Bhagavad-gītā Seriatim #5

Bhagavad-gītā Seriatim #5

Full Playlist of Bhagavad-gītā Seriatim Lectures 

Use your browser search function* to search for keywords within the lecture transcription. You can click anywhere in the audio track to jump to the respective section of the transcription text, and click anywhere in the transcription text to jump to the respective section in the audio track.
*CTRL+F on Windows, CMD+F on Mac, Find in/on Page on phone

DISCLAIMER: This is an automatic transcription which contains some misspellings and other irregularities. When in doubt, compare with the audio. If you would like to help us edit these transcriptions, please write to bvps.transcriptions[at]gmail.com

As the opposing armies stand poised for battle, Arjuna, the mighty warrior, sees his intimate relatives, teachers and friends in both armies, ready to fight and sacrifice their lives. Overcome by grief and pity, Arjuna fails in strength. His mind becomes bewildered and he gives up his determination to fight. This first chapter is called viśāda-yoga, which means yoga of despair. When a pious person is in an adverse situation, he turns his attention to God. Thus, the calamities in life which act as an impetus for spiritual progress are appropriately called yoga. In other words, the definition of a demigod, or sura, is that when there’s a problem, he turns his attention to God. Therefore, despair is a cause for connecting oneself to the Lord. So this is viśāda-yoga, means through the despair of Arjuna, he connects himself to the Lord. Does that make sense? That’s the point, is that if you get into anxiety like that, do you absorb yourself in that, or do you connect yourself to the Lord? You absorb yourself in it, then that’s, of course, that’s mundane, the taste of that, everything. But if you try to connect it to the Lord, then it’s not considered mundane. Right? Does that make sense? Yes.

So verses one to eleven are the doubts of Dhrtarastra and Duryodhana’s attempt to consolidate his army. Verses twelve to twenty, signs of victory for the Pandavas. Verses twenty-one to twenty-six, Arjuna confronted with his attachments. And verses twenty-seven to forty-six are Arjuna’s reasons not to fight. Due to compassion, desire for enjoyment, fear of sinful reactions, and destruction of family tradition. So verses one to eleven, doubts of Dhrtarastra and Duryodhana’s attempt to consolidate his army. In verse one, because always your first verse, your first verse, first three verses, or even the element of the first chapter, depending upon how the writer is writing, this establishes the book, what the book’s about, this work and everything like this. This is the opening. This is called the Anubandha Chatustaya. That it establishes what’s happening in the book, who it’s for, what’s the knowledge that’s being given.

So that all then, so your first verse, or like in Bhagavatam, first three verses, then become very important for establishing the environment.

Verse one, Bhagavad Gita, most Vedic scriptures, opens with a question. This signifies that the transcendental knowledge is transmitted through the process of inquiry. If you don’t inquire, what’s the use of the knowledge? If the food is there, you don’t eat it, what’s the use? Food has use, so there’s no lessening of the Vedic literatures because you don’t study it. But the point is, it’s there, you don’t take advantage, then basically what’s your use?

So everything works by inquiry. If you don’t inquire, you are not going to apply. Submissive inquiry, the next stage is application. So if you’re not inquiring, you’re not applying. If you’re not applying, you won’t be interested. So if you’re interested, then you make the endeavor to inquire, so you get the knowledge by which then you can do service, apply it. Does that make sense? So these are your dynamic elements. Without the inspiration, there will be no activity. You can have a perfect field, but if someone’s not inspired, nothing will happen. You’re there, Prasad’s there, but you’re not hungry, therefore there’s no eating. You get hungry, now there’s a goal. You get inspired to obtain that goal, therefore you eat. Does that make sense? When there’s a vision of a goal, then there can be inspiration. Right?

No understanding of a goal, no inspiration. Make sense? Because the point is this, aniruddha, as goal or prayujan, always moves back to prajumna, which is the submanda. So when you study the field, like as we were saying before, in studying the field, then the spirit, the purpose, the subject, and the process.

Yeah, so this purpose, when that purpose is there, that will then make you interested to do the work. Right? You don’t have that, then there’s not going to be any. Does that make sense? Right? When you see a goal, then you’ll take it very seriously. So these are all going in a cycle that they’re supporting each other. Right? You see the field, you get this, and so therefore you look at it very nicely because of that inspiration. Right? Then you’re going to be able to focus nicely. Does this make sense? Yes. When we say thinking, feeling, and living, this feeling refers more to prajumna. No, it doesn’t. No? Because feeling means the mind is accepting. When you’re dealing with prajumna, you’re still intellectual. The mind’s included, it’s touching, because prajumna and aniruddha are connected, but it’s the intellectual aspect.

The goal is not touched yet, so how can there be feeling?

Because you know the goal is there.

It means, in other words, I’m hungry, I see food, I could get rid of this hunger by eating this food. I’m inspired, therefore, to follow the process, to get the actual goal. That’s why in the description here, then you have, after saying the purpose of Gita, then it says, that’s in two, in five it says the result of understanding the Gita. Right? In other words, there’s a purpose to the various elements of the field and how their relationship and interaction gives results. But getting the results is another thing. So we say thinking, feeling, willing, that’s what the process of the mind goes through. It’s not that when feeling you have the result, no, you’re inspired by the result. So that’s the Vastu Traya within sambandha.

Means you can take it down to that, but that’s how the mind works, because it’s just like this. On the mind, where is there more excitement in the idea of getting something or having gotten it?

Strive for it, so that’s the point. So therefore, feeling is there, and willing means you’ll do the activity and get it, but no one puts a big emphasis on getting it.

It’s what you can get is inspiring, because once you get it, it moves back. Then you’re inspired, how now I can use this. That’s why separation is higher than sambandha. Yeah. But it’s you’re going to be involved in an activity because of what you can get from it. Once you’ve got it, the activity stops, so everything becomes static. So only when you become inspired by now what I can get from this, then again there’s, you know, does that make sense? So the mind is working towards something, because the mind is actually, goodness means it’s in the position of prayojana. So just enjoying and interacting, that’s normal. You know what I’m saying? But that can only happen if there’s connection.

So the connection, that’s pradyumna.

Right? Does that make sense? So that aspect, that creates the inspiration.

So it’s more dynamic there.

It’s just like this. The man, what does he talk about? He doesn’t talk about controlling, because he’s in the position of control. He talks about enjoying. Women don’t talk about enjoying, they talk about controlling.

Because a man’s connection is enjoyment. The woman’s connection is control.

You understand? So that’s why each one feels annoyed at the other’s discussion. Because the man’s in the position of control, why she’s talking control. Or trying to control. And the woman’s in the position of enjoying, why the man’s talking enjoying.

You understand? If it’s something common, okay, we’ll go to this resort, we’ll have fun. That’s okay. But when men talk about enjoying women, women get annoyed. Because they are enjoying it. So what are you doing talking about their position?

You understand? So the connections are there. So the actual engagement, that’s where it’s practically connected.

But the man’s engagement, he’s trying to enjoy. The woman’s engagement, she’s trying to control.

You know what I’m saying? The man’s control is automatic. He’s trying to get enjoyment out of it. The woman’s position of enjoyment is automatic. She’s trying to get the control out of it.

You know what I’m saying?

Does that make sense? Yes. So what we’re saying there is, thinking, feeling, willing is the whole process, but that’s what’s important to the mind.

So the real experience is coming in the abhidheya. Because that’s dynamic.

It’s more complete. Sambandha, you’re contemplating it. You may be inspired, but it’s still contemplation. Prayojana means you’re appreciating what you’ve got, but it’s still static. You’re not doing anything. You have it. That’s all. You’re happy that you have it. Where’s the interaction? There isn’t any. But abhidheya means you’re interacting.

So that’s why it gives the most flavor.

So therefore, we say the Lord’s pastimes, not the Lord’s enjoyment or the Lord’s position.

Say the Lord’s pastimes. That’s what’s prominent.

Does that make sense? So you’re coming back to that.

Logically, you see the field, you perform the activity, you get the result, but you’re only going to perform the activity if you’re inspired to get the result. So unless the mind is already touched on prayojana, there is no abhidheya. So that means the intelligence goes sambandha, abhidheya, prayojana, but the mind is from sambandha touched on prayojana, then back to abhidheya. So when the mind will move back to there, the intelligence moves forward to there.

Then you perform the activity. Then you get the result.

Now you’ve got it. That’s the whole point. You want a kid, right? So how much time does it take arranging that, finding the person, marriage, setting up the house, doing all the things, paying all the bills, interacting with the wife, doing all this and that?

How long can that take? A couple of years. And then the process of conceiving the child. A few minutes.

So you add the two up.

That’s the point.

But the living entity thinks that this is important because the living entity, the jivas, is made up of ananda. Therefore, ananda is important. So they’ll work so hard to get it. But the problem is, is the ananda here is very temporary because you’re trying to please yourself through the mind and senses.

So as long as the sense is in touch with the sense object, there’s some experience. But as soon as they’re disengaged, the experience is over. It’s gone.

So now comes the anxiety. Now is that, OK, if it’s temporary here, then why would I be involved in the spiritual that has the same problem? So that’s why you see in the scripture, like the Bhagavatam, the first thing it deals with is protection.

Because the security, gain and safety, these are the two anxieties of the feminine nature. So safety is coming by connection with the masculine principle. Gain by being connected with the masculine principle, then what you can get from that. Does that make sense? So safety is the first thing. So here’s the question on safety. So I’m going to work so hard, but it’s the same principle.

But the point is, now here, the key is that because of the senses touching the sense object, according to what the mind says, OK, what’s the mind made out of? Material energy. Yeah, and very specifically?

Rejection. No, no, no. That’s what it does. But I’m saying as an element, what would it be made out of that would be significant in comparison to the living entity? The significant difference. It means material energy is an energy of the Lord, right? And the jiva is an energy of the Lord. But what’s the significant difference?

Consciousness, right? So that means matter is dead. There’s no consciousness. So therefore, when there’s no consciousness, therefore, when they’re separated, that ananda is gone. So actually, it’s only because you’re connected with it, you’re conscious of it, not that it’s conscious of you. So it’s basically a one-sided affair. OK?

So therefore, the temporariness of it, right? And because you’re seeing it separate from God, God’s not included in it. Even though he’s organized, but he’s still not included. Now, if you’re doing something that’s Krishna conscious, then God’s involved, right? OK, just go back a step. As we discussed before, between the sense object and the sense, the sense object is the visaya, and the sense object is the asaraya, right? We discussed that. So that means the sense object is the enjoyer. But the enjoyer is dead matter. So what is it enjoying?

Nothing. So therefore, how much can you get out of that? So it’s your only inspiration that if the sense and sense object come together, it will be nice.

We just think if it will be nice. Not necessarily that it is. We just think it will be.

You know what I’m saying? So…

Does that make sense? You need an example? You need an example. So, therefore, when you’re dealing with the spiritual platform, then the visaya is conscious. It’s God. He’s eternal. He is everything. So if you please him, you’re actually becoming pleased. Right? The material is not real pleasure because all you’re doing is removing the anxiety of your need for that interaction. But the interaction itself doesn’t actually generate any happiness. How can it? It’s dead matter. Where’s the relationship between the conscious jiva and dead matter? Where’s the relationship? There isn’t any. It’s an illusion that you think there is. Therefore, when Prabhupada says there is no pleasure in the material world, he means it. The material world is simply… You remove pain. We call that pleasure due to lack of anything else. You know what I’m saying? You’re real hungry. You go in the kitchen. There’s nothing else to eat except for, let’s say, the crust off of the bread. You’ll eat it because there’s nothing else. But if there was something else to eat, you wouldn’t go near it. You know what I’m saying?

Unless, of course, you’re Italian. That’s a special preparation. Olive oil and the masalas and all that kind of thing.

Does that make sense? So, there’s no happiness.

But coming in contact with Krsna, then you actually have a real conscious ashraya and visraya. So there is real relationship. So there is real happiness.

And God being everything, when He’s happy, then you’re happy rather than just your mind’s happy, so therefore.

He’s happy because you’re part of Him. Then you’ll experience that happiness. But unless you understand you’re part of Him, how will you be happy?

You understand?

And He’s eternal. And His happiness is eternal. Therefore, any happiness rendered is eternal. The experience of it is eternal. So you’re just adding to that. You understand? In the material world, there’s happiness that drops off. Then you end up for another. It drops off. In the spiritual world, no. You get the happiness that remains. You do another activity, it adds more to that. So it’s always increasing. There’s a very dynamic, scientific difference between the two.

No, it’s not that we want to increase. We’re trying to increase what? Krsna’s pleasure. Because we’ve defined our pleasure as Krsna’s pleasure.

Does that make sense? So it’s still the same principle. In the material world, we’re an instrument for the senses and sense objects meeting.

So then we call that pleasure.

But the senses and sense objects, and that principle we’re trying to obtain, that’s still the Lord and His energy.

But that’s on the Brahman platform. And as pointed out by Rupa Goswami, as far as spirituality goes, it’s a limited amount of pleasure. It’s greater than the material, but it’s limited on the devotional platform. So even you work on the Brahman platform, it will free you here, but the amount of pleasure you can get is very minimal compared to what you get from devotional service. Though that minimal is much greater than whatever you get here.

Because material means you’re temporarily removing, constantly removing temporary pain. While liberation means, on a longer term, you removed all the pain at once. So that’s why it gives a greater sense of pleasure. But it’s only removing material pain. That’s why we’ll say it’s still temporary. Because real pleasure means please the Lord. He’s pleased, you’re pleased.

So therefore, also you have the element, here’s an opportunity to do an activity that will get a result. Intellectually, if you look at it. But what is that result?

Krishna’s pleasure. So therefore, here’s an opportunity to please Krishna, so I perform the activity.

Does that make sense? So it still goes, sambandha, prayojana, abhidhe, the mind. Because here’s an opportunity in which I could get a result of pleasing Krishna. I want to please Krishna, so therefore I perform the devotional activity.

That is the opportunity presented by that situation.

Does that make sense?

You had something?

No, it’s not that it can be enjoyed when they get pleasure from it. It doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy it. There’s a difference.

It’s serving the God, not but on the platform of Brahman. Krishna says he maintains a material world with the spark of his splendor. So that spark means it’s very small. So how much pleasure are you giving Krishna?

You understand? Not much. So now, with that Brahman understanding, you’re engaging these indirect activities or interactions of the senses. You’re connecting it to the Lord. It’s still, he’s the goal, Lakshmi is the servant. In other words, the field and the activities and that is the servant of the goal, which is that quality of Krishna. We can be instrumental in being involved in that, bringing them together.

Does that make sense? Krishna is purity or cleanliness. And so, let’s say we’re going to, it’s in relationship to the floor. So therefore then Lakshmi is the floor, she is the bucket, she’s the water, she’s the rag, she’s the process that you, you know, putting the rag in the bucket, wringing it out, wiping the floor, putting it back in the bucket, wringing it out. She’s all that. By us assisting in that process, then the goal of cleanliness is obtained. You understand? So, if you just see that on the Brahman platform, then you’re only dealing with that spark. And it’s not even in connection, in your mind, to Krishna. So therefore, what pleasure will get out of it at all? It’s only Brahman interacting with Brahman, so there’s only the pleasure of Brahman. Right? The devotee sees that it’s Krishna, but through this medium of Brahman. Right? And so, the endeavor that you’re trying to do that to please him, that will be the devotional element that’s pleasing to Krishna. But, so, that’s there. But we shouldn’t allow the mind to be satisfied there, because why would we want to please Krishna ultimately, simply on this Brahman platform? You know, how would the person be pleased with the Brahman platform when we could please him on the personal platform?

It’s through the medium of dead matter. It’s just like you have a copper wire. Is the copper wire electricity? Copper wire. No.

So, like that, this dead matter channels the potency of Krishna and his internal potency. That’s what makes it alive.

Yes. Yes. So that’s why there’s a difference in causation between the ultimate cause and formal cause, which is the Lord and His energy. Right? The Lord and Lakshmi. And then, the operational cause, which is the jiva, and the material cause, which is the material energy. In other words, the one is reflected into the other. So, the living entity performs the activity, and because he interacts with the material energy, the material energy transforms and creates the result.

Right? So, we think we’re doing it. But actually, our activity has to be in line with the activities that Lakshmi establishes.

Right? And the result that you get is what you’re looking for is not that physical form, it’s actually that quality of Krishna, the original cause. That’s why when you get the material cause, you’ve got it, you’re not satisfied, because it’s not the material cause that’s actually what you’re looking for. You’re looking for that quality of Krishna that it carries.

You know what I’m saying? So, it’s like, you know, metals can carry electricity. Wood doesn’t carry electricity.

You know what I’m saying? So, therefore, it’s not a medium for that. So, you have to find those things. So, those particular qualities of the Lord, they are only manifest in certain situations.

Does that make sense? So, everything’s connected, but it’s connected according to the particular situation that it’s in.

Does that make sense? Yes? Can you please explain how you said that a man is not interested in…

With a woman.

Do men sit around and talk about control with women?

Who knows that?

I don’t understand what it means that a man is controlling a woman’s enjoyment.

This is not the place for it. Because we’ve been discussing this for years. This is second hand technology. So, this is technically after four years, this is the conversation.

Like that. Because otherwise, this is days of discussion. So, if you pick it up as we go, The basic principle is you have to control her and enjoy her. So, what the principle is, is result is where you enjoy. So, Radharani is the Hladini Shakti. She’s the enjoyment potency. So, she’s feminine. So, the point is, is the masculine principle is performing activities to gain the experience of that enjoyment.

So, Krishna tries to control the situation and control the activities that are done in connection with the gopis. But what he’s trying to gain is not the control. He’s trying to gain the enjoyment that comes from that control.

Does that make sense? And the gopis, they’re enjoying the situation. Because Krishna is doing something. You know what I’m saying? It’s just like this. There’s a hand and there’s a foot. And the hand is massaging the foot. So, now the hand is doing what it likes. It’s in control of the situation. But who’s enjoying? The foot.

You understand? So, the man thinks he’s the enjoyer, but actually the woman’s the enjoyer.

The woman thinks she’s the controller, but actually the man’s the controller.

Yeah, because she’s the enjoyer from the masculine point of view. The man enjoys controlling the woman. But what’s the point? He thinks, if I create this situation, I’ll be happy. So, his enjoyment is manipulating the situation until he gets that situation that he wants.

But the position of manipulating it, the woman enjoys.

Why? Because it’s about her.

The man thinks it’s all about him, but it’s actually all about her. These are all the fun that is there. That’s why when you take all these things and break them down according to Vedanta philosophy, it starts to get a little weird.

But on the principle of the energy and the energetic and how it works, it’s perfectly fine and there’s no problem. But just in the material world where we are thinking we’re God, but at the same time we have the motives of the feminine. We think we’re masculine, but we have the motives of feminine, so therefore it gets very strange.

So that’s the purpose of that, is that it breaks down that there’s actually anything of substance here. But in the spiritual world, it’s real relationships and it actually works. But here it’s just mechanics.

So that’s why the operational cause becomes important, because the mechanics are applied there.

But on the upper platform, the original cause and the formal cause, this is just relationship interaction, it’s rasa. But we’re doing something with something we don’t actually have a relationship with. You’re interacting with dead matter, you don’t really have a relationship with it. So therefore it’s only the mechanics that actually create the interaction and create the sensation or create the experience, that happiness, those feelings. It’s all created by interaction, the operation of it. But the other one is emotions and emotions are dynamically interacting. The medium is just there to carry it.

In the material world, there’s nothing to carry.

You imagine that it’s happening because it’s in line with the original. So you think the reflection is the original. So it’s like trying to get, in other words, identifying with the reflection and thinking the reflection is enjoying. You’re scratching the top of your head and you think you are the reflection in the mirror and you’re enjoying the scratching of the head in the mirror. Is there anything there? No, but the mechanics is there and you can define the mechanics.

But in the reality, you scratch your head, then it feels good.

So that’s what’s happening.

The reflection is like the original, but we make the mistake that the reflection actually can give substance like the original.

But it can’t, there isn’t anything, it’s a reflection. But the reflection acts just like the original, but still there’s nothing there of those experiences that are in the original.

Does this make sense?

The question Dhritarashtra asks is bizarre, as Srila Prabhupada explains. Now the word is used, yuyutsava, they assembled for fighting. Then what is the use of asking, kim akurvata, then what did they do? It is natural to conclude that when they assembled for fighting, there must be fighting. But why he was asking him kim akurvata, the subject was that because the parties assembled in the dharmaksetra, so they might have changed their ideas. So in other words, the discussion is not actually about the fighting, the discussion is about the change of the moods, change of the mentalities. So he’s very worried about this. Dhritarashtra hopes that the pious influence of the holy place of pilgrims will not discourage his demoniac sons to fight, will not give additional strength to the righteous Pandavas. On the other hand, Dhritarashtra wishes that the Pandavas decline to fight with their relatives because of compassion and detachment.

So Dhritarashtra is hoping that his sons will come out victorious, that’s all he wants. So either they won’t decline to fight, they’ll fight, they’ll be victorious, but won’t be influenced because they’re demoniac, they won’t lose strength because of the holy place, or the Pandavas won’t become more powerful. Or even better, because of the influence of the holy place, the Pandavas then take up that religious sentiment and decline to fight, like Arjuna did in the first chapter. He’s hoping that that will then, that and then all the Pandavas will say, okay, that’s it, finished, and then they’ll all walk away. But they’re Kshatriyas, that’s not going to happen. Before the war started, Dhritarashtra sent Sanjaya to the Pandavas with a similar message. Sanjaya pleaded that since the Pandavas are saintly persons, they should refrain from the battle and live by begging. What will they gain by slaying their relatives? It is better to give up the kingdom than to kill Bhishma and Drona. Thus Sanjaya introduced the same arguments, which later on Arjuna developed in his first chapter of Gita. Lord Krsna was also present in the assembly, rejected the proposal. Sometimes unscrupulous men try to deceive saintly persons in the same manner. They persuade holy men that it is not worthy to fight for transitory material things, and that it is much better to pursue solitary bhajan. Lord Krsna does not approve His devotees being fooled in such a way. So the point is, it’s what you have, you engage in Krsna’s service. It’s not to be given up. If it’s your duty, it’s to be performed. It doesn’t matter if it’s trouble or this or that. So unscrupulous persons trying to get what others have due to envy, because envy means they have it, you don’t. Therefore, they’ll preach to you spiritually that you’ll give that up so then you can enjoy. And it sounds good. And one may say, oh, this is very Krsna conscious. On one level, it is, but their motive is not that at all. Like Hiranyakasipu was speaking Vedanta philosophy to his wives and mothers and sisters and other relatives in his household when his brother Hiranyaksa was killed. So was his purpose to enlighten the women of the household about the nature of the soul and all that? No. His purpose was just, by Vedanta, they’ll give up their anxiety, then they’ll be peaceful. And if they’re peaceful, then the house is happy, and he wants to be happy in the house with the ladies. So unless they’re peaceful, there’s not going to be any happiness.

So it’s not, even though what he says is correct, because only if it’s correct will it really work. But his motives aren’t. Therefore, it’s not sampradaya.

Does that make sense? So many times then this will be used, the voluntary nature of the devotees, it will be used to persuade one to do something that technically is, in one sense, right in the devotional process, but at the same time may not be appropriate for the situation. Because they want the pandavas to give up everything as saintly persons, but what about their duty as kings? Why aren’t they sharing the kingdom? And even if they were to give up, they said, just give us five villages. They won’t even do that. What’s this? Five villages? Who cares? Temples have more than five villages.

So what’s the big deal? They won’t give that. So that means that it’s mundane to the nth degree. There’s nothing pious about their mentality. What they want is totally mundane, but they know through piety you’ll get it. So therefore, they’re doing all these things and preaching all these things. But in reality, they’re only interested in mundane sense gratification. Yes. Dritarashtra’s illusion is peculiar because it seems like he understands that what we’re doing is bad. These people are good. No, no, just get to the point.

The point is, is there’s a difference between knowledge and realization.

That’s where you make a distinction. So Dritarashtra is very knowledgeable. He’s referred to in the Mahabharata as a rajarsi, because he technically is. But the problem is, is he’s good on everything up to the point of his children. At that point, he’s blinded by… So he follows, in one sense, the external to some degree, but at the same time, because of the attachment, he doesn’t apply it properly. So it’s because realization means where your values are. So his realization is, you know, his son’s happiness is his happiness. Therefore, the knowledge of these other aspects won’t have effect. So unless the realization that Krishna and his devotees’ happiness is the real happiness, then he won’t change what he does.

Does that make sense? The man is smoking because he thinks it makes him happy. He has knowledge about how bad it is for him, but he still smokes.

So his realization of the happiness he gets is greater… There is no realization on the detrimental side. He has knowledge. But when that becomes realization, like a good friend of his that also smoked just as much just died of leukemia, then he thinks, well, I don’t want to die. So dying is not happiness. So therefore, living is more happiness than smoking cigarettes. Therefore, I give up smoking cigarettes.

Do you understand? So his realization is not that.

Śrīla Prabhupāda reveals the esoteric meaning of the word dharmakṣetra. As in the paddy field, the unnecessary plants are taken out, so it is expected from the very beginning of these topics that in the religious field of Kuruksetra, where the father of religion, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, was present, the unwanted plants like Dhritarāṣṭra’s sons, son Duryodhana and others, would be wiped out, and the thoroughly religious persons headed by Yudhiṣṭhira would be established by the Lord. Because the kṣetra is where something grows. So in a dharmakṣetra, what’s going to grow is dharma. But his sons aren’t dharmic in this regard. And the sons of the Pandavas are. So there’s the anxiety, they’ll grow and my sons will become weak or be killed.

They’ll be removed. So that’s his anxiety.

Does that make sense? So this is how, like Sanskrit, what it describes and what it is is the same thing.

Because the field is what it does. The word māmaka shows that Dhritarāṣṭra is partial to his sons and envious to the Pandavas. This word is very important because it reveals the very reason for the war. The concept of mine and yours, friends and enemies, this wrong idea, creates hatred and envy which leads to conflicts. Because he is the eldest there, so it’s supposed to be all those in the dynasty are like his children. Like Bhishma is like that. Drona is like that. So he’s supposed to be like that. He’s supposed to be following the Brahmins, but he’s not. He’s following his son, which is wrong.

So then this concept of I and mine is actually the whole problem here.

So that’s what we see. The spiritual, that’s the first thing that Kṛṣṇa addressed. The actual definition of I and mine. Because if that’s understood, then you can deal on the spiritual platform.

So verses two to six. Yes.

You left out what happened to love. Society, friendship and love. Did you on purpose leave that off, or did you just forget about that? Okay. So that means then in your relationships there aren’t loves, so that’s why you forgot.

Okay. We’re just harassing.

Lacking the. Yes, because otherwise the same saying the concept of family here. Family means wife. How would you define what are the elements of a family? Okay.

Well, yeah, that would be your mood, what you’re trying to obtain. But what are the observable elements of a family?

Husband, wife, children. Yes, husband, wife, children. There’s a house. There’s paraphernalia. There’s interactions. Okay. In the spiritual world, are there husbands, wives and children? Are there houses? Do the houses have stuff in them? Right? So therefore, what’s the difference between the two?

Consciousness. Yes. If Krishna’s involved, then that’s there, because otherwise where’s the medium of interaction?

Right? So the whole point is if Krishna’s going to enjoy these things, it’s there in an environment where everybody else is. Right? It means you sit with a friend. You can have a nice interaction. Why have a party? What does a party do? It’s still you and your friend, but what’s the party do?

Interaction in different settings. Different settings, but the important thing is that setting is that it’s a setting in which other people are also enjoying interaction.

So that increases your, you understand? So Krishna’s going to enjoy with his devotees.

Right? But there’s also the element if the devotees are also having that kind of same situations, it increases it.

Does that make sense? Right? You know, your modern kind of despotic kind of concept is that you’ll enjoy, nobody else does, because if someone else is enjoying, that’s some enjoyment you could have. So you want to suck out all the enjoyment and make it all yours. But it just reduces. The point is you’re happy, everyone else is happy. It increases, you know? Does that make sense? So that’s why you go to do things in what someone else is doing. Right? You know, you go to a ski resort because someone else is skiing. You see them skiing, you get inspired, and then you want to ski or something like that. You understand?

Does that make sense? So that’s the whole idea. It’s that therefore all these things are there, and then it creates an environment in which there’s even more.

Yes? The relationship between people there, they are seeing it as a precious element, as a just medium to increase his pleasure.

Yes.

Yes, I mean, in some ways they’re increasing pleasure. Even they have the gopis, they have husbands. Okay? Okay, so now, okay, they have husbands.

If they didn’t have husbands, then it would be much easier for the gopis to interact, no?

Right? Technically it would be. Now, what does it say is a girl has no connection and she likes you, and a girl has a connection, but she’ll give that up for you. Which is more? Yes, so that’s the point. So all these things are to increase the nature of the rasa, create the environments that are the most perfect for experiencing that rasa.

Does that make sense? Because it’s like, yeah.

Okay.

After examining the Pandavas’ army, King Duryodhana became afraid, right? So now he had the opening. Now this is then where he’s looking at the army, right? And then he’s comparing and everything like that. Because of this, he personally approached Drona instead of summoning him as he fits a king. But Duryodhana attempted to hide his fear, pretending that he comes only out of respect of his guru. According to Baladeva Vidyabhusana, this clever use of diplomacy is indicated by the word raja. And vacanam abhravit, he spoke some words, means that Duryodhana carefully used the words in a way befitting his interests. So we’ll see, everything he does is very perfectly done to get his interests. But what we’ll notice is that you’re performing activities to get a result. That’s not the problem. The problem is the result’s just for himself, right? And that result for himself is on a lower level. It’s simply his pleasure, right? Now if we look at levels of consciousness, where is one’s own pleasure situated?

Bottom, anamoya, right? But you’re going to get that through interacting with others and caring for others’ situations, which is? Anamoya. That’s the place of niti, right? But dharma means it’s not for your pleasure, it’s for the higher purpose. You will automatically be pleased by performing your dharma. But it’s not about you getting the result.

Does this make sense? That’s dharma. Niti is where you’re trying to get the result. So there’s a difference here between niti and dharma. Niti is based on dharma, but the focus of niti is not dharma.

Right? Because all you care about is your enjoyment, while dharma is you care about following the law. And then from that, everybody will enjoy properly. But it’s not that you’re doing it to make it, it’s just this is what you’re supposed to do. Right? Does that make sense? So you’re doing what you want because you have that nature, so you want to engage your nature in the Lord’s service. But niti means it’s how to get what you want by dealing with nature. But your focus is not actually on the religiousness of the relationship. It’s simply how manipulating nature can you get what you want. Does that make sense? Well, dharma is how to engage nature so you elevate yourself.

Does that make sense? And in that elevation, automatically, everything else is taken care of. You perform dharma, artha-karma automatically are there. But dharma will elevate you to a higher platform. Does that make sense?

Duryodhana was afraid because he knew that although his army is bigger, Pandavas warriors are superior in quality. The great heroes of the Kauravas, Bhisma and Drona, had great attachment for the Pandavas and sided with Duryodhana because of political considerations.

Only. Thus, they were not wholeheartedly dedicated to the cause. Similarly was the situation with many other prominent soldiers from the Kauravas side, like Salya. He’s there just because he got tricked by Duryodhana. Otherwise, he was coming to join the Pandavas side. He’s a relative. Salya is an uncle of the Pandavas. So he’d naturally fight with the Pandavas. But he got tricked by Duryodhana. So like that, there are many warriors who are on the Pandavas, Duryodhana’s side because of political connections. But they would rather not be, and rather they would rather side with Yudhisthira. So he’s worried about that, even though he has a bigger army.

But generally speaking, success is on one’s commitment. The greater the commitment, the greater… It means if you’re not interested in the fight, you don’t fight very hard. You become angry, you fight very hard. That’s why the ksatriyas always, at the beginning of a fight, insult each other. So they become angry, so there’s a good fight. Otherwise, what’s the fun of fighting with someone who doesn’t really fight back?

It’s just like you sit down to take prasad. You love taking prasad and all the different elements, but the guy next to you couldn’t care less. He just says, Yeah, really nice, huh? Yeah, beautiful, yeah. That guy’s like, how can you get up and go somewhere else? So a ksatriya wants to fight with someone who’s fighting, and it has some meaning. Otherwise, what’s the use?

On the other hand, the generals from the Pandavas’ army were united and completely committed. They had a smaller army, but everybody’s committed. They all support the Pandavas, not simply just because of political… They feel they’re right. But Duryodhana’s side, some will feel he’s right, but most of them will actually be just because of political connections. With his carefully selected words, Duryodhana wanted to provoke Drona by the usage of the word pandu-putranam. He pointed out that the Pandavas were Drona’s disciples, and yet they were ready to fight and kill him. Duryodhana hoped that this would invoke the anger of Drona, and he will fight with full strength. Pandu-putranam, he’s there, so he’s the Pandu’s children, but they’re ready to fight with you.

Putra, disciple, child, but they’re ready to kill the father. So he’s trying in different ways to… This is what he’s meant before, calling on dharma, but he’s still using it through the medium of nitya. He’s not talking dharma for dharma. He’s talking dharma in using it as a tool in nitya. There’s a difference. That’s why one has to be able to tell what one is saying, why one’s saying it. Otherwise people get confused. I’ve heard it said that… You can take this Prabhupada quote and use it in so many ways. You have two parties that are arguing, but they’re using the same quote, so some devotees get bewildered and say, therefore, why should I study? No, but that’s the point. You must study so you know the difference. You know why Prabhupada used it here. What’s the point? Then you can say which party is using it correctly.

The Pandavas’ army is called great, although it is much smaller than the Kauravas. Duryodhana uses this word because he does not want Drona to be lenient in the battle. This shows also that envious persons like Duryodhana cannot tolerate even the smallest progress of the enemy. So he’s saying great, but even if he was out there with six men, he’d say great because it’s six more men that he’d want him to have. On the other side, it’s great because if you look at it, we have eleven Akshahinis, they only have seven, so we’re almost half again as much, so they won’t fight so hard. So he says great just so that they’ll fight hard. Because you have to remember, niti means you don’t just do how much is necessary, you do beyond what’s necessary to ensure that what you have isn’t changed.

Dharma is this person’s done something wrong and he may be punished, or in the case he may be killed, but everybody else in the family is left alone. Niti means if anyone else in the family could in the future give you trouble, you kill them also.

In other words, anything that could give you trouble in the future, you get rid of it now.

Does that make sense? Because you’re taking the religion of success, of gain, rather than the religion of the nature of the living entity. You understand? So it’s the religion of profit. So that’s why you always have to be careful, is that people will speak the philosophy, but they’re speaking it from the religion of profit. You know, we don’t mean here profit as in…

They’re following because of dharma.

So they’re doing because they’re taken care of by Duryodhana.

In other words, they are committed to the Kuru dynasty. And so the one who’s managing that is Duryodhana and his father. So they are giving them facility, position, and everything like that. Therefore, they’re committed. So in that way, they’re creating the environment, just like a lesser king is committed to the higher king as a vassal, because he’s protected by that higher king. You know, like that. So in that connection, then, they’re there. So from that aspect, but as far as their behavior, but their business is to instruct the king and support the king. So even if he’s wrong, they’re trying to get him to, but the results will be there. So they’ll perform their duty. And even if they die in the battlefield, they’ve acted according to dharma. They’ll be elevated. Now, whether Duryodhana gets elevated, that’s another thing.

Yes. But then what happens when you side with Krishna on this? If you’re going to apply it here, if you’re going to apply it here where they would change sides, they wouldn’t change sides. They’d just serve the dharma and go to the forest.

What is their dharma?

They’re vassals of the king. So their dharma as a vassal is to fight for the king. So that’s what they’re doing. So now whether they do that to please Krishna or not, that’s another thing.

You know what I’m saying? So this is the problem with our concept of justice is on the platform of niti.

Right? Because most justice is all connected with economics.

You understand? Otherwise, why is it that the courts can discuss principles of dharma and come up with niti resolutions or laws?

You know what I’m saying? So, therefore, we’re used to justice on the pranamoy platform. We don’t understand justice on the platform of dharma. Dharma is you perform your duty, whatever is your duty. Now, whether it gives you immediate benefit or not, that doesn’t matter. It will give you long term.

Right? That’s one thing. If you look at it on the bigger picture, you say, No, but it’s to please Krishna. But why did Krishna, why does, on this platform of this world, why does Krishna come? What is Krishna’s reason for coming?

Annihilate the demons. So unless there’s a nice war, how will it happen? If all the soldiers go over to the Pandavas’ side, is there a war?

No, but all those rascals, they’re all connected with those kings.

You know what I’m saying? So, therefore, there’s something to take care of.

Also, Bhisma, he’s one of the Vasus. He’s got work to do. So it’s time for him to go back. Abhimanyu is the son of the moon god. He only lent him for 16 days.

So 16 days is up.

So before the end of the 16th day, then he has to go back.

So many there, they’re demigods who came down to take part in the Lord’s removing all that. They have to go back.

You understand? So there’s so much bigger.

That’s why then the dharma is made as the focus, because sometimes you can’t understand what’s bigger. But at least if you perform your duty, you’re in connection with. Because when you’re dealing with, the Lord will descend into the material creation as a hoaxer. In other words, on that platform of liberation as Brahman. But Brahman will touch dharma, because dharma is the proper medium for interacting with Brahman. But the Lord doesn’t enter down into artha and kama. Right? Those are connected to dharma. And because dharma then is connected to a hoaxer, then it could be connected to the Lord. Does that make sense? So that’s why even though he’s following Niti and he’s following it properly, it’s still not connected to dharma, therefore it’s still wrong.

Yes?

Niti is the, will be, is ethics within.

So you have, in the realm of artha, you have economics, justice and ethics. Right? Or morality. So Niti is ethics.

Right?

Drstadyumna is called Drupada Putrena, which is a further prod for Drona, since Drona and Drupada were enemies. In his purport to verse three, Srila Prabhupada writes, Dronacarya had some political quarrel with King Drupada, the father of Drupadi, who was Arjuna’s wife. As a result of this quarrel, Drupada performed a great sacrifice, by which he received the benediction of having a son, who would be able to kill Dronacarya. Dronacarya knew this perfectly well, and yet, as a liberal brahmana, he did not hesitate to impart all his military secrets, when the son of Drupada, Drstadyumna, was entrusted to him for military education.

Duryodhana indirectly reprimanded his guru by using the words, Tarasusena dhimata, your intelligent disciple. Duryodhana suggests that Drona was deceived by Drstadyumna, who will now use all he had learned against his own teacher, because he’s looking at it from the platform of Niti. So Niti is, you do whatever it takes to get a profit. So from here, he’s looking at it that Duryodhana, Drstadyumna, is deceitful.

And Dronacarya was foolish.

Because here’s your enemy’s son, and that son was created just to kill you, and still you taught him. So that’s foolish. If you’re looking at Niti, it is. But if you’re looking at Dharma, it’s not, because he’s a teacher. He teaches. A teacher teaches a qualified student. If the qualified student is there, he can learn the knowledge, he behaves properly, he’s your student. That’s Dharma. So Drona is therefore appreciated for that. If he was like Duryodhana, he wouldn’t be appreciated. He’d just be another materialistic brahmana. You have that Kanaka that’s mentioned. You hear about him talking Niti, and that’s it. No one even cares or inquires about him. There’s no explanation of his background and birth and family line and that, because who cares?

He’s not following Dharma, he’s following Niti.

Does that make sense? So Dharma is something glorious and special. So therefore, he’s looking at it this way. So sometimes you might find people are arguing in that, and they’ll say, oh, but no, but he’s envious. When he’s not, he’s just doing what he’s supposed to do. Like, let’s say, one time the boys were criticized because they were very arrogant and thought themselves special because they were brahmins and everything like this. And on inquiry into the actual situation of this offense that they’ve committed and upset so many matajis in the community, then it was found out that the boys are walking along amongst themselves from the school and are coming, and they’re laughing and joking with each other and smiling. When they got to the courtyard, then, because there’s devotees in the courtyard, and especially grihasthas and ladies, they became quiet and shy and looked down and just went straight into the temple. So that’s according to Dharma. That’s how the brahmacaris, they don’t interact on such a frivolous platform. If there’s some service, they interact. Otherwise, they don’t interact.

So that’s Dharma. So there’s nothing wrong there. But from the others, it was taken from niti or from kama that the boys are there and they’re interacting and they’re smiling and all that energy, and we want to experience that energy also. So therefore, when they come into the courtyard, then they should look at us and smile, and we should get some of that. But because they didn’t give that to us, therefore, they’re arrogant. They think they’re special and different and superior. They don’t have to give us that. Just like you have ladies who consider themselves superior, they don’t talk to the other ladies. You understand? You understand what happened here? So this is an example of where a lower level of consciousness is applied to a higher level. And so on the lower level, it’s a mistake.

But on the higher level, it’s not. So the point is, Krishna consciousness, minimum, is supposed to work at Dharma.

It’s not supposed to work down below that.

So even we deal with niti and kama shastras, we’re looking at it from this is the nature of artha and the nature of kama. Therefore, as a dharmic person, you follow those. But you’re rooted in dharma. Does it make sense? This is the difference. So because of this, because this is how the scriptures are written, many people don’t understand and think they have other purposes. So therefore, duryodhana is misapplied in. Like that. That makes sense.

Can niti be, I just explained that, didn’t I?

Means, if you’re looking at, niti is defining the nature of artha. So therefore, then it’s usable. Chanakya niti, we use that. But it doesn’t stand on its own, it’s based on dharma. So that’s why chanakya niti is, it stands out because it is taken directly from the dharma shastras. But other niti shastras are explaining it, but they may not make that connection so obvious. Just like manu is the top of all the dharma shastras. And the others are then giving other aspects of it and bringing out, but it’s understood.

You’re approaching these other dharma shastras through manu. So in the same way as that, for the proper person, he’s approaching the niti shastras, but he’s using that connected to the dharma shastra.

Does that make sense?

According to Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana, Duryodhana said, the army has been arranged by the son of Drupada. Drupada, in order to kill you, has had his son Drstadyumna appear from the sacrifice. And then you, though knowing he was an enemy, taught that son the art of fighting. That was your foolishness. And he, the enemy, is very intelligent. Having learned from you how to kill you, what you have done has produced a problem for us now. In other words, it’s Duryodhana’s problem. If it wasn’t Duryodhana’s problem, why would he care? So his point is, foolishness means you create a problem for yourself.

So that’s why in niti shastra, the first thing they do is define what is a fool.

Because otherwise, someone who follows dharma is not a fool.

But Duryodhana is trying to define Drona as a fool. But by his logic, a niti is that you do whatever you need to do to get done what you want.

So according to that, then, in artha, it means, in other words, if Dronacharya gets killed, that’s not very profitable. That’s not prosperous. So that’s against niti. But it’s in line with dharma, because from that, because he followed everything, he’ll be elevated to heavenly planets.

Right? Does that make sense? So, therefore, that’s the level of consciousness that everybody’s given something that they can improve themselves. What you can see is that the consciousness makes the difference. That’s why it takes thousands and thousands of births, or more, to change the consciousness.

Right? He mentions the yogis can drill the respiration for millions of lifetimes and still not see the Lord. Why? Because their consciousness didn’t change. Right? So, thousands or millions of births as a karmi, then one might become a jnani. From that, then a yogi. Then it just goes back. It just keeps… Understand? So, slowly, slowly, slowly, it changes. You know? After so many lifetimes of you killing the animal, the next one he kills you, and you kill him, and he kills you, one day you go, this is stupid. Then you stop. But it takes a long time.

Thus, Duryodhana’s opinion is that one should perform his duty only as long as this is favorable for his opulence and sense enjoyment. Right? Opulence, artha, sense enjoyment, kama. So, dharma is only important in connection with these. No, but it’s the other way around. So, this is where he’s missed. Because he’s taken… That’s where he’s not pious.

He only follows dharma because it gets what he wants.

But when it doesn’t immediately get what he wants, he doesn’t follow it. So, therefore, he drops the niti.

You know? But at least, you could say one thing, at least he follows shastra. He has faith in the scriptures and the brahmins and everything. So, that way he’s… Because at least he’s doing it based on shastra. A modern man follows these things, and there’s no connection to shastra. And then, you know, so he’ll say what’s good or what’s bad, or get done whatever he wants. It’s not connected to shastra. So, therefore, there’s no elevating element at all.

To go against… Okay. To go against one’s selfish interest in the name of dharma is foolishness. Right? So, that’s how he defines a fool. But actually, that’s not. Someone who misses the point of dharma, that’s a fool.

Duryodhana compares the Pandava soldiers to Bhima and Arjuna because he fears them most. Bhima is especially dangerous as he is by nature more ferocious than Arjuna because he has taken dreadful vows. To kill all one hundred sons of Dhrtarastra, to drink blood from Dushasana’s heart, to wash Draupadi’s hair with the same blood, and to break Duryodhana’s thighs. So, these are all the terrible vows. So, he’s a bit worried since a lot of those have to do with him. He’s going to break his thighs, he’s going to kill him, and then he’s going to rip out his brother’s heart, drink the blood, and I guess whatever’s left over, wash his wife’s hair. I wonder if there’s some special, like, conditioning.

Actually, there was a countess I think in Hungary, or it was Hungary, but it’s down in what’s it in Switzerland? Bulgaria? Romania. Like that, she was famous for killing girls and bathing in the blood. I think at the end, the barons around figured out what was going on and they cemented her inside her room.

Because she was a countess, they wouldn’t kill her. They just cemented her up into the room.

Okay, verses 7 to 8. Thinking that Drona might perceive his fear from the Pandavas, so now it’s been the opening, now we’ve had Dhritarashtra’s fear, and now we’ve had Duryodhana’s fear.

And now we see the difference here is now we’re going to go through all this fear and everything in politics, but in no case does he surrender.

But then Arjuna develops fear and he surrenders.

Right? So this is this visada yoga. Right? Duryodhana, there’s visada, but no yoga. Right? But Krsna, but Arjuna, the visada is there, but there’s yoga. So the whole chapter is on this. So these are all the different kinds of fear. Now, the other side is he’s worried about the strength of their army and their commitment. At the same time, if he harasses them too much, they might get insulted or might be disheartened.

Right? Because they are ksatriyas. Right? Or in that ksatriya field. So now these next ones. Thinking that Drona might perceive his fear from the Pandavas’ army, Duryodhana boasted the power of his own soldiers. But since one should never underestimate the strength of an enemy, he mentioned only seven Kaurava heroes. He counted seventeen great soldiers from the Pandavas’ side. Right? In other words, he counted seventeen from the Pandavas’ side because he’s really worried about them. Right? But he only mentioned seven from his side, so it doesn’t also look like he’s too boasting and this and that. But at the same time, he’s only seeing those seven as comparable to those seventeen. So in his mind, he has eleven aksrahinis, but he only has seven main warriors. While the other sahai has seven aksrahinis, but they have seventeen. Right? Because remember, an atirati can fight with 60 ,000 soldiers at once.

Yes? Sometimes we hear that aksrahini, comparing to the strength of the armies, the Kaurava army was comparable to even the elephants and fish. Yes. But the point is, what is it made out of? Is it actually a timangila, or it’s a whole bunch of small fish that have all got together and look like a big fish? Right? Does that make sense? I think I saw that as an advertisement showing how by cooperating together you can do something. So these small fish took the shape of a big fish and scared off a medium -sized fish.

In this way, Duryodhana wanted to incite Drona to take the battle seriously, but not to discourage him by excessively praising the enemies. Right? Because probably he would have gone on more. Maybe there’s more than that. You know, but he’s worried. By glorifying his warriors, Duryodhana faced a difficult dilemma. It was very important who among them will be mentioned first. Right? Because you’re dealing with ksatriyas. This is a big thing. So we see here how clever he was. That’s why when in the Rajasuya sacrifice you had Nakula and Sahadeva, they dealt with greeting the guests and seating them. They didn’t just have seating guests. Hey, just get some brahmacarya to do that. No, but it’s so important that you seat the wrong person in the wrong place, you could start a war.

So that’s why the top people are doing this. This is a big mistake. I’ve seen it myself. In the Gaudiya tradition, when prasad serving is going on, then the senior people are doing the service. And depending upon the nature of it, even the senior most is there seeing if he’s the host. If not, he’ll sit, but he’ll still have his eye on the serving and watch and just be commenting and making, giving direction. We have the idea of serving prasad. That’s service, so that’s menial. So therefore, you know, let the new bhaktas do it. But in the Gaudiya traditions, if someone’s not second initiated, technically he’s not supposed to serve prasad to people who are second initiated.

Because he won’t know the etiquette.

Does that make sense? So that’s the kind, this is what we’re dealing with here. So it’s not, this is something very serious. So it is a problem. So he’s also, you can see how clever he is. At the same time, just how diplomatic he is, just trying to get his own work done. So even to this point, we’ve spent so much detail that everything will go perfect. And which is the proper way to do it. Right? Because technically it is according to the right way of doing things, the dharma. But his motives are not correct. Therefore, it’ll all be lost. While glorifying his warriors during… Okay. Being an expert diplomat, he selected Drona since he was a brahmana. Bhisma, being a ksatriya, would not feel offended by this. Because Bhisma and Drona are the superior. But which one do you mention first?

Dronacarya is a brahmana. Yes. How come he’s fighting? How come he’s fighting? Well, technically he’s not supposed to be fighting.

He can teach. He can go on the battlefield. He can give advice. He can even make strategy, but he wouldn’t fight. Right? But as soon as he’s there to fight, then he’s treated like a ksatriya. But still, he’s a brahmana who’s a ksatriya. Therefore, he’ll be senior to Bhisma. So why his decision to fight if he thought Duryodhana was… Because he’s harassing so much and insulting his practice of dharma. Because as you said, the unscrupulous person will quote dharma to a religious person to get them to do what you want.

Wiser, but still it’s dharma. Because you’re still saying wiser means what? What is your wiser? What would be the effect of your wiser?

But the point is, is what he’s trying to do. You see that. But the point is, is that what is drawn as alternative?

Just be a brahmana. That means he leaves the king and goes out to the village.

That’s what it means. So he could do that. But why did he come to the kingdom in the first place? He was such a brahmana.

That came afterwards.

Why was there a problem with Drupada?

Yes, but why did he go to Drupada?

He wanted wealth so he could take care of his family.

So he was a brahmana who was on that level, but there was still that element because his field is the martial sciences, so there’s that element of that little bit of passion and pride is there. So he couldn’t handle the element of others insulting his family due to lack of money.

So he could have at that point continued his brahminical nature on that level and just, you know, what can you do?

He’s purely a brahmana, but there’s so many ranges of brahmana. How do you find brahmana? Brahmana is one who knows the scriptures, teaches the scriptures. Now, why he knows and teaches, that’s another thing. That’s his level of consciousness.

You know what I’m saying? So it’s not that he does that so he’s not a brahmana. Devotees do that all the time. Oh, he did that. Oh, he never was a guru. Oh, he never was a sannyasi. Oh, he never was a devotee. But that’s based on the mundane platform. Who said he wasn’t a devotee? Just because you take morality as the supreme, you know, subject, that doesn’t mean it has any weight or power over devotional service.

You know, they’re taking it, being moral is the natural position. But no, devotional service is the natural position. But in the material world, not being devotional and doing things wrong, that’s the standard setting. So if somebody does something wrong here, that’s normal.

It’s just like if you’re in a jail. Which would you be… You hear stories about in a prison, right? A high security prison. And some of the prisoners harass each other or beat each other up or even kill each other. Are you going to be surprised? No. Now, what if you heard a story about a prisoner who’s there and he just behaves very nicely with everyone, is considerate of everybody else, you know, tries to stop the fighting, tries to create, you know, harmony between them. Would that be noticed? Why?

It’s against the flow. It’s against the flow. But just because it’s against, oh, this guy’s so weird, or people think it’s actually something special. It’s appreciated. It’s appreciated. Even other prisoners will appreciate it. Right? Anybody who’s got a little bit of character. Right? And especially the wardens and others will appreciate it. Right? What will happen to this guy? He’ll get out earlier than the others. Right? So now, if in the material world, using the same principle, since this is Durga, it’s a prison, then people being bad is normal. So one should not be surprised.

But if somebody actually tries to practice devotional service and behave in a proper way, that would be noted as special.

Right? Now, who would take it that, you know, that wasn’t real, and that it’s normal to behave bad, and that’s a standard?

Who would take that and only see that?

A gross materialist.

So now, apply that into this position.

It means the consciousness is materialistic in this particular area. They’re overwhelmed by the idea that material life is standard.

And therefore, within material life, you know, doing what you’re supposed to do, that’s established by the other members of the prison. Right? The prisoners themselves establish their own culture. You know, how you dress, how you do, what kind of tattoos you wear, what kind of hairdo, like that. You do something different, then that’s wrong.

You know, that a guy who does something right according to outside the prison, you know, he’s weird. He doesn’t fit in.

You understand? So that’s the point, is that the consciousness is material at that point, and so they can’t appreciate the devotee behaving properly. So when he stops behaving properly, they’ll say, oh, that was never real, rather than, no.

Why not the inverse? Why wouldn’t you take it, well, if, you know, you’re in the material world and doing all these things is normal, I mean, is not normal, then when he does devotional activities, then all this bad activity wasn’t real.

It was illusory. Why don’t we look at it that way? Why do we look at it, oh, the brahmachari got married, yeah, well, it’s all nonsense, all these brahmacharis trying to be celibate, and this and that, and it’s all just an act, you know, it’s like that. Why don’t they just be honest and just, you know, you know what I’m saying? This is all mundane consciousness.

But they’re using these terms of devotional philosophy, and they have a purpose to do. Why? I can’t control my senses, so, therefore, if anybody else can control their senses, I’ll look bad. If nobody controls their senses, I look normal. In fact, since I was the first one to not control my senses, I will be senior.

Does that make sense? So, it’s materially motivated. They’re using niti.

You understand? So, the ideas were able to tell the difference between these things, they can analyze the difference.

Does that make sense?

To further encourage Drona, Duryodhana next named Drona’s father, Lakrita, and Drona’s son, Ashwatthama.

The next was Vikarna, who was not a great warrior like Drona, Bhisma, and Karna, but as he was the only one who objected when at the gambling match, Draupadi was insulted, Duryodhana was worried that he might join the Pandavas. By listing his name amongst the best of the ksatriyas, Duryodhana wanted to flatter Vikarna and thus secure his loyalty. In this way, by mentioning the names of seven prominent heroes, Duryodhana tried to please Drona and to enforce the fighting spirit of his key warriors. So even Vikarna, he just mentioned because he’s the only brother who complained that this is unjust. So he didn’t want him to go to the other side. Still, even as it was, I think one brother went to the other side. I can’t remember his name. He wasn’t in the Hundred Sons. He was the son of a maidservant.

Yuyutsu, yeah. But you see, he’s a great warrior.

So he survived the battle. He was one of the seven or nine people that survived. So he went back and took care of Dhritarashtra and Gandhari. But he can’t be king because he was, you know, son of a maidservant.

Like that. You know, like Vidura. He’s in that position.

But they’re in that line. They learn the things that the others do and all that, but they don’t take the position.

Okay. Verse nine. In his purport to this verse, Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura reveals that Duryodhana actually confirms what Lord Krsna says later in Gita. Therefore, get up, prepare to fight and win glory. Conquer your enemies and enjoy a flourishing kingdom. They are already put to death by my arrangements and you, O Savyasacca, can be but an instrument in the fight. Bhagavad-gita 11.33. The word cakra-jivitaha is used in the sense because that’s from this verse. That the soldiers are ready to sacrifice their lives for Duryodhana’s sake. However, the literal meaning is those who have given up their lives. So here it’s meaning they’ve given up their lives for the cause. They’ve given their lives to be used for the cause. So technically you’re saying they’re already dead. But you generally use it in the term of they’re here to sacrifice their life and all that. But technically it means the one who’s already sacrificed it. So Visvanatha’s pointing out Duryodhana’s already confirmed that all these other great warriors who are sacrificing life are already dead. So it’s the same thing Krsna says later. They’re all dead. You can just be an instrument.

Thus Duryodhana admitted that he wanted to achieve his selfish goals even at the cost of the lives of his own men. In a purport to Srimad-Bhagavatam 116.34 Srila Prabhupada states The asuras want to enjoy a life of sense gratification even at the cost of others’ happiness. In order to fulfill this ambition the asuras, especially atheistic kings or state executive heads try to equip themselves with all kinds of deadly weapons to bring about a war in a peaceful society.

Both Duryodhana and Arjuna observed the armies before the battle. Their reactions were opposite.

Duryodhana was happy to see that many noble ksatriyas were ready to die for his cause. As a pious man Arjuna felt compassion for both enemies and friends. He was horrified that so many soldiers were to be slaughtered for the Pandavas’ sake. Arjuna fought only after Krsna personally guaranteed that this is the best thing for him to do. Duryodhana, on the other hand, was resolved to fight even though Bhisma, Drona, and Vidura repeatedly attempted to persuade him out of his plans. So you can see there’s always these opposites on that.

Duryodhana is in anxiety that he may lose the battle because the people aren’t committed properly. While Arjuna is worried that so many people are going to die unnecessarily just in a fight over who’s the king. But Duryodhana doesn’t mind. Everybody can die as long as at the end of the day he’s still king. He’s cool with that. In fact, everybody did die. There were only a few guys left. And he was one of them at the time. And then, you know, then he died. But otherwise, he died after his whole army was… There wasn’t anybody left. That was it. I think it was Krtavarma, I think, may have been the only one left.

And then, so, he didn’t have compassion. Arjuna had compassion. And Arjuna only fought after his authority told him it was all right. And Drona and Duryodhana, his authorities were telling him, don’t fight, but he fought anyway. Right? So, you see, great differences in the consciousness of…

Verse 10. Srila Prabhupada and Srila Visvanatha, Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana translate the word aparyaptam as immeasurable. The strength of the Kaurava army is immeasurable because of bejewelous protection. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura translates aparyaptam as insufficient.

In this case, the meaning is our strength is insufficient because out of attachment for the Pandavas, Bhisma is not fully committed to the battle. Therefore, we depend on Drona for the outcome of the fight. Thus, with a single word, Duryodhana managed to encourage both Bhisma and Drona. In other words, you’re saying in here, it’s very, very, very important to note because you may have seen in other places written where the…

where it’s discussed that people may have a doubt about the acaryas, that they seem to have different points of view. But they don’t have different points of view. They’re discussing different things. You see, Baladeva, like Prabhupada, is talking about what is the observable there, what’s practical, and the hidden within the observable.

Right? And then, Visvanatha is, in these two cases, then is discussing what’s even more subtle than that, you know, so that that is brought out. Does that make sense? So that’s brought out that actually he’s confirming that everyone will be dead and this and that, but that’s not going to be his active role in the…

How do you say? The pastime. In his mind, he thinks they’re insufficient.

But what he’s saying and what he’s trying to use is, you know, we’re so great, we’re so powerful, therefore everyone should be inspired. But what he’s saying is that because you guys side with the Pandavas and you’re in spirit, then our army’s insufficient.

Right? So both of these are being used. So there’s not a difference, they’re bringing out different aspects. Very important. If you ever read the works of the previous Acharyas, if you ever come up with a conclusion that they’re saying different things, then you’re a rascal. That’s all. They never say something different, but they might talk from different points of view. But those points of view are easily reconciled.

Right? That’s the whole point. Jiva Goswami is a perfect example of this. Narada Muni. Jiva Goswami, Rupa Goswami make statements that seemingly aren’t supported by any other Pandavas, and not by scriptural quotes that anybody knows of, that they’re using. So he, believing in Rupa Goswami, finds those Shastra quotes and presents them to show Rupa Goswami that he’s correct. And Narada Muni, you give him any scripture and the two have verses that are contradictory to each other, and he’ll show you how they’re resolved and how they’re not contradictory. They’re just talking different aspects. Because the Shastras give all the different aspects that are there that somebody could approach that verse from. Right? Because your presentation of his karma is going to be different than if it’s jnana, or different if it’s yoga, or different if it’s bhakti. There’s going to be a difference. So the Shastras describe all these.

So it’s very, very important to know because throughout here we’re going to be quoting Prabhupada, Baladeva and Visvanatha.

Six, yeah?

In different angles, yeah? You could say like that.

Yeah, and much of the time the verses are overlapping. Even when they have a different anuccheda, a different how do you say, philosophical point to establish, sometimes they’ll use exactly the same verse. Because that verse establishes so many points. So if someone brings out a Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur spoke on the first verse of Bhagavatam for 90 days, just to show that there are so many angles. Because somebody complained, oh you always say the same thing, it’s always Krishna and changing Hare Krishna. So this other person thought he was a bit of a scholar so then he showed, no, we can do that also. But the essence is changing.

So one verse has so much in it and then different verses sometimes emphasize different things. Because in the verse so much is there but there’s going to be the direct meaning, indirect meaning and hidden meaning. So other verses may take what’s the indirect meaning in that verse that was the direct meaning and make the indirect, their direct meaning. Or someone will take the hidden meaning and make that the direct meaning. So it may seem to be contradictory but it isn’t. Very important.

According to Duryodhana’s own calculation the Kauravas had only 7 powerful warriors against 17 Maharatas from the Pandavas side. The main Kaurava heroes Bhishma, Drona and Kripa favored the Pandavas so that’s 3 out of 7. And then one of them he mentions Vikarna he wasn’t such a great warrior. So that leaves only 3.

Favored the Pandavas who were thus divided in their allegiance. Bhishma in particular had announced to the world he would not kill the Pandavas. So already it’s a problem because the point is he’s trying to kill the Pandavas. Bhishma won’t do it. He’s his main soldier. Karna was completely devoted to Duryodhana but he vowed not to fight for as long as Bhishma was present on the battlefield for his ego. So if the two of them went on the battlefield together then that would have been a problem. But due to their ego then Karna wouldn’t fight as long as Bhishma was on the battlefield. And Bhishma is not going to retire because he’s a Kshatriya. So that means until he’s killed then he won’t go on the battlefield. So that also now is a major problem. So even here Karna who’s completely committed he will only fight under certain conditions which is quite late in the war. So that means then now your seven is dwindling very quickly.

Another consideration was Krishna, the Supreme Lord took the side of the Pandavas. It was obvious that the pious Kaurava leaders Bhishma, Drona and Kripa will be hesitant to attack him. So they’re going to try to avoid attacking him because even if they did they know it’s no benefit so it’s something to watch out for.

In verse 11 Duryodhana says All of you must now give full support to grandfather Bhishma as you stand at your respective strategic points of entrance into the phalanx of the army. According to Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur Duryodhana meant that the success in the battle depends on Bhishma. So because before he was talking to Drona but in his mind it’s Bhishma who’s going to be the success. So that’s why he’s not too bent out of shape that Karna won’t fight as long as Bhishma’s there because he feels Bhishma’s the one that’s going to do everything.

In this way Duryodhana simultaneously encouraged Bhishma and conveyed to Drona and all others that they must fight with full strength because otherwise he’s there so they don’t have to fight. No, but he needs support.

Bhishma had to be protected because he was the commander and chief of the corps of his army and his presence was of vital importance because the commander stays in the center so he’s the last one to get attacked. So we say the king goes out on the battlefield means he leaves the army out but in the fight he stays in the center. Because if you kill the king the war’s over so therefore you put your other soldiers around like that.

Another reason was that Bhishma vowed not to fight with a woman since Sikhandi was considered a woman the grandfather had to be protected from him because Sikhandi is a maharata.

Sikhandi is the brother of Drstadyumna so they’re all very powerful that family but Bhishma knows that Sikhandi was Amba in her last life and she’s still conscious of that.

And so therefore that he sees that connection.

Because generally a man who was a woman in her last life was thought of the man at the time of death so you could say well okay every man is that but here it’s that there’s that connection in consciousness that it’s the continuation of trying to kill Bhishma so you can’t do it as Amba so then she comes as Sikhandi.

Point is he’s a man he’s on the battlefield but it’s still why is he there just to kill Bhishma. So that Bhishma won’t fight because he sees one last life she was Amba right he doesn’t want to disturb her because he did wrong her and at the same time is Sikhandi yes was born a woman and only by the blessing of the yaksha then it got changed.

But he’s a man you have to deal with him as a man.

Duryodhana declared that his life depends exclusively on Bhishma because he knew that the ksatriyas feel proud and empowered when someone seeks their protection. So if you tell them oh I’m dependent on you then that makes them more they fight more. Duryodhana praised Bhishma indirectly while talking to Drona because he knew that the indirect praise is more pleasant because generally you praise yeah indirect means it’s like someone tells you you’re nice but then you hear from someone else that they told them that you were nice that gives you more pleasure. So here it’s that you don’t have to wait for it to come through the grapevine you talk to Drona loud enough that Bhishma can hear while you’re glorifying him so that will be more. Yes He says that Bhishma vowed not to fight with a woman Yes Does that mean generally a ksatriya might not have a problem fighting with a woman? No A ksatriya won’t fight with a woman but the point is he’s made it very clear he considers Shikhandi a woman so that’s the problem so none of them will fight with a woman right but he’s made it very clear of her standing but at the same time Shikhandi is in a man’s body and is out there he’s armed and he’s dangerous right Shikhandi armed you know what I’m going to say? yeah here okay so we’ll end here and yeah and then tomorrow we’ll continue with twelve to twenty and twenty-one to twenty no twenty-one to twenty-six confronted with attachments yeah okay tomorrow we have to try to keep it more on the Gita points and the points will remain here if there’s something there nice but make the question very exact and that and so we can get more exact answer right because otherwise we’re not going to get through the Gita we have seventeen weeks to get through the whole Gita right and this is what we would consider one of the lesser chapters so we have today and tomorrow to get through it right but then we’ll have six days on the second chapter so different things would go because that’s where means here we’re looking at the cultural elements and the nature of consciousness that creates that right we’ll go to the second chapter and on then we’ll be looking at the philosophy you know that is supposed to be driving the consciousness okay yes so make sure you how you say read the the verses and purports and read this so either read the verses read this then go back and read them again or read this first then read the Gita and then you know we’ll hear it here something like that what is this ah Duryodhana consciousness was Annamaya he was using higher realms Duryodhana is Annamaya basically but he also cares for his family so therefore his brother is his father he just doesn’t want the Pandavas involved therefore you’d say basically he’s situated means he runs he performs his duties in Dharma but he’s he’s he’s more focused on Artha than he is on Dharma in this case for his own personal benefit but what he’s trying to get is for others also so he doesn’t want to sacrifice his brothers like that but you know in this case we’ll end up having to okay so we’ll end here and then continue tomorrow

Sign In

Register

Reset Password

Please enter your username or email address, you will receive a link to create a new password via email.