Right? So, now, when he thinks of activity, what will he think of? Demoniac activity. Demoniac activity? Possibly. Being killed by Kṛṣṇa. Being killed by Kṛṣṇa. So then, from there, then he’ll go back to Godhead. You know, but he’ll only go to Vaikuṇṭha.
You know, for us, only go to Vaikuṇṭha.
But Raghunath dāsa mentions that. Don’t get attracted by Vaikuṇṭha. You understand? So the demons are better off than the Māyāvādīs.
You understand? So you can understand where we place Māyāvādīs.
Yeah. You know, they’re right on the bottom of the pile. You know, they don’t even, they don’t even count.
You know? That’s why Śrīla Bhaktivinoda is so strong against them. Yes. It means we’ll respect them as transcendentalists.
Because the process that they’re, that they’re saying to get out of, technical process to get out of the material world of naiṣkārya is the same thing that we’ll say. Because we’re quoting Gītā, they’re quoting Gītā. Problem is, is they take Brahman as the end. We just take it as a, you know, someplace you, you know, you pass through. You know?
Like that. So in other words, they’re only talking about, their goal is to get out of the material world. We’re saying the only reason, we’re trying to get into the spiritual world. To do that, you have to get out of the material world. So for us, it’s a side thing. For them, that’s the all-in-all. But the process is the same. You know, they’ll, they’ll, they’ll be very austere, get up in the Brahma-muhurta, they’ll be doing the same processes there. But they’re, they’re using the process not for, you know, actual, you know, it means they are what we call real. The real here means it’s eternal. Right? So their liberation is not eternal, it’s temporary. Compared to time here, it seems very big. But when you’re talking on eternal time, it’s, it’s very short. Right? It doesn’t have much significance.
Yeah, Prabhupāda’s mentioning that. He’s mentioning that, you know, it’s like, you know, you, you know, when I wake up, ooh!
Because you think of the time there, if three quarters of a second is a one breath of, of, you know, how you say, Mahavishnu.
Right? So then, you know, even you put together, you know, hundreds of thousands of lifetimes of Brahma, how long is that actually on, on transcendental time? You know. But at the same time there, a blink of the eyelid annoys the gopīs.
You know what I’m saying? So it’s not like, you know, you’re, you’re gone for two or three minutes and, you know, nobody notices. People do notice, you know.
Does that make sense? At the same time as there’s so many other things, so then when you come back, everybody’s very happy.
Make sense? I’ve heard also devotees saying that when we arrive in the spiritual world, there are other Christians there and asking us, why do we take so long? Could be. And that’s a shame, so much, that they’ll never want to come back from the spiritual world. Yeah. That, that would, that, that would be one aspect, you know, because of that personal. At the same time is, what’s there?
What is the taste? In other words, you’re situated on the spiritual platform. Right? Brahmananda is how great compared to the material? Ocean to the mustard seed. Yeah, ocean to the mustard seed, a drop, like that. You know, so that’s what it’s given. But what is that taste of Brahmananda compared to the devotional ocean? Mustard seeds compared to shoreless ocean. Yeah, but I was thinking it’s, it’s even, it’s not even a full mustard seed. Yeah. The comparison is given, is really less, you know, or like that, a cat’s hoof. It’s very small compared to unlimited. So now, if you’ve come to the point of that unlimited ocean, then Brahman, the taste of, of, of, of the Brahman platform, is nothing. And so, how much is, you know, absolute nothing of nothing?
You know what I’m saying? So there’s that aspect also. There’s no, because before is that one thinks maybe there’ll be something there. But then one understands there’s nothing there.
Does that make sense?
Is that okay?
Like that. You know, because it’s not just you feel bad, but why would, why would feeling bad? Because what feeling bad, what would it generate?
You understand? You know, that fear, other things. No, it generates is that you’ve disappointed who’s the most important to you. You understand? Not that you feel bad because it’s improper, or, you know, I’m servant of Krishna, I wasn’t being a servant. You understand? That, emphasizing that point, will work like that on us. But in actuality, for someone in that position, it’s the point is that of they’ve disappointed, you know, who’s important to them.
Yes, it would come on that level, but it’ll be looking at shame as a, you know, you’re bad, you’re, you know, like that, and comparison to religious principles and a good chance it’s dropped down to morality. You know what I’m saying? So, you know, it may be an inspiration here, but that’s not actually the point. You know what I’m saying? Like that. It says, Nectar of Devotion says, when the devotee comes for the deity and thinks about his, you know, just material existence, he’s embarrassed.
Like that, that comes up. I’m not sure if that’ll come up in the section, you know, in the first part, or if that’s a later part. Like that.
Okay. Non-devotees attain liberation only after much trouble and many, many births, and even then their liberation is only partial, and there’s every chance of returning to the material world. So every chance here would mean they will return. Right? Unless they’re one of those demons. That’s the rare occasion. So that’s why we leave that little bit of chance. But it’s not, don’t worry, it’s not the Mayavadis.
You know. On the other hand, the devotees, simply by understanding the transcendental nature of the Lord, attain the abode of the Lord without any risk of falling down. Right? Because there’s a taste. You’ve attained there. You have a relation. So that’s where your interest and activities are going to be. So you’re going to remain there. Although there are many transcendental forms of the Lord, they are still one and the same. Supreme Personality of Godhead, where Srila Prabhupada explains. The Vedic aphorism, tat tvam asi, is actually applied in this case. Anyone who understands Lord Krsna to be the Supreme, or who says unto the Lord, You are the same Supreme Brahman, the Personality of Godhead, is certainly liberated instantly. And consequently, his entrance into the transcendental association of the Lord is guaranteed.
Right?
The devotees accept this truth on the strength of the authority of the Vedas, and they don’t waste time in philosophical speculations.
Thus they attain the highest perfectional state of liberation. So, I am that means, I am that servant. Right? Because if I am that, means I am Brahman. But the point is, is Krsna is the Supreme Brahman, and the Personality of Godhead. Right? So that means, we’re Brahman, He’s Brahman, but He’s Supreme Brahman. Right? And we’re a person, and He’s the Supreme person. So understanding that, one is liberated. Right? That’s the Brahman platform. Right? And then you can enter into the Lord’s association. So that’s the real meaning of this Tattvamasi. Right? Otherwise Tattvamasi, they make it into the main thing of the Vedas, when it’s not. Aum is the main thing of the Vedas. Right? Then how do we understand Aum? Yes, three letters, A, U, and M. So A is Krsna, U is Radharani, or His internal potency, and M is the Jivas.
Right? And then there’s something to do with the Anushwara and the Dattin, like this and that, they also have some, some meaning.
You know, I think in the past times and all that. Okay? So that’s the actual main Vedic aphorism. Because no verse can be said without Aum. But you can say any verse except the one that has Tattvamasi in it, without Tattvamasi. So it doesn’t make it very prominent.
Does this make sense? So it’s not, so, the real, that’s the real point is, the real Brahman platform is the relationship with the Lord, with the form of the Lord. The non-devote, sorry, Tattvamasi, that’s the main aphorism of the Mayavadis, Shankarites.
Tattvamasi, I am that. So they think, I am Narayan. No. You are Brahman, yes. But Narayan is the supreme Brahman. You know, so it’s just a trick. That’s a, because they speculate, then, then they come up with speculative definitions.
So then they go on trying to enjoy that platform. And, but, they don’t get a whole lot, so it’s a trick. You have to remember. Who is Lord Shiva’s wife? Maya. Maya, OK. So is he going to do anything to upset her? No. No, so therefore the Mayavadis are going to stay in the material world. Right, because she only recommends devotees to get out.
You understand?
So, they miss these subtle points.
The non-devotees cannot attain this perfect stage because they are interrupting, interpreting the Bhagavad-Gita according to mundane scholarship.
Quote, such inferior philosophers may assume very important roles in the material world, but they are not necessarily eligible for liberation. Such puffed-up mundane scholars have to wait for the causeless mercy of the devotee of the Lord. One should therefore cultivate a Krishna consciousness with faith and knowledge, in this way attain perfection.
Right? So it’s interesting here is that how I use it, inferior philosophers may assume means are not necessarily eligible. Right? So that makes it sound like you’re not saying something absolute. Then immediately he says, such puffed-up mundane scholars. You know? It’s just like, someone asked probably about, you know, Ramakrishna. It’s like, you know, what do you think of Ramakrishna? He says, you know, we don’t think about him. You know? And then they said, or, you know, and what about, you know, Vivekananda? He said, he’s another rascal.
Right? So that means the one before was also a rascal. So, like that, Prabhupada is very, very clever, because if he says, you know, these nonsense, immediately then, oh, how can you say that? You know, they are not necessarily eligible.
Right? And then you say, you know, like that. So it’s presentation. So this is transcendental political correctness. You understand? This is the real way to present it. Because their point is, is if they come in contact with a devotee, they’re nicely situated. You know? I mean, if they’re real, you know, bona fide, you know, Shankarites, or, you know, these others, inferior philosophers, because then they’ll actually be, be, you know, practicing a sadhana and all that. Like you see, Prakrishnananda Sarasvati, Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya, as soon as you add Krishna consciousness, they’re on a very advanced platform. Because their sadhana, their belief in the scriptures, belief in guru, belief in the practices, is already very strong. Right? So when you add that, then, then they’ll get liberation.
But then, and that’s, that’s just, comes as a side thing, you know. Sarvabhauma was the biggest Mayavadi. The biggest and highest in India. And he, he didn’t even want to hear the, you know, the word mukti path, you know, it’s like that, that bothered him, you know. Didn’t even want to hear the word mukti. Like that. Yes? What does empiric mean? Empiric. Empiric, I think, basically means speculative. It’s proven without a doubt. Huh? Proven scientifically. It’s proven scientifically. By experiment. Okay. Through experimentation means, in other words, from the senses, you have to be able to observe it. Like that. So it has to make… Descending process. Descending process. Descending? Ascending. Ascending process. Means you take your senses and what you see, then you analyze that, and then come to something that you think is a proof, a fact. So basically all they’re doing is fact to fact. But facts won’t necessarily tell you what’s there. You know, especially depending on what the fact is. Like an ant, you know, is on a table, right? So, you know, it can say something is vertical and, you know, it’s solid, it’s not, it’s not, you know, like a bowl of jello or something. So then, you know, it’s there, but can it understand what a table is? Could it understand that you’re sitting on that table reading Srimad-Bhagavatam?
Could it get all that from analyzing that portion of the chair leg that it’s on? No. So that’s the problem with empiric philosophers.
They study the so-called facts because that’s all you can see with the senses, so facts is all they’re interested in. So that’s why even devotees may fall into that trap, you know, unless there’s something seen or they haven’t seen it, then it’s not real. You know, Prabhupada talks about the Vedic culture. So so many devotees will say, well, that’s not there, it doesn’t exist. Why?
They’ve never seen it. Okay, here’s the scenario. Okay, you’re in whatever country you’re in, okay, you know, are you seeing Vedic culture? No. No, okay. Then you get in your car or taxi, whatever it is, you go to the airport. The airport do you see? No. No. You get on an airplane, you’re definitely not seeing there, right? And then, then, you know, unless they’re showing, you know, Lost India or something like this, the movie or something like this, but then you’re going to arrive in Calcutta, okay? And then, you know, do you see any culture going on there? No. Then when you walk out the front, you’re right, who’s out there? All the representatives of India and everything, as you know, there’s five million rickshaw walls and taxi drivers, right? Then you’re going to get into one of their taxis, you know. I mean, let alone the Vedic culture, it’s not even a real car.
It’s an illusion. You think it’s a car. It’s called an ambassador, right? And then you’re going to drive out here, okay? Then you’re going to see people outside the front gate, right? And, and then you have a place or this or that, you know, you’re going to see some lady from Taranpur come and wash your clothes and wipe your floor. And, and, right? Are you going to get any more exposure to the culture than that? Technically, coming from the Indians. Think about it. So that’s why, yes?
If you went to their home, then who goes to their homes? You, go ahead. Tell me, who over here is going out and interfering? You know what I’m saying? Very rare. Like that. So, devotees who’ve been on something like pariyatra, right? Or go out on book distribution, out. And they have to stay at people’s houses. Devotees who are here in early India when there wasn’t much here, then they’ll see the culture because they’ll know where to look. But others will have no idea. Therefore, that’s why you’ll even find senior men saying, it’s not there, it’s gone. Why? Because they’ve never seen it.
Yes. But, but, but, why would you be there? Even a devotee goes to South India and goes to the temples. Where does he stay? He stays in some hotel, gets another rickshaw, goes over there to see something and then goes out. If he’s knowing what he’s looking for, he might catch it. But if you don’t know what culture is, how will you see it? Otherwise, you can even see it with a rickshaw, Wallace. But you have to know what you’re looking for. Yes.
The first time I came to India, I was 18 and we went to a life service house in Jaipur. And the mother was like squeezing my cheeks and would hand beat me. And I was 18 years old, you know. It was a little strange. But that, that surrender, that’s Vedic, that’s the culture. You know, someone’s young. Well, the point was, is were you married? No. No. And, so in India, until you’re married, you’re a kid. Like that. Soon as you’re married, you’re an adult. So from the same way, so you’re 18, but you’re a kid. So she could do that. But there’s a good chance her daughter was probably 16 or younger and was married and she wouldn’t do that.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah. It’s just like you have the street, right? And they’ve gotten rid of the horse carriages so now there’s no, you know, horse dung on the street. And then there’s a curb, right? And then there’s more cement that goes right across all the way up to the building. Right? And then, from there it goes, and then before you get to the building, there’s this like 10 foot tall number just sitting there. Right? And then when you hit the building, then it goes straight up and it’s just glass. Right? And then they’ll probably have somewhere, you know, some kind of like exotic plant. So that’s called culture.
Right?
Basically. So it’s hard to see.
Especially in Calcutta, right? But the point is, is like what you’re saying is that the Western mind doesn’t know actually what to look for. Because when, like let’s say if we bring up to, you know, in a conversation in the Western environment, we say culture.
We go to devotees and say, what’s culture? Cinema, theater, the opera, you know, yeah, it means that there, but you know, more is like the opera. You go to, you know, an Aussie, they’ll say yogurt. You know?
You know what I’m saying? So that’s it. But the idea of like how you wash your hands, you know, or you know, different things like that, that’s not considered part of the culture.
Like that. These things aren’t, you know, you would say, yes, that would be culture to consider. Yeah, manners like that, but even that is only in a certain group of society we’ll consider like that. In most general, people don’t consider these things because they don’t, whatever they feel like is what they wear and do. And there’s certain occasions you have to restrict yourself, going to work or going to some social thing or going to a funeral. You know, then you have to be a little bit more careful. Yes. No.
Does that make sense? So, the idea that culture is actually your whole lifestyle, your value system, why you do things the way you do, so that means every aspect of anything, how you blow your nose, anything, it’s all connected.
Right? And we’ll see people that have less of that connected then we’ll say they’re uncultured or they’re rough. But otherwise, we wouldn’t think of what we’re doing as culture. But they’ll lack what we’re doing so we’ll say they’re uncultured.
Right? But then there’s a class of people above us so we’ll say we’re uncultured. You know? Does that make sense? You know, we’ll be sitting in a restaurant tell the children don’t put your elbows on the table. And then there’s some other people thinking what culture person would ever be in that restaurant? You know? You understand? You know, so there’s always going to be, you know.
In the purport to verse 10, Srila Prabhupada describes raga, bhaya and krodha, attachment, fear and anger as false doctrines arising from ignorance. Some people are too maturely attached and therefore do not give attention to spiritual life. Some of them want to merge into the supreme spiritual cause. Some of them disbelieve in everything, being angry at all sorts of spiritual speculation, out of hopelessness. The last class of men take to the shelter some kind of intoxication and their affective hallucinations are sometimes accepted as spiritual vision. One has to get rid of all three stages of attachment to the material world.
Negligence of spiritual life, fear of a spiritual personal identity and the concept of void that arises from frustration in life.
To get free of these three stages of material concept of life, one has to take complete shelter of the Lord, guided by the bona fide spiritual master and follow the disciplines and regulative principles of devotional life. Okay, so raga, bhaya, krodha. So this attachment means material attachment, so it means you’re not absorbed in spiritual development. So this would be some variety of karma. Now whether he’s pious or not, that’s another thing. It doesn’t matter. But they’re attached to the fruit of their labors. And so because of this, they’re not, they’re neglectful of spiritual life, right? So that’s raga, right? Then bhaya means they’re afraid of a spiritual position as a personality. So they’re not interested in that, right? They’re afraid of actually being servants and all that because they want to be God. You know, they’ve tried to control here but they can’t. So they can’t control on the little level so I’ll be God, right? You know, it’d be like, you know, you’re sitting at home and you can’t, you know, get anything to work in your kitchen and decide, well, then I’ll be the president of the country. You know, and then that makes you feel good, right?
So, and then krodha is you’re angry because you’ve tried material, you know, it didn’t work. You’ve tried this, you know, philosophical speculation, that didn’t work. Now you’re not interested in anything. So that’s void, right? So in other words, you get your karmis, your gyanis, and your buddhists.
You understand? Buddhists is the most, you know, how you could say, extreme example, but all the classes of pessimists, pessimistic philosophies, you know, they fall in this category, right? You know, or, does that make sense? So it’s a very prominent, even in the modern culture, you have those, your philosophers that sit around and, you know, nothing works, nothing happens, nothing, it’s all, it’s a very prominent schools of philosophy, you know, nothing could be nice. No free will, you know, nothing should have a good ending, if it does, it’s not real. You know, yes? It says there that another could get free from all this, one has to take complete shelter of the world. Yes. So, how we can judge that whether we have taken complete shelter of the world, what would be the criteria?
It means, complete means you’re absorbed, body, mind and words are absorbed, that’s the complete that we’re looking for, because complete’s not a matter of measurement, because for each living entity, complete is different, it’s just full absorption. You know, for someone, then it may mean a great amount of activity, for someone else it’s a very minor, it means whatever absorbs them. You know, someone’s just in the kitchen just washing a pot and fully absorbed, you know, thinking how to do this for Krishna and do it nice, and it’s absorbed, it’s done. So, it’s basically, it’s a state of consciousness, it’s there. If that consciousness is Krishna conscious, then it’s happened.
Does that include the sense of not judging? Because many times we…
Sense of not judging, meaning? Means, comparing ourselves or looking for we’re doing more or we’re doing less. Yeah, means you compare is that, in other words, the six Goswamis are sitting under a tree, right, and writing books and preaching.
So, what should we be gaining from that?
Knowledge, but I’m saying if you look at that example, what can we apply in our life? Humility. Humility. The simple life. The simple life. Performance of duty. Performance of proper duty. Satisfaction. Satisfaction of whatever they have. Absorption. Absorption, yeah, absorption. So, so we understand, so that’s what you take from that. You don’t take, well, because I’m living in an apartment, I’m still not living under a tree, so I’m not advanced.
You know what I’m saying? Because then, if that’s the thing, then, the other end of the scale, then you have Pundrik Vidyanidhi, right, living like a king and all opulence and everything and servants. So, Garadhar Pandit first thought the guy is a gross materialist, right, like that. So, then only after seeing, you know, his, you know, manifestation of, you know, his ecstatic mood that he understood. So, the external manifestation is secondary to the primary element which is the proper attitude. So, in other words, not keeping more than you require and being satisfied with that and with that being fully absorbed, that’s what you’re trying to gain from that example. So, that’s following the footsteps, right. The other would be imitating, try to live under a tree and everything like that. Does that make sense?
Yeah.
Because big means what? I mean, it’s just like this. Just as a side study, it means that everything was, it was some years back. So, it’s an old study, but they’ve done a study that the, of the CEOs of the big companies, you know, successful companies in America, I think it was 70%, they started out on the very lowest level of job in that company. You know, they came in as a kid and, you know, swept the office or something, you know, and just because they did it so well and, you know, with such focus and all that, someone who knew what to look for noted that and then they moved up. So, the reason they’re on the top. Now, let’s say even someone, they have a family business and it’s quite successful and very big, right. So, they have managers, they have this and that. Now, when their son is going to learn the business, what does he do? Walks in, gives him a big office and says, okay, here, go for it. No. They make him do all the jobs that are in the business. So, he has to pack the boxes and, you know, throw out the garbage and do everything because then he knows what it takes and then what to require of his servants. So, once he’s done everything, then he can sit in this big office. You know what I’m saying? So, the actual people who are big are the ones that are absorbed in doing something small because the point is this, if you’re fully absorbed and doing nice job, that’s a qualification for doing something bigger. You know what I’m saying? Because otherwise, so, like you said, it’s the opportunities that are missed. I saw once there was something, whether it was attributed to him or not, but it was Bill Gates who was talking to some college students, undergraduates. He was saying, you’re expecting you’re going to get your degree, walk out, and walk immediately into this big, you know, six figure, you know, how you say, salary and all facilities and your limousines and this and that. He says, but, you know, you may or may not get that. That’s not the reality. And you’ll look at things that, you know, simple jobs as below your dignity and stuff like that. So you see them as something not worthwhile. He says, but your parents and grandparents, you know, because basically in America, unless you’re a red Indian, you weren’t from there, you know, so you go back a few hundred years. They came from somewhere else. When they came, they had nothing. He said, they saw it as opportunity.
That’s why you’re going to the university that costs, you know, hundreds of thousands of dollars. Because they saw it as opportunity. So they would do anything. And then from that, they would build.
You know, so that’s the principles. You see what’s there in the field. You work with the field. That’s in the mode of goodness. And then you get something done. You get a result. But if you think, no, this is not good enough. I’m waiting for that thing in the future. That’s the mode of passion. And nothing is done, so nothing’s achieved. So you’re waiting for that to happen, but you could have already gotten something. Right? You add so many somethings together, you have something big. But the person who’s waiting. Like I know God brothers that, you know, I knew them when we were 18, 19 in India.
And they were looking for the perfect wife.
They’re in their 50s now. And they still haven’t found the perfect wife.
Right? And they’re still looking.
So I guess, I guess you should take from that that they have faith and determination.
I know she’s there. Yeah, patience. No, but enthusiasm means endeavor with intelligence. Like that. So I wouldn’t use that term.
This fear of the spiritual identity, for those who are just facing the spiritual knowledge, for them, this is like fear from the concept that you become servant or something like this. Yeah, ultimately. Because what does it mean? It means, I am God. What my body say, I’m God. So if I’m servant, that’s a lot of difference.
And many devotees also like, we carry on some kind of fear that like, by having, by attending some particular spiritual school, you lose your free will. Or that is, I’ve heard also another one, that by attaining some spiritual school, and then it’s kind of, it may not be, somehow daily. It may not be what I like. Yes, exactly. It may not be what I like, and plus if it’s that one, it closes down my options. Like that. So these are material considerations. Why are they there? Why would you be worried about not liking what you have and losing of options? Where is that coming from? Material world. But, what specific mentality is that? What mentality requires options?
The feminine mentality. That means the nature of the jiva. So the jiva here is thinking it needs those things, but at the same time what they’re leaving out is the dependency. And what they’re also leaving out is that Krishna is unlimited in his pastimes.
So, we’re worried that in the material world if something’s fixed, it loses its taste immediately. But there, when it’s fixed, it generates security.
You know what I’m saying? Because we want our variety, but we want that fixed. So we’re not understanding that this is the fixed element.
But otherwise, every time, the pastimes are always different.
So it’s not a matter of free will, it’s a matter of what you are. You know what I’m saying? Do you have a right hand? So now, because you have a right hand, and we’ve identified that that’s a right hand, and it’s your right hand, you know, does that now reduce your free will?
You know, or, you know, you could have had webbed fingers, you know, like a platypus or something.
You know, what does that mean? You know, let us say you go to a, you know, a buffet, right? Or whatever you call it. And there’s all variety of foodstuffs. You know, everything, you know, from, you know, something for, let’s say, what a cow would like to eat, up to, you know, like this. And there’s something you really like. Now, if when you go to eat that, if I tell you, no, but if you eat that, you’ll lose your free will. You’re restricted. You know, why don’t you want to eat all the other things? You know, wouldn’t by eating all the other things you increase your pleasure? Because there’s more variety and more of that. But what’s the actual point? What’s the actuality? That’s what you like. You’ll be satisfied eating that. You know, so free will is how you engage what is you. Because the sarup means it’s you. It’s not something else.
You know what I’m saying? So, in other words, that’s why one is supposed to, that’s why Rupa Goswami is talking about sadhana bhakti. Right? Don’t worry about these other things because when you worry about them, you worry about them according to mundane intelligence. Because what they’re applying here is pure mundane intelligence. There’s nothing spiritual about it. But they think they’re discussing very serious spiritual topics. They’re not.
Because the point is, that’s not, you know, you worry about here. You know, they can’t even figure out. It means they’re saying, oh, they’re worried about that, but at the same time it’s okay. Well, what’s your conditioned identity?
They don’t want that either. So then what do you want?
You know what I’m saying? So, without identity, how do you function? So, in other words, people who are talking this kind of thing, there’s a good chance they’re not doing anything.
You know what I’m saying? If they’re very sincere about that thought, there’s a good chance materially they’re getting nowhere also. You understand? If they are very expert materially, then they’re having that discussion to show how intelligent they are and how much they know. So they’re trying to get profit. It means they’re very good at getting profit in the world. They’re trying to get profit out of this. You’ll think they’re advanced for discussing these things on a high level.
Does that make sense?
All right. I was also wondering about taste, because apparently taste is coming when there is no pure spiritual taste. Taste for service is coming from engaging one’s nature in service. No, but you’re touching spiritual, so you are getting a taste from the spiritual. The point is that what we’re saying is that what taste you could get you’re not getting because of distraction by material. The example is given of when you have jaundice, you eat rock candy. It is sweet, but you don’t taste the sweetness. But it doesn’t mean that it’s not sweet. We can’t taste it. But as you keep tasting it, because the rock candy is medicine for the liver, and the liver governs taste, and so as the liver becomes rectified, then you start to taste the sweetness. Right? And if you just keep on, then it will become very sweet and very relishable. So the point is this chanting the holy name, doing the service, these are Krishna. And Krishna is there, so what taste you’re getting, that is Krishna.
But you’re recognizing that it’s Krishna, but the problem is it’s minimal because of our material distraction.
Right? If we actually understood this is Krishna. Right? In other words, Krishna we’re talking about here. You know, standing in the battlefield, he’s in Vrndavana and everything. When you say Krishna, his name, he’s there. That same person is there. What would you do? If Krishna now suddenly walked around this corner, what would everybody do?
Pay obeisances. And then?
Yeah, that’s the whole point. So that’s the whole point. The holy name is there. That same Krishna is there. And we don’t know what to do. So that’s the point. So we keep chanting and one day we’ll know what to do. And then it’ll have more meaning.
So that’s the thing. Yeah, this, that, and then. So I’ll do this. Yeah, and then after that?
Yeah, and then for eternity after that? Krishna’s there, eternally going to be there. You’re going to be there. What are you going to do? So that’s the thing, is that Radharani knows what to do. Right? Rupa Goswami knows what to do. Prabhupada knows what to do. You know, so we take shelter of the Paramaprabha. They know what to do. So we just have to have this service attitude to always be absorbed in their instruction. It’s not that we have to generate that on our own. No, that’s already being generated. We just have to take part.
It means the generator’s working, the electricity’s there, but you have to, you know, plug in. You know, what is it? Tune in, turn on, drop out. So it’s like… To take the mind place that we think that we are some, when we join, we’re giving something, but actually receiving a great, great opportunity. Yeah, yeah. We don’t realize that. Because in the third canto, that we’re offering something is actually coming from devotional service to the mode of ignorance. Because we think that I am qualified because of my material qualification. That’s my qualification in devotional service. Right? That’s why you can have someone, let’s say they were an academic before, and no one really likes them. Because they think they’re special because they’re an academic and everybody else is, you know, something common. And another one who’s an academic, he might not even know it. He’s just such a nice devotee because he’s intelligent enough to actually understand the position. So he’s very nice, very humble. Like that. One is functioning in the proper, you know, goodness, pure goodness, and the other’s functioning in ignorance. So it’s not that we are offering something, like you said, we’re being given the opportunity that we can take part in. And then we use our conditioned nature so if we can engage that and it has great qualifications, great, we can do nice things.
Yes? So we might be talking some days ago about engaging one’s nature. So isn’t there, in this case, a risk that we start to think that we are offering because we’re very expert at what we’re doing? Means there’s always that chance but that false ego is going to be there anyway. Because even if one doesn’t offer one’s nature, if you’re expert, can you be not expert? I was thinking if we offer what we are not expert at. But is someone who’s expert going to be satisfied that something that’s not expert is worth offering?
You understand? So because you are expert means you have the ability to do expert activities. So you have to take those expert activities and do them for Krishna. That’s the meaning of do your own duty. Don’t do someone else’s. Someone who’s not expert, they’re going to offer that. And they’re going to drive you nuts. Don’t worry, there’s plenty of them.
You understand? So that’s the point. You offer your expertise.
That can be. But that’s, you know, that’s there. But that’s his business, not ours.
Like that. Like, like, Vrindavanananda Maharaj, he wanted to learn Sanskrit. So he got all these books and this and that, thought we’ll do this, so many things like that and asked Prabhupada. Prabhupada says, what do we care? You just read our books, you get the Sanskrit from there. Like that. So he just took them all and dumped them in the garbage. Just immediately. Because Prabhupada said, he just dropped it. Right? So that was a qualification. And later on, he’s the one that knew the Sanskrit and translated the books. Because he was willing to. So that surrender, that was.
Yes.
Yes, you could say. But think about it. When someone first walks into the temple. What is there in their mind, their actual identity?
Their occupation. But what is that occupation carried out by? What’s the common disease of the materialist? I am the body. Right? So everything will be seen seen through the body. So the idea is that the body is the first thing to engage because that’s where the identity is. And so that’s why that. But then someone who doesn’t have that problem, they might not do that. I’ve heard of devotees that, I heard of a devotee, he joined in, the first service he had was being Tamal Krishnamurti’s servant.
Nobody starts off there, you know.
You know what I’m saying? But that’s where he started because he didn’t have those prankas of his background. So he was able to do that, but in that he would make plenty of mistakes, but that’s then where he gets purified. So the idea is what will engage you the most, body, mind and words. So because we’re so attached to the body and relate to the body, so the first thing is to engage the body. If we’re not so much attached there, then whatever is going to connect. You know, so the general thing is there. Because in any case, it’s a nice thing anyway, you know, doing the menial service because that’s the fundamental principle of being a devotee. So even if one can do more, be pleased with the opportunity to do something so simple because a time will come when you’ll be thinking back, you know, how do you say, yeah, yeah, what do you call that? Reminiscing about how nice it was just washing the pots, you know. Now you got to manage a whole temple or a whole yatra or something, you know. So life was a lot easier when you just had to wash pots, you know. The big, what do you call it? The big disaster was, you know, the big problem was he ran out of soap and he had to go to the corner store and get some, you know, so he lost ten minutes, you know.
Or the sink got plugged. You know, that’s it, you know.
Okay, so, okay. Okay, some people are too materially attached and therefore do not give attention to spiritual life, right.
Some of them want to merge into the supreme spiritual cause and some of them disbelieve in everything, being angry at all sorts of spiritual speculation out of hopelessness, right. So one doesn’t give attention because they’re materially attached. One is, how do you say, wants to merge and one is just angry with everything. They don’t believe in anything. Okay. And it says here, this last class of men take shelter of some kind of intoxication. And then they’ll take their intoxication to something spiritual.
Okay. So now one has to get rid of all three stages of attachment in the true world, which is, all three are negligence of spiritual life, fear of a spiritual personal identity, that’s the wanting to merge into the supreme, and conception of void that arises from frustration in life, right. So that means frustration physically, mentally, emotionally, intellectually, anything. That’s why these guys like Charles Hawkins, they’re very slightly angry at God. Yeah, they’re angry because, you know, what’s their life? You sit in a wheelchair and you get to, you know, oh, that’s not, oh, that’s the other Hawkins, that’s Stephen.
Oh, the Hawkins, yeah. Yeah. But I think it started up more with, they started with, they found discrepancies. What was that guy?
I don’t remember. But it’s, you have that whole range of these people from like, basically in the 1700s, I think, or when they started coming up, 17, 1800s, all these big kind of philosophers, because they were starting, means you had the, in other words, the Inquisition was basically over. So if you came up with some theory like this, you wouldn’t be burned to the stake. Previously, you didn’t hear about it, not that it wasn’t there, just that they got burned to the stake, you know, like that.
So they come up with this idea, they find discrepancies, and then it doesn’t make sense, so therefore it’s all nonsense. And then they have their own ideas. What it means, we’ll get into deep, how do you say, study of that in the third year. That’s when we study the six schools, then we’ll also study just material philosophy and religion like that.
Okay, so then to get rid of, free from these, then one has to take complete shelter of the Lord by a bona fide spiritual master. So you take shelter of the Lord, follow the instruction of the spiritual master, and follow the disciplines and regulative principles of devotional life.
So through the spiritual master, you can understand how to view everything properly, and one has to surrender to the Lord, and then practice what is given. That will get one free from these three, raga, bhaya, and krodha, because these are the big, big problems. Bhaya and krodha are technically in the same category, just one’s more extreme than the other.
You know, in other words, raga means material attachment, so you can do things, get results, and be happy, right? Then the pessimists, they say, you can do all the things you want, you still won’t be happy. So this is your bhaya and krodha, right? But, you know, the bhaya still has some, a little bit of more upbeat concept, while the krodha is just, you know, void, nothing, right?
Yeah, they won’t get past it, so they’re affected by that. So what’s their solution? Nothing. It means that people won’t come up and then, no, they don’t believe in authority, they won’t believe. So what does it do? It destroys everything. You try to organize some social thing, oh, that’s all just nonsense, it won’t work. So what’s the point? Destruction. So destruction ends in void, there’s nothing there, right? The other one is just, it doesn’t work, I’ll go off on my own, I’ll do my own thing, you know, become absorbed there, so that you have, it’s, you know, a semi-positive kind of concept. But there’s no faith in the material, but there’s faith in a spiritual process, and that will get you a result that has some substance, right? But this anger means, you know, void is the substance. When there’s nothing, then there’s nothing to bother you, right? You ain’t got nothing, you’ve got nothing to lose, right? So that means.
Yeah, yeah.
No, it’s, this is, these three positions are what we’ve been doing in the material world since time immemorial. There’s not a fourth option, you know? Means we’re a gross materialist, and we start to doubt that, we get into spiritual activities and philosophies, that doesn’t work, then we become, you know, frustrated.
So that’s why it’s introduced into the material sphere, your karma, your jnana, and then you have these atheistic philosophies, because these are the three natural steps, right? Buddhism means that it’s, there’s no, one doesn’t have faith in the Vedas, one doesn’t have faith in the philosophies, it’s just void, right? So by necessity it needs to be non -Vedic.
Yeah, what’s their point? Means, okay, that’s his position. What’s the position of the soul?
Right? Buddhists, there is no soul, right? It’s an illusion that you think is separate. Then once you perfect your process, and you come to the perfectional platform, what’s your relationship with that Buddha? That’s the question. If it’s that eternally you’ll be serving and, you know, as two people in the spiritual world, then, you know, they may have something. Because you have to always check five things in the philosophy, because otherwise the ritual may look nice, but the ritual is for a purpose, right? We offer arthik to please the Lord, why do they offer it? So the arthik is not the thing. Means, you’ll see some commonalities, so from there you can, they’ll think, oh, there’s common, so you might find that certain practitioners of Buddhism that are not so staunch in the philosophy might find the common of their culture and the Vedic culture, and actually be in that way inclined or attracted, right? You know, it’s, oh, it’s similar culture, you know, you just add Krishna, you know, it’s like this, so. But the point is, is what’s the nature of God? Okay, so you say He’s the Supreme Person and all that. What’s the nature of the soul? What’s the nature of the material world? Then what is your process to elevate you? And then the fifth is, what will be the result of that process? So right there is maybe the God element seems to have some elements of truth to it. Your process has some elements of the truth, but their understanding of the soul and the material nature is most likely, you know, has nothing to do with reality, and their ultimate goal may not have. So three out of five. So two out of five, you have to give them credit for that, but we can’t say that, oh, they compared to devotional service. You know, they have two elements out of five, you know, and then what fully is that, you know, how do they authorize? Why do they offer that? Why do they offer a lamp? Who said? Did Buddha say, offer me a lamp?
You know what I’m saying? Where’d they get it from? You know, so. But this is what I was wondering, if they were connected to Vajrayana. But you have to see is unless the ultimate goal is devotional service, then it may, like you go to Guruvayur, that Shankaracharya established the worship. They’re all Mayavadis. I mean, just upfront Mayavadis. And they worship the deity there. And every night when the elephant goes out of possession, they chant for three hours Hare Krishna Mahamantra Kirtan, right? They sing Gita Govinda for the deities when they eat. So they do all these, what we would call devotional elements. But their ultimate goal is through bhakti, they’re going to emerge into the Brahman. You understand? Because they see as bhakti is more, more, more, you know, how you say, more effective than all this austerity. That they respect those who do it, but these are all grihastas. And so then they, because technically, how can you be a Shankarite and be a grihasta? You know, a real Shankarite has to be a sannyasi. So through bhakti, then they do. You know, you go to these outside programs and there’s these big Mayavadi speakers. They’re preaching bhakti and nice karma. Same stuff we’re preaching. But their purpose is, is through bhakti and nice karma, you become liberated. And then, you know, so that’s what you have to see. These are common points that you can use for preaching. You start there and then go in. But one shouldn’t just by seeing the external say, oh, hey, you got, you know what I’m saying? Otherwise, it’ll be too shallow. You know, you have to say, it’s okay, you have to, so what’s your purpose of it? Oh, to serve, so then why would you want to serve the Lord? You know, you know, like that. Are we His eternal servant or so that then we can become like the Lord or become the Buddha? You know what I’m saying? That’s, that’s where you’d have to, you know, because if it’s spiritual, if the activity itself is spiritual, it could give them a spiritual result, then why wouldn’t it be good after you have attained the spiritual result? If serving the Lord is actually spiritual and it will get you to the liberated platform, which is spiritual, then why wouldn’t serving the Lord after you’re at the liberated platform also be practical? They say, no, it’s just the technique to get there. But then if the, is the technique spiritual or not? So then because they’re using mundane logic, they’ll have to say it’s not spiritual. So if it’s not spiritual, how will something, the material world give you something spiritual?
You know, you’re saying through illusion, spiritual was covered and then you got the material manifestation. And now you’re taking this illusion and by operating it, you’re getting the spiritual. So that you’re saying the material can deliver spiritual.
You know what I’m saying? Would you bring them to the point of your working service? Yes, but you have to discuss the philosophy. You have to, you have to show something, or if they’re not, then you engage them however you’ll engage.
My point is, it’s, don’t just take these externals and then to that, then create, you know, this, this common, common ground. Because otherwise, then it’s not going to work. If you’re, if you’re a Mayavadi, then you might be able to do that because actually it’s the same philosophy, just whether you follow the Vedas or not. But if you’re not a Mayavadi, then there’s, there’s not a whole lot of, you have to be careful. Otherwise, it looks good, you know, sentimentally, oh, we’re cooperating, but cooperating in what? Okay, we all sat together. We all sat around with different people, you know, talked. We didn’t throw tomatoes and cabbages. So, you know, that was, you know, we had to restrain ourselves, but, you know, we did that. And then afterwards, we all sat around and ate something and chit-chatted and all that. And then with big crocodile grins, we all got in our, you know, vehicles and went home. So, but what did that do on the spiritual landscape? What did it, oh, no, but we brought closer. Closer what?
You know, closer that, you know, I mean, so then why don’t you go out and just go on the street and start chit -chatting and shaking hands and all that? Yes?
Yes, but the point is, is how efficient is it? Because for us, mode of goodness is, you know, you’re talking, it’s like, if we talk, it means putting it in perspective, is you’re talking about bhava being the first stage out of ten levels of prema, right? And we’re saying, and that’s your first stage of uttamadakari.
So for us, the mode of goodness and getting out of the material world, that’s a very small, you know, of our process.
So to put too much emphasis on that, then has a problem. Just like he brought up, we’re discussing these three, but, you know, they brought up the point is, no, but by connecting devotional service, then you free yourself from them. So it’s pure goodness that has some meaning. The only value to goodness is that it’s easy to engage, it’s easier to come to the platform of pure goodness from goodness than from passion or ignorance. You know, it would be, if you’re in goodness and then go up to pure goodness and drop back to goodness, then it’s not very, you know, emotionally disturbing. But if you’re going from passion, pure goodness, passion, or ignorance, pure goodness, ignorance, it’ll be, there’s too much chance of being too much stress or being too distracting. So goodness only has its value in that it is useful in, as a situation, to understand Krishna Consciousness, because goodness is illuminating. But that’s it. That’s the end of it. It doesn’t stand on its own. The difficulty comes is that we’re too used to the concept of good and bad stand on its own. You know, like we said before, why should a husband and wife have mutual fidelity? Why? What’s the reason? Why shouldn’t, you know, the guy run off with someone else or the wife? You know, they got tired. They’ve been around a while. You know, they take healthy soda.
It’s a regulation. But from where?
From God. But where, where, where do people in the world get it from? Why do, why, the guy on the street, he never goes to church. He never goes to the synagogue. He doesn’t practice anything. But if you ask him, he’ll say it’s not good. Why?
But he’s, he’s the one quoting it. Political correctness comes from that guy. It doesn’t come out of here.
You know what I’m saying?
It means that you go over in the community here. Someone just ran off with someone else’s wife. And then he’s got to leave the community for two years. Why?
It creates a disturbance. What’s wrong with the disturbance? The kids, kids in the morning, they’re yelling and screaming. They don’t want to take a bath. That’s a disturbance. So then according to that, all people with children should leave Maya.
You know what I’m saying? Where does it come from? Where is its authority?
And if you check back, most will take it back into whatever is their conditioned cultural background before becoming devotees. That’s where it goes back to. But what grounds that in, in reality? Why do, why is that defined as, as good or bad? If you look back, it’s what you said. It’s ultimately you went back to religion somewhere along the line, some hundreds of thousands of years before.
Yeah, people want security, but why is security in relationships good? Why not, you know, like we were saying before, why restrict yourself? Why, you know, your options, you know, it’s like, you know, you lose your options here. You know, you have so many other opportunities. You know, there’s people who profess like that. They think it’s good. You know, it’s like, you know, as soon as a girl becomes, shows a little interest, that’s immediately got to drop her, you know, like that. You know, they’re getting serious, you know, so you want to move on. That’s bad. You know, other people are dying for someone to be serious about them. So what defines?
That’s the point. It’s only because Krishna defines it. Otherwise, why are devotees discussing, you know, equality of men and women and, you know, and the Vedic is not so important, doesn’t apply. Where does that come from? Based on what? Because they’re saying what they’re thinking is good and what’s being given here is not good. How do they make that decision?
That’s all. But they’re thinking that they’re actually sincerely discussing something spiritual. They’re discussing purely mundane topics. Pure.
Not even a touch.
Because if you ask them, they cannot connect what they’re thinking back. That’s why here we’re analyzing things so much. Because we’re analyzing stuff that is day-to -day thinking, is day-to-day.
Because generally speaking, when devotees sit around and discuss social issues, there’s basically nothing spiritual about what they discuss.
Unless, you know, it’s a matter of, you know, Prabhupada said we do this, so we do this. So the faith is there. They can’t necessarily mechanically explain why, but at least the faith is there. These others, the faith is not there. So the faith is not there. It drops it out of the process. Because Shraddha to Prema means Shraddha. Prema means mature Shraddha. So if there’s no Shraddha, you’re not talking about devotional service.
You’re just not. So you’re talking mundane, and then what connects to mundane? So even though we say, okay, but you connect the mundane, the conditioned nature, to Krishna, how do you do it? What’s the mechanics? Where does it connect? It’s only because they feel like that.
You know? Like they say, no, you know, ladies should be gurus, and this and that. So they’re coming up, and then they say, Urmila. And then the other ladies go, why Urmila? It’s just like, what’s deciding this thing? If it’s a matter of ladies can be gurus, then what’s wrong with her? No, no, not her. It should be, no, this one, she’s seen her, that one, she doesn’t see her. It’s just, what’s the basis of the discussion?
I try just so they won’t disturb anyway. I mean, to go back a couple of years, I’d only discuss it like this, but I’m trying to discuss it more subtly to not bring up these kind of things. But that’s the actual point, is what devotees sit around, their actual social values have nothing to do with Krishna consciousness. I mean, nothing.
You know what I’m saying? You go into someone’s house, why do they live? Why did they put the furniture where they put it?
They don’t know. So that’s not being engaged in Krishna service. They should know why they have it there. Why those curtains? Why even curtains at all? Why the rug? What kind of rug? You know, how they set the altar, they’ll say that’s for Krishna. You know, but what about the bathroom? What’s in their bathroom? What’s in their closet?
How do they deal with their bed?
They can’t say. And then they’ll say, oh, this is Kali Yuga, things don’t apply. What do you mean? Kali Yuga is all there. It’s just people don’t have the consciousness or the interest. That’s all. So Kali Yuga means no one’s interested, not that you can’t do it.
Does that make sense?
Did you get what we’re talking about?
OK, but what we’re saying is, is that this is the platform of pranamoy. Pranamoy is the platform of, it’s the second level of consciousness, which means justice, morality or ethics and economics. So that’s generally what devotees discuss when they discuss social issues. But dharma is above that. What’s the inherent nature? What’s the inherent nature of a man or a woman or parents or a teacher or an administrator? That’s not what’s being discussed.
Ksatriya has a nature. Brahman has a nature. Therefore, the rules are there so that they are only engaged in activities that are according to their nature. But we’ll say, oh, we don’t care for Varanashram. So what does that mean? That means you don’t care for the nature. So it drops it from dharma down to artha.
You know, as soon as you say that, no, no, no, but this is connected. How is it connected? Go ahead. We don’t mind. We want it to be connected. Arjuna is worried about his relatives.
But then, you know, through the proper, he’s connected to Krishna.
So it doesn’t matter. Anamoy, pranamoy, manamoy. Connected to Krishna. But we’re just pointing out what level of consciousness is functioning at. Because when you’re following Varanashram, then you’re talking manamoy.
When it’s actually for the purpose of freeing you from material existence, then we’re talking vigyanamoy or moksha.
And bhakti is how all those are connected to the Lord. So if you can’t say how it’s connected to the Lord, then it will be in the mundane category. And then if you can’t explain it, that means one’s uneducated. But generally, those who discuss this will claim to be educated. You know, they represent the modern, educated, liberal man.
But they can’t explain it. So they’re not educated.
That’s the point. So we don’t mind discussing anything. That’s the point. We are, you know, as a class, not dogmatic. We can discuss anything. But it has to be able to be discussed. Discussed means you’re using the intellectual platform in consideration of the emotions and the body.
So that only is done by the scriptures. Nothing else actually defines it that way. It’s the only one that sees all of that together. Anything else only takes a portion.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, but that’s because those are natures of the soul. So kindness and consideration. But that’s social. It’s not spiritual.
You understand? Kindness and consideration. Cows are kind to their calves. It’s not spiritual. You know what I’m saying? It means these are nice qualities. And they’re nice qualities to engage, but until they’re engaged. Just like let’s say you have a blender. It’s a nice blender. Top class blender. But if it’s not plugged in, will it work? Will it work if it’s not plugged in? No. So that’s the point. All the good qualities of the world still have no meaning unless they touch Krishna. Because where does the quality come from? It comes from Krishna. That’s the point. Compassion. So compassion itself, that quality is Krishna. The forms that can manifest compassion are manifest through his internal potency. Then you have the external forms. So people are going there looking for compassion, but do they know compassion is Krishna? If they don’t, they’re an illusion.
So all that talk. So it’s nice. But everybody. Let’s say the guy is down there. You have a bunch of really bad kids. And they go out for fun. They like to be destructive and vandalism and all that. But what do they get from it? They go out and throw a brick through someone’s window or do something. What do they get from it? There’s some excitement. Krishna says he’s adventure. So that taste they get, that’s Krishna. So they’re also looking for Krishna. But just they’re looking for excitement in a lower manifestation that is not useful in a social environment.
You know what I’m saying? So we’re discussing here Brahman platform.
So that means they’re looking for the exact same thing that the person who’s more controlled by goodness is looking for compassion and feeding poor kids in some unfortunate place. So they’re both looking for Krishna and they’re both their drive to do what they do is because they’re tasting that element of Krishna. But they’re both an illusion because they don’t know it’s Krishna.
Why would you want it based on compassion and kindness? What would be the basis for why? Why compassion and kindness? Why not something else? Why not cooperation? Why not good education or good social? Like Vaishyas get together and have a chamber of commerce. It’s all because keep the money in the family. Why kindness and compassion?
I’m not saying it’s good. I’m not saying that. Why? Why kindness and why did you pick those two?
Because harshness and some of these other qualities, the later, where is it, the 12th, one of the chapters of Bhagavad Gita, we find them in the 16th chapter on the demoniac side. Okay, but what’s wrong with the demoniac side? Pilat Maharaj is a demon. He’s the exception. So, but if there’s an exception, it means there’s a possibility.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with fighting, you know, per se. No, but we’re not saying that. I’m just saying why compassion?
Why did you pick that? Why did you pick it, personally? Okay, probably because I had a recent Buddhist life or something. Okay, but then, so, but that’s, that’s fine. But the point is, is no, no religion functions without these, without that good qualities. Means if you want to make something popular, it has to have a God, a supreme, and it has to have good work. That’s all. Then it will be popular. Okay, so that’s, so it makes it popular.
You understand? Makes it popular. So anything that doesn’t have these two won’t be popular. You know, there’ll be some back room somewhere, some guy sitting around, sipping some strange, you know, coffee or something like that and talking all kinds of stuff, but it won’t get out of their room, you know. So that compassion then is nice, but the point is, is what’s its function? What does it do? If someone has spiritual visions, they feel painful, you know, pain. That’s there, okay. Okay, so then, but that’s, then, then, then is the real, so compassion is the basis or is the spiritual vision is the basis? Okay, so then your statement should be, what’s wrong with the community based on spiritual vision?
You understand? Because now you’re talking, now with that, now, with that if there’s spiritual vision, then there should be compassion and other things. Why? Because you have the eternal soul who’s Krishna’s servant. So if somebody does something wrong, you deal with them in compassion. What will actually bring them to the right path? You understand? This is what I’m meaning is that the compassion, you’re looking at it in a generic sense, and it could be Krishna conscious or not. The demons are compassionate to their children. You know what I’m saying? So it’s not enough. What’s the source of that? So the demons’ compassion for his children is pure attachment, mundane attachment, right? Like that. But here we’re talking about because of the spirit being attached to Krishna and all living entities are Krishna’s parts and parcels. Therefore, you’re compassionate to Krishna’s parts and parcels because they’re connected with Krishna. That then has some spiritual value, has some lasting value. The other one, though very nice, is temporary. So what we’re saying is why for the same work get a temporary result while the same work you could get an eternal result. So you have to change the perspective so you know what actually is the value of compassion. It has to go back to the spiritual platform. I agree. That’s all we’re saying. But what I’m saying is many times when devotees discuss these things, they’re not taking it back to there. Therefore, they’re not able to use it. Though they’ve been discussing for a long time, they can’t implement it. Yeah, I mean, for myself, the Dalai Lama, he has an expression, all religion is kindness. But then the man, he deviates from the vegetarian. That’s fair. You know, what’s that, you know? Yeah, of course. To kill animals. Of course. Why are you talking for hours on compassion when you can’t even extend that to the animals? So you have to give them credit for that little bit of compassion where they do apply it, but like you said, as seeing it in a holistic context that they aren’t able to explain properly. So that’s the weakness, because ultimately it’s all illusion anyway in their mind. All this doesn’t exist. It’s not even here. Who you’re being compassionate to. Yeah, so you’re being, you know, compassion as a quality has to be illusion, and you’re being compassionate to someone else who doesn’t exist, who’s illusion. So the whole thing is a nice illusion. In other words, he’s preaching nice illusion as opposed to not nice illusion. They worry about Tibet so much. Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, you’d think he’d be fighting over like, you know, the Bahamas or something. You know, the canyon.
Does that make sense? In other words, we’re trying to, this is, you know, the study, we’re trying to get it where we can actually say what we’re doing. So it’s not, in other words, the intelligence and the emotions must be matched, because if it’s just emotional and not intelligent, we all know that that generally has a problem at some point. Yeah, it works, you know, Hollywood movies, but it doesn’t always, you know what I’m saying. Okay, so we have to…
