Bhagavad-gītā Seriatim #76

Bhagavad-gītā Seriatim #76

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

SAHA NAVAVATU SAHA NAO BHUNAKTU SAHA VIJANKARA VAVAHAI TEJASVI NAVADI TAMASKAMA VIDVISHAVAHAI OM SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI OM JAYA SHRI KRISHNA CHETANYA PRABHUPADITYANANDA SHRI ADVAITHA GADADHARA SHIVA SANIGAURA BHAKTA BRINDA HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA KRISHNA KRISHNA HARE HARE HARE RAMA HARE RAMA RAMA RAMA HARE HARE Page 33. Food in the mode of goodness is prepared with pure ingredients, cooked in pure consciousness, and served by pure devotees in a proper environment. Such food is purifying and brings health and longevity. In contrast, the food in the mode of passion results in distress, misery and disease. According to Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, distress refers to the suffering felt while eating foods in the mode of passion, misery refers to the despair one feels after eating, and disease refers to the future results.

The next three verses, 11 to 13, describe different types of sacrifices performed according to the modes of nature. Sacrifices performed according to the scriptures without expecting results are in the mode of goodness. Sacrifices performed for some material benefit or for the sake of pride are in the mode of passion. Sacrifices performed without faith, disregarding the scriptures, without distribution of spiritual food, chanting of Vedic hymns and remuneration of the priests are considered to be in the mode of ignorance.

What would be the impetus for performing a sacrifice without desire for results? Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana explains, quote, One should concentrate the mind thinking this sacrifice should be done wholly, done solely because of the instructions in the Vedas directing me to do so. It is not to be done for achieving results. So that the Vedas say, we have to remember, Krishna is the compiler of the Vedas. So by following the Vedas, you’re following Krishna. So it’s not just that it’s dry. See, in the West, following ritual is dry because the ritual is man-made.

So man-made ritual naturally become boring because it will be created for a particular time, place or circumstance. While the Vedic injunctions coming from the Lord then are eternal. So they don’t get that aspect. So it’s not a matter, well, it’s dry. What about the feelings, all this? Isn’t it a feeling that you’re following the Vedas? Is that not a purpose, right? I have the feeling, I want to do this to please this person. I want to do it to please myself. What about if I’m doing it to please Krishna, right, by following the Vedas? Does that make sense? So it’s not a matter of, oh, then it’s just, it’s dry. It’s just a, it’s just a drama where nobody actually has any feelings. Like that. One can’t actually get to the point where there’s no feelings. There’s no such thing. You know, the person who’s, he’s so impersonal. He doesn’t deal with anyone. That’s all because of his feelings. He’s just thinking of himself. So he’s very personal. Just your persona doesn’t have anything to do with it. That’s all. You understand? So when we define impersonal, we mean we’re left out of it. But there’s no such thing as anybody doing anything that’s impersonal. Even the impersonalist is following that path because of his own personal needs and desires.

So there’s no such thing actually as impersonal.

There’s impersonalist philosophy, but there’s no such thing as doing something except for that. So one should do it because this is what I’m supposed to do, right? And if I do what I’m supposed to do, others will do what they’re supposed to do, and it will work together because Krishna’s plan is complete.

So if everyone does what they’re supposed to, it’ll end up with something very nice. All right? Does that make sense? But it’s not just because I’m doing it. It’s because it pleases Krishna. So the mode of goodness is I’m doing it because I’m directed to. And because Krishna’s giving that direction, I’m doing it to please him. That’s devotion. All right? Does that make sense? So the devotion and the mode of goodness go together very well.

The next six verses, 14 to 19, because devotional service means nice karma, mode of goodness means nice karma. So the two match very nicely. It’s the basis. It works very well. The next six verses, 14 to 19, describe the austerities performed in the modes, right? Because sacrifice means you’ve done something voluntarily, giving up the result for someone else. So that’s the point that stands out in sacrifice, right?

The austerities performed in transcendental faith without expecting material benefits and done only for the sake of Krishna are in the mode of goodness and are threefold, right? So austerity here is, it’s, it’s the sacrifice, the emphasis is that you’re following the rules because they’re directed in the Veda, you know, without desire for results. Okay? So the point is, is that you’re doing an activity without desiring results. That activity is recommended in the Vedas, right? Austerity will mean what duties you’re supposed to be doing. You understand? There’s a slight difference, you know, not much, but the slight difference. They’re connected. The one is that this is how sacrifice works. It’s generic. You’re following the scriptures like that without desire for results. So whatever that is, then that’s sacrifice. So that element that I’m giving, I’m doing what I, I’m restricting my life according to scriptures and giving results to others, right? That will be sacrifice. Austerity is that this is what I’m supposed to do. This is my duty and I do my duty. Right?

So then in the mode of goodness are threefold. Yes. Do we also hear austerity used in situations where people are actually not doing what they’re supposed to be doing? I mean, it means you can use the word, means there’s what the word is for, and then there’s how it may be used. You know, like if I say, wow, today’s feast was really, I mean, it was like really bad, you know, what do I mean? It wasn’t a feast. No.

I didn’t like it. You didn’t like it. Anyone else? It was really good. You know what I’m saying? In other words, there’s what is the original uses the words, and then there’s how colloquially we may use it. So austerity or the sacrifice will mean that you’re doing something for a higher cause. That higher cause is supposed to be God. Then next down for that least mode of goodness. Right? And then mode of passion is better than ignorance. So it’s going to give you trouble. Right? But it can also just mean, it means the generically you’re giving up something for someone else. So that could mean anything, you know, like that. Does that make sense? You know, you bought an ice cream, you bought one for the kid. The kid always stupidly drops it. Right? You know, that’s always what they have to do. So you give your ice cream to them. Right? So that’s sacrifice, you know, but, but it’s on a lower level, you know, depending on what’s your motive. Does that make sense? So, so then just like that. So that sacrifice has a ritual. Now you have the rituals that are given in the Vedas, but you could also have manmade rituals. You know what I’m saying? So someone’s doing a sacrifice, though it’s by manmade rituals for their own motives to gods that don’t really necessarily exist to all these different things. You could call it a sacrifice, but it’s not actually what it’s meant for. Does that make sense? You know, it’s just, it would be another example would be like calling an ambassador, a car, right? You know what I’m saying? You know, you, you could in the longest stretch of the term like that, but in reality, that’s another thing, you know what I’m saying? So, so same with austerity, like Prabhupada will say is like, in the wintertime, the girls are out with very skimpy clothing. That’s very austere, you know, but it’s austerity in the mode of ignorance because it’s based on the body, you know, so you can say it’s like that. Does that make sense? So that’s why then all the modes are there. So it’s defined the mode of goodness. That’s the actual definition. Mode of passion is kind of, you’ve started to, you, you’re doing the right thing, but the wrong motive, right? Goodness is the right activity, right motive. Mode of passion is right activity, wrong motive. And mode of ignorance, wrong activity, wrong motive.

Does that make sense? Yes. Could you describe the principle difference between the sacrifice and the austerity? I think we already did, didn’t we? Isn’t that how we opened the first 10 minutes?

So, okay.

So the austerity will mean that you’re performing your prescribed duties. That’s austerity, that you do that instead of doing something whimsically. Sacrifice means that you’re performing those duties for the benefit of someone else. That’s the difference.

Austerities are not related to others. Austerities are not related to others, means… They’re not necessarily related to others.

That means others are already always connected, but it’s just a matter of…

See, it becomes difficult when we spend 10 minutes describing it, and then you’ll ask questions not based on that. So I would just listen and let’s see. Austerities of the body. The worship of Krishna, brahmins, the spiritual masters, and superiors like father and mother. Cleanliness, simplicity, celibacy, and non-violence. So that means how the body is controlled, right? So one is respecting others, because otherwise one wants to respect oneself. So that’s not austerity, but it’s respecting others. So those senior to yourself. So Krishna, the brahmin, spiritual master, superiors like mother, father, any one is superior. So that respect of those senior to yourself, that’s an austerity, because otherwise you’d rather not do that, or you’d rather you be worshipped. Right? Cleanliness, because the body is kept clean like that, because its natural tendency is to become dirty, but you keep it always in a clean state. Simplicity, you deal with it in such a way that it’s not complicated.

Right? Simplicity doesn’t mean it’s not sophisticated. It just means that it’s very direct between what you’re doing and its results. Right? It means you’re doing something, it gives a result very easily. The situation you’re in, it’s very natural to do that, and very naturally gets that result. That is simple. Complicated is there’s all kinds of obstacles that can get in the way.

Celibacy means that the senses are controlled and just used in what they’re supposed to be used for. Right? Nonviolence means it will be in connection with the Lord. Right? There’ll be a connection with the soul. Right? If you see things according to the soul, then there’s no violence. Right? You see things according to authority, according to scriptures, there’s no violence. Right? So, in other words, violence means it’s not progressive. And if it’s progressive, it’s nonviolent. Yes? I’m asking simplicity in management, that that needs to be straightforward, because… Straightforward? But what do you mean by straightforward? Not, you know, diplomacy… What’s wrong with diplomacy? Just like am I going to tell you that that chutter is brand new and it looks like you just bought it yesterday, so it’s kind of a little stupid.

That’s non-diplomacy.

So, is that good?

No. So, why you give the term diplomacy, why is that bad? What’s the problem with diplomacy? In here… Yes?

Crooked. So, what defines it as crooked? Ulterior motive. Ulterior motive. So, what does that ulterior motive mean, according to what was then described here? You want something for yourself. You want something for yourself. So, when it’s diplomacy in the mode of passion, it’s a problem. But if it’s a mode of goodness, because it’s your duty…

You know what I’m saying? You know what I’m saying? So, the point is, is when you’re dealing with others, this idea that, oh, it’s based on facts and it’s, you know, straightforward, I say whatever I want, but I say whatever I want is my own feeling. It’s not for the benefit of someone else. So, they’re saying, no, you should just be honest and open, means I’m saying that about you because I don’t want anything hidden, because I want to know everything, because if I know things, I’ll feel more safe. So, if there’s something I don’t know. So, it’s motivated on my path that I’m, by position I’m saying that. Someone else, no, we just, I thought we were, you know, had a relationship, we’re just straightforward, means I don’t want to take the trouble or be disturbed by that I have to actually be careful of what I say, you know, and control myself. You know what I’m saying? So, therefore, the modern concepts of things we have to be very, very careful about, because why are they there? You know, there may be some good element. Okay, so that there’s, the government runs things, you don’t know why things are running and you’re being controlled and all that. No, it’s good that you know basically what’s going on, but you don’t need to know detail, because what does it matter? Because if we need to know what the government detail, why don’t we know what our neighbor’s detail is? You know what I’m saying? So, there’s a weakness to this because it’s not based on the Vedas. So, we always have to understand that as the modern, it always will fall short, always. It’s not a matter, well, no, it’s pretty good. No, it always will fall short, because it does not see the bigger picture. It does not. You know what I’m saying? Yudhisthira Maharaj saw the world, how that worked, all living entities on the planet and how this planet worked in connection with the rest of the universe. That’s administration. But you tell me of one country that sees their administration in connection with the whole world, let alone the universe, right? So, that means you’re going to fall short. So, we have to be very careful about these points, because they’re based on this very first point. Austerity of the body. Worship of Krishna, Brahmins as spiritual masters and superiors, like mother and father. Here we’re talking mother and father, let alone a temple president, a sannyasi, a G.B .C. or guru.

You know what I’m saying? But if they’re in question, then why? Nobody cares for the mother and father. Why? Because positions higher than that, Brahmin spiritual masters are in question. So, why won’t the lower? And so, is that creating this fabulous, wonderful, you know, social interaction? No. So, that’s because there’s no austerity of the body.

So, simplicity simply means it’s straightforward. It’s not complicated. You know what I’m saying? You wipe the floor. You pick up a rag and wipe the floor. Complicated is I have to call in some outside people, bring in old machines and do this and that. That’s complicated.

That’s another thing. How does simplicity and that, what is there? You’re not understanding. You’re connecting the thing. Conceal the truth. What is truth? What is truth? Yeah, but if you go like that, that means then you don’t know. And so, then using, concealing the truth is just, it just sounds good. In other words, that’s diplomacy. That’s 101 percent of diplomacy. Say, oh, it conceals the truth because it sounds good. Everyone’s going to go, oh, yes, truth is important. Why? Because in Kali Yuga, it’s the only element of the religious principles left. So, you know that you can get support saying that. That’s pure diplomacy. You understand? So, what’s truth?

Krishna. What are you going to say? But is that what they want in that meeting together? You get all your people together and have your committee and have a meeting. Is that the truth they want to hear? No, they want facts.

So, to them, facts are truth. No, facts the environment. What you do with the environment, that’s the actual point. I have a knife. I put it on the table. Is that dangerous? No, it’s just a knife. Is it beneficial? But it’s not doing anything. You understand? So, depending on what you do with it, that defines if it’s good or bad. But they’re just saying that facts themselves stand on their own with this great light shining down through the clouds, that that itself, if I know the facts, then everything’s done. No, they know the facts, they know the situation. Now, what was done in that situation, what they’re going to do in the situation, that’s different. So, what they do is they’ll say, these are the facts. So, whatever the person did, that doesn’t matter. And now, whatever we do, no one can question, because the position of responsibility for action in the environment, that’s not taken. So, that’s diplomacy. That’s not truth.

You know what I’m saying? So, it’s only talk that they say truth and truth is good and diplomacy is bad. That’s all talk by cheaters.

So, if diplomacy is used for Krishna’s pleasure, it’s fine? Yes, but it’s not a matter of just Krishna’s pleasure, but it’s Krishna’s pleasure according to your duty.

Like that. So, if it’s your duty, just like, you know, everybody’s got to know everything about everyone else. It’s not your duty. So, therefore, you wanting to know is not the mode of goodness. And so, it’ll be really hard to say it’s for Krishna.

You know what I’m saying?

Austerity of speech, words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, not agitating to others, and also the recital of Vedic literature, not agitating to others. Right? So, that means it has to be diplomatic.

Diplomatic simply means you use the proper words for the proper time in the proper situation.

That’s what diplomacy means. Now, that is used by people for their own purposes, so it gets a bad name, but diplomacy shouldn’t get the bad name. The people that are using it in that way should get the bad name.

Right? Also, the recital of the Vedas. So, truthful means in connection with the Veda, in connection with the Lord. It’s not. It’s false. Right? Just like that point where they asked Prabhupāda, this, you know, just man on the street asked Prabhupāda, you know, if you know everything, the spiritual master knows everything, how many windows in the Empire State Building? He said, how many windows in a mirage? Because it’s not real. It’s connected to Krishna. It’s real. It’s not connected to Krishna. It’s an illusion. So, truth not, facts not connected to Krishna are illusion, and they will have that effect.

Does that make sense? Pleasing is spoke very nicely, right? It’s eloquent, like that. Beneficial, that there’s the spiritual benefit by following it, right? One will be uplifted. One will move forward, like that.

You know, even, yeah. Austerities of the mind, satisfaction, simplicity, gravity, self -control, and the purification of the existence. So, satisfaction is what you have, you’re comfortable with. Because if you’re not comfortable with that, you’ll never be comfortable with anything, because you’re always in a state of having something, right? And so, if you’re always in a state of trying to get more because you’re not satisfied with what you have, you’ll always be doing that, right? So, the mind should be satisfied with what it has. Then you properly perform your duties. Then you can do, if you’re satisfied with what you have, you can then naturally do work where you’re not looking for the result, right? The man who has tons of money, he can come to the temple and do things for the temple. That will generate money and this and that, and he’s happy, because he’s got enough. He’s doing something for someone else, you understand?

Like that. So, satisfaction then makes it so that one can do all these other things very nicely.

Right? Simplicity, again, you don’t complicate it. It’s just, this is the way it is, deal with it the way it is, right? You know, you want that stark reality, then that’s you, that element of simplicity, do with your own mind. You know, why everybody else’s? You know, that’s the thing. It means, in other words, it’s a mode of ignorance, everything’s turned around. So, because it’s a mode of passion, it’s in the middle, so it’s obvious. But you turn the thing completely around, opposite, you know, you get confused, because it looks like the same thing. Mode of ignorance, in one sense, looks like the mode of goodness, but it’s exact opposite. So, that’s the thing. If people use nice language and all that, then one can be confused.

Gravity means one’s thoughtful. It’s one’s focused on things. One looks at things as they are and then sees what is the actual reality. One takes things seriously.

Right? Self-control, that the senses are engaged according to what they should be engaged in. And the purification of existence means everything that one does should be uplifting. That means it has to be connected in some way to the śāstra, to Kṛṣṇa.

Austerities performed out of pride for the sake of gaining honor, respect, and worship are in the mode of passion and are temporary. Austerities performed out of foolishness, with self-torture, or to destroy others are in the mode of ignorance. Right? So, here, for the sake of honor, respect, worship are in the mode of passion. So, that’s generally how people are using diplomacy, this, that. So, therefore, it gets a bad name. But it’s diplomacy is not the problem.

It’s how it’s used. The following three verses, 20 to 22, describe the charity in the modes. Charity given at a proper time and place to a worthy person without expecting return is in the mode of goodness. Charity performed in a grudging mood with a desire for fruitive results is in the mode of passion. Charity performed in an impure place and an improper time to unworthy persons or without proper attention and respect is in the mode of ignorance. Right? So, you have impure place, improper time, unworthy persons. Right? So, that will define it as the mode of ignorance. Or everything may be proper, but it’s done without proper attention and respect. So, these will put it into the mode of ignorance. So, in other words, the first ones are it’s whimsical, or you’re not properly paying attention and everything, because that’s part of it. Because if you’re not paying attention, it means the mind’s not involved. And if the mind’s not involved, then it’s just the body. Right? And the body’s, you know, basically ignorance. You know what I’m saying? The point is, it’s the manifestation, it’s the gross manifestation of the mind. Does that make sense? So, one has to be careful.

In this section, the Lord described this criteria by which one can assess his own advancement and the advancement of others according to preferences in worship, food, austerity, sacrifice, and charity. These preferences are divided into three categories, but they are always contaminated by the material modes of nature. Therefore, even those who are inclined towards the best material situation are still bound in the material world.

Right? So, even one is situated in goodness, that’s still not good enough. It has to go to the point of devotion. Right? But the mode of goodness, that’s the situation. Now, if we notice, did any of those elements in the mode of goodness, did they, were they so specific that they can’t be performed in the Kali Yuga or can’t be performed in the 21st century? You understand? They’re not dealing with the specific. They’re dealing with the principle on which the rituals and rules are followed. Right? Satisfaction, that can be applied anytime. You know, speaking beneficially, not agitating, that can be done anytime. Right? Worship of superiors, being clean, simple, celibate, not, these are things that can be done anytime. So, we have to remember is that, therefore, that’s the best situation. So, it can always be obtained. Right? So, this idea that things can’t be followed. No, the principles can always be followed. A detail, of course, it details some details. That’s why time, place, and circumstance are there. Right? If there was no such thing as time, place, and circumstance, would there be a need for any adjustment in the ritual? No. It’s only because of the time, place, and circumstance that there’s need of adjustment. That means there’ll be so many rules given for what? To cover all time, places, and circumstances.

Right? And one has to use one’s intelligence to know what is applied where.

Now, in verses 23 to 28, Kṛṣṇa will explain that by chanting Aum Tat Sat and dedicating all activities to Him, one can remove all defects of one’s work.

Yes?

Sacrifice, charity, and austerity.

Yes. So, that already explained it. So, why you’re asking again? See, at the time, you have to ask because then we’re focusing on that area. Does that make sense? If you have a question on something, ask at the time that we’re discussing it. Because if you go after a few days, now we’re focusing on something else. So, that fine detail you may not get. So, to get there, we’ve gone to that fine detail by discussing it for quite a while. So, at this point, we may not just pop back to that.

Does that make sense? You know what I’m saying? Hmm? I understand that still. You still, you don’t. But at the same time is now you’re feeling that I’m not taking care of your needs, but at the same time is this another 30 people here who’ve already heard it. See, previously, I would deal with it. But then I started finding that after a while, senior men don’t come to the classes anymore. Why? Because they get really annoyed that it’s moving along in a particular level of depth, and then somebody will come along and keep taking it back, taking it back, taking it back. Like we went last week, we were only discussing questions of, you know, the second chapter, third chapter, fourth chapter. And it was also the same, the emotional demanding that if you don’t deal with this, then you’re not actually being fair and, you know, broad-minded and taking care, and that it’s my fault.

Sure you did.

Otherwise, why did you go, because you were simply reciprocating with me doing that before.

I only did that because the day before that means that on Tuesday, I made it very clear, don’t do this.

You know what I’m saying? Only because we’re short on time. If not, spending time, I don’t mind. We spent one and a half years on ten chapters of Bhagavatam. It didn’t bother me at all, but problem is, is many people here have to go, and they want it finished before Gaurapurnima.

You know what I’m saying?

This is 23, 28.

23. From the beginning of creation, the three words om tat sat were used to indicate the Supreme Absolute Truth. These three symbolic representations were used by Brahmins while chanting the hymns of the Vedas and during sacrifices for the satisfaction of the Lord.

Therefore, transcendentalists undertaking performances of sacrifice, charity, penance, in accordance with scriptural regulations, always begin always with om to obtain the Supreme.

Without desiring fruitive results, one should perform various kinds of sacrifices, penances, and charity with the word tat. The purpose of such transcendental activities is to get free from material entanglement.

The Absolute Truth is the objective of devotional sacrifice and is indicated with the word sat. The performer of such sacrifice is also called sat. There’s all works of sacrifice, penance, and charity, which, true to the absolute nature, are performed to please the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or Sanaprita. Anything done as sacrifice, charity, or penance without faith in the Supreme, or Sanaprita, is impermanent. It is called asat and is useless both in this life and the next.

Then verses 23 to 28, the goal of all activities, pleasing Kṛṣṇa. From the beginning of creation, the Brahmins, while chanting the hymns of the Vedas and during sacrifices, use om tatsat. These three words indicate the Supreme Absolute Truth, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. All activities are meant for His satisfaction.

Śrīpad-Mādhvacārī explains the meaning of om tatsat as follows. Om tatsat are three well-known names of the Supreme Being. The Vedakīla says, The Lord is called om because the whole world is woven, oṭam, into Him and abides in Him. His true nature is knowable only through the Vedas in their primary sense, and He is not accessible through ordinary perception or inference. Therefore, He is referred to as tat, that. In other words, there’s this and there’s that. You can’t see through this, that. This is the Upaniṣads. This, that.

He is ever full of all auspicious attributes and is free from all imperfections, and for that reason He is known as sat, flawless. Therefore, the wise apply to Him three names, om tatsat. That’s from His Gītā-bhāṣa from 1723.

Śrīla Prabhupāda writes in his purport to verse 23, It has been explained that penance, charity and foods are divided into, penance, sacrifice, charity and foods are divided into three categories, the modes of goodness, passion and ignorance. But whether first class, second class or third class, they are all conditioned, contaminated by the material modes of nature. When they are aimed at the Supreme, om tatsat, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Eternal, they become means for spiritual elevation. In the scriptural injunction, such an objective is indicated. Śrīla Baladeva Vidyābhūṣan further explains, In speaking of the three types of sacrifice, austerity and charity, with divisions into three modes, those which were in the mode of goodness were shown to be accepted, and those in the mode of passion and ignorance were shown to be rejected. Now the Lord says that sacrifice, austerity and charity by persons qualified with sattva should be performed along with chanting the names of Viṣṇu. If these names, om tatsat, are used along with sacrifice and other acts, these names will compensate for any fault in the performance of the various parts of the sacrifice. By uttering these sounds, one is assured of getting the results.

So now we’re dealing with the goal of all this. So austerity, charity have been established as means, means of elevation, how one’s going to, you know, process that one’s going to use. So then the goal has to be the Lord, right? So then the Lord then will be connected with everything that one’s doing by understanding this om tatsat. He’s the supreme person, right? He cannot be seen or obtained through the material energy, right? It’s only through devotional service. And He is flawless. He’s the perfect goal, the perfect, let me say, yeah, the perfect goal. Means prayojana finds its perfection in Him, right? That’s what one’s trying to obtain. Is that smoke too much? No, okay. So you bring out these aspects within prayojana, right, of the Supreme Lord Himself, right? That process is being performed without the desire for result. And then He is the perfect goal, right? Does that make sense? So within, within prayojana, then you have those three. So om tatsat takes care of all the aspects that are there, right? In other words, the field that’s there, when you perform something, you’ll get something. That’s by the grace of the Lord. He is interwoven, but Him you’ll only see through devotion, right? Not through something else. So when you perform an activity, a result will be gained. You can see that result. At the same time is that’s not what’s important. It is what is gained through that interaction of performing something for the Lord’s satisfaction, right? That’s, that’s what one is trying to do. One is trying to get to that position.

Yes.

And the point is? I’m asking this. I’m not saying what’s the benefit of that. Because this is basically pointing the vajanic om tatsat, one ensure that the… Yeah, but the om tatsat, it’s not, it’s not specifically just chanting of it. It’s, it’s, of course, there’s the chanting, but it’s of understanding what that is. Like om is there, Prabhupada says, om tad vishnu paramam param, like that. In other words, seeing the Lord, how to obtain the Lord by the great sages, by their following, their instructions, their directions, their example, they see the Lord, you’ll be able to see the Lord. So by performing those activities, then that’s tat, all right? And then they’re directed at the Supreme Lord, who is sat.

Does that make sense? So in other words, he’s taking it, he’s, he’s pointed out the modes, because in the previous chapter we’re defining that the material world is nourished by the modes. The tree of material existence is nourished by the modes. You’re not acting under the modes, the tree is not nourished. So one’s not in material existence. So to be able to understand if you’re under those modes or not, then we’ve gone through the detail in this chapter. But even when it’s gone through and pointed out the mode of goodness, still it’s a mode. And so it has to be transcended by connecting it to the Lord. So unless that’s connected, om tat sat, then you’re still. So that is the point that was being given in the 13th chapter, is that you see the field and the knower of the field, then you’re out of material existence, right? And so to know this, then you have to know the difference between the soul, the Supersoul, and the material energy, right? So seeing like that, one’s not under the modes, right? So this modes, why that’s important, because the modes nourish the tree of material existence. So therefore there needs to be a study of the tree and a study of the modes, right? And then, so now that we know that the modes are there, it’s been defined, then this chapter gets down to detail, right? Because the 16th chapter goes into that the modes are there and what will be the effect. But now it’s saying specifically how you define the mode. So then you can see the faith, because the faith is the point. Is the faith in the Lord, is the faith in something else, right? So if faith is in something of higher standard, that’s the mode of goodness. If it’s not, that’ll be passion and ignorance. So that’s why it’s rejected, right? So the mode of goodness is the desired effect, right? But it’s only to be used as a stepping stone, right? Since you’re dealing with the modes, you have to know what they are and you have to know how to transcend them by connecting for the Lord. So that’s the point.

Could it sometimes be necessary or useful to sacrifice the mode of ignorance?

What means, what would be the benefit of sacrifice the mode of ignorance? I was thinking, heard from Ramana Maharaj that if some beggar comes to you and asks for money… That’s not sacrifice the mode of ignorance, because is it your duty to give or not? And who recommends that? The scriptures.

So how is that in the mode of ignorance? I’m thinking it’s an improper place for a… No, but what kind of sacrifice is being performed? Are you doing some big, nice devotional sacrifice to the deities out on the street? No, you’re giving one rupee to a beggar. So where does the beggar stay? Street, okay. And, you know, is the beggar poor? Okay, so therefore it’s right place, right circumstance.

You understand?

That’s another thing. How he uses it means you do your duty. How he uses it, that’s his problem.

You know what I’m saying? If it’s your duty, then by you performing it, then that’s another thing, you know. Otherwise the parents could say, well, you know, we had this child and then he grows up to being a demon or something, you know, so then… You know what I’m saying? No, but they’re supposed to have children and try to train them in Krishna conscious and the child is supposed to become Krishna conscious. If he doesn’t, if they’ve done their duties and he doesn’t, then that’s his problem. Right? If they don’t perform their duties, then they’re implicated in that problem.

You know what I’m saying? So, so the point is, is it’s the proper performance. It’s not, mode of ignorance means it’s against the written principles. It’s whimsical. It’s an illusion.

So then why one’s recommending that it’s good or sometimes has to be performed, you know what I’m saying? So there’s a contradiction there. The point is, is the person himself may be in ignorance. He may be use it in ignorance, but that’s his problem.

That’s why we only give them one rupee. We don’t give them, you know, a thousand rupees. You know what I’m saying? That would be improper. That would be the mode of ignorance because that’s inappropriate.

You know what I’m saying? Since a kid, you give them, you give them five bucks for Krishna, for Christmas, right? They don’t give him a thousand, right? That would be improper because he won’t use it. So that’s the point, is according to their position, that’s what you give. Better than giving money is to give food because that, what can you do with it, you know, other than eat it, right? So it’s kind of limited, you know, plus you’re guaranteed that he’s going to get some devotional benefit. He appreciates his prasad, he gets devotional benefit, he doesn’t, he gets sukṛti, right? But the money, that may be wasted, so that’s why that’s not as ideal, right?

Although the Vedas recommend gradual cultivation in the mode of goodness and avoidance of the modes of passion and ignorance, this is not their final conclusion. Krishna’s real desire is described in verses 24 to 27. Well, performing sacrifice, charity, and penance in accordance with scriptural regulations, they start with Aum to obtain the Supreme. Without desiring, in other words, that’s the point, right? So you’re situating yourself in to obtain, but you haven’t performed it, you situate yourself there, so you and the Lord, you see the proper relationship, right? So then that has that aspect. Without desiring fruit of results, right, because you’re performing the activity, that’s where, in other words, when does the question of fruit of results come in, right? At what point in the process? You know, sambandha abhidheya prayojana. Abhidheya, right? I mean, of course, prayojana is there, but if it’s been there in abhidheya, that it’s done in naiskarmya, then prayojana is a good chance it’s going to remain that way, right? But if it’s done for fruit of purposes, then when you get the result, there’s every chance you’re going to want to apply it in that way, right? So then that would be the abhidheya.

Without desiring fruit of results, one should engage with such performances with the word, in other words, such performances that will generate no fruit of result.

With the word tat, to get free from material entanglement, in other words, that, it’s for the Lord, it’s not for me, right? That’s why when it’s offered, it’s for Krsna, it’s not for me, right?

The object of devotional service is the Absolute Truth, indicated by sat, because they are performed for pleasing Krsna. When one performs penance, charity, and sacrifice with these three words, he is acting in Krsna consciousness. So if you see yourself in relationship to the Lord, in other words, the field and the knower of the field, right? So then you situate yourself properly. Then you perform that activity without a desire for results to please the Lord.

If that’s done, if these three are applied on these activities, penance, charity, and sacrifice, then one is situated in devotional service.

Even though… Yes? Ah, yes.

You can. I mean, there’s always, at the end of something, there’s always the beginning of the next. Maybe, but then I would say is, let us get to later, and then we’ll see the connection.

Because the point is, is that what Krsna is saying, it’s not specifically the chanting of om tatsat, it’s the understanding of om tatsat. So He says you perform this with om tatsat. That means you understand your relationship with the Lord and that you perform activities for His satisfaction.

Like that. If that, if your charity, austerity, and sacrifice are done in that way, then it becomes devotional service. Otherwise, then you can situate yourself in goodness, that’s nice, but you’re still in the material world, right? So that’s, we’re trying to differentiate between the material and the spiritual, right? And then, since we have to act and we are situated within the material sphere, how to engage that material sphere in the Lord’s devotional service, right? So that’s your om tatsat. You’re going to perform these activities with that benefit.

Is that what you’re saying?

Yes. We know activities which are devotional service. Which are.

Benefit is once connected with the Lord, but the other thing is like, what does it mention? If something is done and activity is done with no attention, what mode is? Ignorance. So in other words, that aspect has to be removed. We have to be attentive. Right? Does that make sense? So when we find we’re not attentive, then we try to become. But that we’re engaged in that activity, then we’re rightly situated doing the right thing. So we’re associating with the Lord. But the point is, is the benefit that we want may not be fully there.

Does that make sense? You know, it’s just like you’re in the house and, well, let’s say you’re in a situation and your others are around and it would be natural to interact, but they’re not. They’re just busy doing whatever they’re doing. Right? So you’ll feel left out, though what they’re doing is in connection with you, but you’re not as a person involved. Does that make sense? So that’s going to get very minimal interaction from your side. You know what I’m saying? The Krishnas now will be upset about that because we’re dependent. The Krishna is not dependent. So then it’s just a matter of, you know, they’re not interacting, so he doesn’t interact.

You know, so love of God means it’s interactive.

Does that make sense? So, therefore, inattentive chanting is not useful because then how Krishna respond to that, how he will interact with that.

Does that make sense? That’s the difficulty. So, in other words, one is analyzing these things because not that, okay, there’s this one symptom, so that’s all there is, is the motive. Because we know everything is mixed. So every motive has, there’s no pure manifestation of a particular mode. There’ll be something like that. You know what I’m saying? So the guy is out there on the street, you know, he’s running his, you know, particular, you know, criminal activities and all that, you know, he’s speaking roughly, he’s disturbing others, you know, so you definitely see some motive passion there. There is, what do you call it, definitely a motive for gaining the results of his criminal activities like this. You know, that he’s doing this as his opposition to the Vedas and all that, so then it will be in the mode of ignorance. He’s doing it on his own desires, it’s whimsical, so it’s mode of ignorance. But at the same time as he’s doing all that, because when he goes home, then he can take care of his mother. You know what I’m saying? So there’s a touch of all the modes there, but you see what’s prominent, that’s how you’ll classify it, you know. Does that make sense? You know, like, you know, what color, what color is that line there?

What do we generally call it? Yeah, black, but it’s, is it pure black? No, it’s bluish black, because we’ll call, but we’ll still call it black. You know what I’m saying? But now this, that’s more black. You know what I’m saying? So the point is, is whatever’s predominant, that’s what we’ll call it. You know what I’m saying? This is orange, and that’s orange, right? Because of the combination between the red and the yellow is still visible, but that’s got more red, this has more yellow. You know, but you add a little bit more red or a little bit more yellow, and then you’re going to start calling it red or yellow. You’re not going to call it orange.

You know what I’m saying? Does that make sense? So the modes work like that, whatever’s prominent, that’s what we’re going to call it. But these others are going to be mixed, that’s why devotional service is important. Then it becomes pure, right? Because there’s always, even you’re doing according to the rules, but your motive is, you know, to be good or to be nice or to get, you know, benefit, then it’s still, that’s the mode of passion. And you’re doing all that, you’re following the Vedas, you’re doing everything perfectly, but you’re not, but why are you doing everything like that? Because then you think it’s pious existence, it’s religious, it’s nice, great, but they’re, they’re thinking that, you know, I’m from this particular position, I am that, so that means they’re not distinguishing between the body and the soul. So that’s ignorance, you understand? So there’s always going to be, so that’s why the study is there to be able to analyze. So what is, what is good, keep, what’s bad, remove. You know, just like before we said about diplomacy, then it’s, oh, then the whole thing goes out. So then if you take out diplomacy, then that means you also remove the need to follow the austerity of speech and speak nicely. You know, therefore you can sit around and, you know, you got this circle and then everybody just says, oh, they like stand up, yell, scream, and this guy is like that. Then afterwards everyone goes, wow, that was great. You know, like that. But you know what I’m saying? So it’s, it’s, it’s, you know, where is the, where is the, huh? Yeah, self-improvement means everybody agreed to get together to do something selfish, you know? In other words, it was an agreed upon that I want to be selfish, but, but I’m willing to let you be selfish also. So it’s a cooperation, but it doesn’t go beyond, you know, pranamoy. You know, at best it’s, this is, you know, real low level pranamoy.

Yes, of course. That’s, that’s the, everybody’s selfishness. Yeah. But the dharma is not there. What’s the duty there? Right? Because the point is, is you want to speak your mind, but one has to take that time, the right place and circumstance so that one can speak it in the right way. Because the point is, is, is that, is the point, is the relationship continuing after you’ve said all those things, important or not, you know? And if the person’s upset, well, I was just being truthful. And then you’re supposed to say, oh, okay, that makes everything okay.

You know what I’m saying? Does that make sense? So, so this is the, how do you say?

Yeah. Rupa Goswami also says, be straightforward in ordinary dealings means that you have to say something in that, but it doesn’t mean that you don’t say it nicely.

Is that okay? Yeah. So in other words, these things are to analyze what situation we’re in. And so if it’s 90% goodness with 10% passion or ignorance, then that’s the point where you have to look at. But even we look at that, still more important is that it’s connected to Krishna. Right? And then if we say, oh, if it’s connected to Krishna, it doesn’t matter. In one sense, it doesn’t, but on another sense of Krishna satisfaction is what you’re trying to gain. So does that 10% of ignorance is that, is that the most ideal for serving Krishna? Since he’s him, he’s perfect. Why wouldn’t we want to do the best of our ability, make it perfect? In other words, if it’s the best of our ability, it is perfect. But if we could do better, but we’re not just saying that, oh, that’s enough, then that means that’s all the better the relationship is also.

Does that make sense? So even though recommended by the Lord, the mode of goodness does not have real value unless it is used for further advancement in Krishna consciousness. This is important. These are much earlier chapters. So it’s being given is that if it’s not connected to the Lord, it is useless. If it’s connected to the Lord, it has use. Now, then we can look at the quality of usefulness. Just because it’s useful doesn’t mean it’s the best.

You know what I’m saying? Does that make sense? You know, a fish or a potato. Okay. So the fish, hard to use for Krishna, right? Potato, easier to use for Krishna. But now there’s qualities of potato. You know, this one’s been sitting in the corner for a while. It’s turned green and it’s got all little things growing all over it. So not as nice as one that’s not green and doesn’t have things growing all over. You know what I’m saying? So there’s always that something more. There’s the category and then within the category.

So this is what, yeah, is trying to be brought out. Otherwise, we’ll say, oh, it’s connected. That’s good enough. But what about the quality of its connection? Quality of what you are connecting.

So that’s what’s being looked at here. Because mother, like Mother just showed her, she’s not about to anything of not good quality offered to Krishna. Right? The gopis is not going to be anything of bad quality that they’re going to offer. So good enough is not good enough. You know, because who is good enough for us? And what was defined before is that it’s done out of laziness, right? It’s mode of passion. One doesn’t want to do it. So it’s a problem. It’s a mode of passion.

Right? So in a society that’s known for being situated in passion, then there is a lot of laziness when it comes to uplifting rituals.

Right?

And as we said before, it’s someone who is situated nicely in the direct activities of devotional service. There’s five main direct. If there’s some laxness on some of these parts, that’s another thing. But if someone’s situated in the indirect, all they have is proper performance of the activity.

Right? Because the standard of it being so devotionally inclined is not very great. So what you’re doing indirectly is according to your own desire, your own need.

So then very much, then you have to look at the quality of it. Does that make sense? Therefore, the person who is in that simple position doesn’t have money, then they give something simple, then that’s fine. But someone who has lots of money and lots of facility, if they give something simple, that doesn’t look good. Does that make sense?

Therefore, anything done as a sacrifice, charity or penance without faith in Kṛṣṇa is impermanent and is called asat. These non-Kṛṣṇa conscious activities are abominable and are useless both in this life and in the next. Right? So here, abominable means it’s not connected to Kṛṣṇa. Whether it’s a very nice, wonderful activity or something not very nice. So that’s what we always have to see when we define something as abominable. We have to see what is that definition within the material realm of the quality of the material elements or we mean its connection to Kṛṣṇa. It can be both. Yes? Could something be, let’s say, indirectly useful even though it might be classified as abominable? Indirectly useful? The point is, what would that mean? If it brings you closer to nice karma. How would it bring you closer to nice karma? If it moves you from mode of ignorance towards mode of passion. Yes. And that’s there. That’s the whole idea. It’s like the, how you say, you have the person, he’s very lazy. So he’s not actually, how he’ll engage in sacrifice or charity because that means activities. So then by getting married, it’ll move him up to the mode of passion. So therefore, he’ll have to act. And then from acting in that way, then by, if he’s doing according to what he’s supposed to do, his duties, which is situated in goodness, though he may not be so well, he’ll get purified. Then he’ll start to see things in relation to nice karma. That will bring him properly situated. Then he can see things very nicely connected to Kṛṣṇa. But that process is only going to happen in a dynamic way if from the beginning, the idea is to do it for Kṛṣṇa. Because in this age, no one really has the great qualification that just by the material good, they’re going to move themselves some ignorance up to goodness. You know what I’m saying? Because if you had the good qualities to elevate yourself, you’d be in goodness. You know what I’m saying? But if you’re in ignorance, it means you don’t have the qualification. So the only qualification is going to be through chanting.

Yes. But of these four classes of men who come to Kṛṣṇa, three of them are basically not there to please Kṛṣṇa. Yes, yes. But still it’s good that they come there. Yes, but you have to make that distinction. In other words, what’s the abominableness?

The selfishness. And so what’s the problem with that? It’s not connected to Kṛṣṇa. That’s the abominableness. But if you just say, well, we can connect abominable activities to Kṛṣṇa, is that okay? People will think of materially it’s abominable. But even the most nice material situation is abominable, it’s not connected to Kṛṣṇa. You understand? So that’s the point is that whatever one situation you connect that to Kṛṣṇa, then within that situation you pick what’s the best.

Does that make sense?

They are useless in the next life since they were not perfectly executed because of lack of faith. They will not give fame in this life because such faithless acts are condemned by the saintly persons. Because if it’s faithless, it’ll be in the mode of ignorance. So it won’t give you a good result. You perform the activity, not get the result. So that means that there’s something more subtle at work here. Because austerity means body, mind, and words, all of them. So maybe the body was engaged, but what’s the mind and words?

So that’s, that’s… In this 17th chapter, the Lord described different auspicious and inauspicious material situations. The mode of goodness has been glorified as the best material position and the modes of passion and ignorance have been rejected as abominable. So this is auspicious and inauspicious material. But still, even if it’s auspicious material, if it’s not connected to Kṛṣṇa, it’s still abominable. It’s just, it’s just nice abominable.

You know what I’m saying?

So, you know, the example of Prabhupāda gives of one is bound. So one is bound by iron chains or by silver chains or gold chains, right? So if, you know, the guys that are sitting there in the row in the prison and all that, they have this chain and this ball there, you know, and then, but they’re all in jail, right? So it’s abominable. But amongst themselves, the guy with the gold chain and gold ball, he’ll say, hey, I got that. You just have the iron one and he’ll feel bad, how come I didn’t get a gold one, you know? Does that make sense? So within the prison house, then they make a distinction. But the point, the first point is in the prison or out of the prison, right? So connected to Kṛṣṇa or not, that’s the first thing. Then within connected, then you make your distinctions what’s better. And what’s not connected, then you can make distinctions. But the point is, is the only worthwhile distinctions is if it’s the connection to the Lord. Yes? So it’s not abominable to ask Kṛṣṇa for money? It’s not abominable to ask Kṛṣṇa for money, but the point is, is then… It’s not the best, but it’s not… It’s not the best, it’s not the point, but the point is, is then what happens if you don’t get it when you ask?

Then what? You lose faith. Why? Because… You know what I’m saying? So it’s a matter of, okay, you go to Kṛṣṇa because there’s no one else you can go to, but still it’s up to Him whether you get it or not.

Abominable means… Why do you want the money?

Why does one want sense gratification?

One wants to be happy. Why do you want to be happy?

So why would you choose that method? Control, interact.

And what will be your benefit? Because when the senses connect to the sense objects, you get something. As soon as it’s disconnected, you’re disconnected. It’s not there. Right? It means when the light’s on, there’s light in the room. You turn the light off, there’s no light in the room. It doesn’t linger. It’s just the senses and the sense objects, as soon as they’re separated, there is no lingering. Any lingering’s in the mind, not in the sense and sense object.

You know what I’m saying? So what benefit you’re going to get? Why engage in that way?

Right? But, so what are you going to do?

Since you’re not supposed to do that, what are you going to do?

Offer it to Kṛṣṇa, but then how will it be offered? What’s the practical method? Give it to the temple. Okay, that’s the money.

Devotional service. Okay. And then you’re the one that took it down the rabbit hole.

Engage it according to śāstra. In other words, he took the senses and all that. He’s just talking about getting some money and you are taking, yeah, the senses. You know what I’m saying? So then, what do you do? Then you connect that to the scripture. So you’re engaged in sense gratification for your own happiness, but you’re doing it according to scripture. You’re regulating it. So that’s already elevating. It’s still not ideal. It’s still controlled by passion, but we notice that mode of passion is in line with śāstra. Mode of ignorance means it’s not in line with śāstra. So we’ve moved it from mode of ignorance to passion. Then by being in that mode, then what’s going to come? We’re going to get our happiness, but we’re also going to get our distress. So after a while we start to notice, you know, hey, you know. And so then one can start, and one may still be attached to that activity or attached to that situation, but then one starts to perform it without desire for results. So one’s taking a lower activity, connecting it to the Lord. You understand? So that process is going on. It’s progressive in this way. That’s why you always have to say, what’s the motive behind it? Why it’s going on?

That make sense? So it’s not ideal, but it’ll work. But you don’t say, oh no, it’s okay to ask for money. No, it’s not okay to ask for money, but if you need to, then that’s what you can do. Pure devotional service means you don’t. But if you need to, then understand it’s not pure devotional service, but it’s connected to Kṛṣṇa. So that’s better than it not being. So it’s progressive. But don’t say that, oh, it’s okay, meaning that it’s pure devotional service. No, understand the gradations. That’s the whole point, right? The problem with, what do you call it, rationalizing something or justifying something is then you’re trying to equate a lower standard of devotional endeavor to a higher standard. No, you have to make the distinction. And if due to pride, then you’re trying to do that, then that’s mode of passion or mode of ignorance, depending on how it’s applied, right? If it’s for the benefit of maintaining your pride and prestige, it’s mode of passion. If it’s done out of pride in that, then it’s mode of ignorance.

Does that make sense?

You want it done in that way because it’ll protect your position, that’s passion, right?

Does that make sense? No? And if it’s done just because you are proud, then that’s mode of ignorance, right? Because pride then it means is a symptom of illusion.

Does that make sense? So we have to be able to distinguish the path. Otherwise, how do we know where we are and therefore how to engage?

So it’s not that, okay, well, I can engage where I am, so therefore it’s all right. No, it’s all right to engage that, but it’s all right to engage that because that’s where you’re standing. But if you move forward, then to say it’s all right to engage that, then you’re moving back, right? One has to keep moving forward, right?

But now the last verses of the chapter, the Lord gives this final conclusion, right? So auspicious, inauspicious, mode of goodness, auspicious, passion, ignorance, inauspicious, but now he has given his final conclusion. Even the perfect sattvic activities are useless when devoid of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And even devotional work influenced by passion and ignorance is perfect because it’s connected to Kṛṣṇa, right? So it’s perfect because it’s connected to Kṛṣṇa. So the point is, if Kṛṣṇa satisfaction is what you’re for, then you would want to offer the best, right? So if you’re able to tell the difference, then you would do that. If you can’t tell the difference, don’t worry about it. But if you can tell the difference and then say, don’t worry about it, then that’s a fault, right? The person who doesn’t know, he does his best, right? But the person who does know better do what he knows is better.

Śrīpat Madhvacarya comments, verse 28, censuring offerings made without such faith, brings out the indispensability of bhakti for the Lord as a necessary ingredient of sattvika, sattvika-svabhava.

So in other words, that faith in Kṛṣṇa to please Kṛṣṇa, that’s the essential element. That’s what one’s trying to gain. Then all these other elements, then they fall into place, right? So that’s the whole point. Someone has faith, it doesn’t matter what position they start from. They connect themselves to Kṛṣṇa. And then as they become purified, they will naturally develop, right? So this way, then, one can accommodate the broadest range of engaging people in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. But you’re not saying it’s okay. You’re saying it’s okay. Means, in other words, is an activity in the mode of ignorance okay? It can never be okay. Or mode of passion, it can never be okay. Mode of goodness, that can be okay. But actually, unless it’s connected to Kṛṣṇa, it’s not okay. So if someone’s in the mode of passion and ignorance and they connect to Kṛṣṇa, what’s okay about it? The connecting to Kṛṣṇa, not the mode of passion and ignorance, right? So in other words, it’s okay because they’re connected to Kṛṣṇa. They’ll start there. But as they progress, if there’s an opportunity to improve the quality of their material situation, they would naturally do it, sense the results for Kṛṣṇa, right? And if they can’t, then don’t worry about it.

Does that make sense?

You know, is it better, there’s the, you know, the drunk bump on the street, you know, out there. And if he’s willing to take prasāda and do a little chanting, is that good? Yes. But he’s still, you know, drinking his alcohol, living on the street, he’s still, you know, pretty low, how do you say, yeah, you know, basically not what you’d call, you know, very developed. He’s not going to win any awards for, you know, hot couture or anything, you know, so.

No, it’d have to be clean, means that with the same clothes, if you wash them a little bit like that, then you might be able to pull it off, you know, but it’s the panache, how he wears it, you know, that we’re talking about.

But otherwise, it is, you do have a good point. So, he’s not going to, but so, and one can say, oh, he’s useless and that, this and that. No, he’s connected to Kṛṣṇa. But with time by that chanting and taking prasāda, then he might start moving up and then, you know, not be, you know, you know, drinking alcohol or not living on the street or, you understand, it’ll slowly come. But the point is, is whatever situation he’s in, that’s fine, you know, as long as he’s connected. So, the quality of his connection, that’s what you should focus on, because he can’t focus on the quality of his activity.

Does that make sense? And then, and with time, then you can’t, because the modes of passion are very hard to connect them.

Can be, but hard to connect. So, in other words, his situation is not good, but he’s connected. So, that aspect, that’s what’s important.

Does that make sense? Here’s a fine point. Then one can expand the preaching. It doesn’t mean you lower the standards. Some will say, oh, we have to accommodate, we can’t be so fanatic. No. The point is, is pure devotional service, is it fanatic? Is the concept of pure devotional service fanatic? Because if we say, oh, we can’t be fanatic, means we’re saying we’re dropping the standards of pure devotional service. No, that remains, right, the standards, but at what position one can take up the process of devotional service about, that can be from anywhere, as long as that connection is made.

Does that make sense?

Śrīla Prabhupāda summarizes Chapter 17 as follows, anything done without the transcendental objective, whether it be sacrifice, charity, or penance, is useless. Therefore, in this verse, it is declared that such activities are abominable. Interesting to note, this is the 17th chapter, just before the end, and this is where this point is made in the Bhāgavatam, is in the 11th canto. You know, so just before the end, then this point is made, that there is, you know, auspicious and inauspicious, or pious and impious, is it’s pious if it’s connected to Kṛṣṇa, it’s impious if it’s not. It doesn’t matter the material situation.

Everything should be done for the Supreme in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Without such faith, without the proper guidance, there can be, there can never be any fruit. So that means you have the proper faith and you’re working under authority, right? Then it can be progressive.

In all the Vedic scriptures, faith in the Supreme is advised.

In the pursuit of all Vedic instructions, the ultimate goal is the understanding of Kṛṣṇa. No one can obtain success without following this principle.

Therefore, the best course is to work from the very beginning in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, under the guidance of a bona fide spiritual master, right? Therefore, from the beginning, no matter what your situation, that’s the best thing. Faith in Kṛṣṇa and guru, then everything will be successful.

That is the way to make everything successful. The mode of goodness is better than the modes of passion and ignorance. The one who takes directly to Kṛṣṇa consciousness is transcendental to all three modes of material nature. Although there is a process of gradual elevation, if one, by the association of pure devotees, takes directly to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is the best way. In other words, go through, there’s a gradual process in the Vedic that you’ll go through all these different things to slowly elevate yourself through the modes, you know, over lifetimes and that. But devotional service means it’ll be directly done very quickly. So we look at it, you know, 30 years is a long time. No, it’s not. 30 years is a drop in eternity, right? So it’s not big. We’re not talking about thousands of lifetimes to elevate. We’re talking about direct.

So in the association of pure devotees, naturally one will be doing activities that they will be directing. Anything wrong, they will point out, right? You will be educated how to improve. So that’s the best situation. Being chanting in the association of devotees. You’re doing that with faith, then that will be the most dynamic situation you can be in.

If one, by the association of pure devotees, takes directly to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, that is the best way. And that is recommended in this chapter. To achieve success in this way, one must first find a proper spiritual master and receive training under his direction. Then one can achieve faith in the Supreme. When that faith matures in course of time, it is called love of God, right? So that’s, this is the point where we take, understand that when we have, you know, śraddha, śādhu, saṅgha, bhajana, kriya, this process, going through these nine stages, is that each one matures more, right? So when faith is fully mature, then that’s prema. So that means faith went along with all those other processes. If faith’s not there, then it doesn’t have any meaning, right? Because it said mode of ignorance is something done without faith.

To achieve success in this way, one must first find the proper spiritual master and receive training under his direction. Then one can achieve faith in the Supreme. When that faith matures in course of time, it is called love of God. This love is the ultimate goal of the living entities. One should therefore take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness directly. That is the message of the seventeenth chapter. Śrīla Baladeva Dvīdhyābhūṣan summarizes this chapter as follows. Rejecting faith arising from one’s impressions, the person who takes shelter in faith arising from scripture becomes qualified for the highest goal. This is the ordinance of the seventeenth chapter. So this would be the application of how, why this knowledge would be given. Otherwise, if the whole point is just that faith, why not that just be discussed? Because the point is here is that rejecting faith arising from one’s impressions, right? The samskaras situate you in the modes, right? So if someone is being influenced by that faith in the situation of their modes, that will be an impediment as opposed to the faith in Kṛṣṇa. So it’s not the situation in the modes that’s the problem. It’s the faith in them.

Does that make sense? Right? So then that makes the definition. That’s why one would be able to analyze this, because once faith is in there, one analyzes it, one can see, oh, where one’s situated. And so that’s what’s causing the problems, because one’s faith is in something other than Kṛṣṇa, and especially if it’s in the modes of passion or ignorance. But even if it’s in goodness, generally we don’t have that much problem with, you know, obstacles stemming from the mode of goodness, like that. But… So that’s why it’s so tough, for example, to distribute a book to a Christian as opposed to a guy who may be even more in ignorance. Yeah, like that. Because he has no, not necessarily faith in his ignorance, but the other has faith in one reason. Yeah, that’s there.

So does that make sense? So generally mode of goodness is more useful, but still, ultimately it can’t be one’s faith in that, like before the point of, you know, being non-diplomatic, being truthful, being straightforward. These things, that will be seen in the mode of goodness. But still, if it’s not connected to Kṛṣṇa, it will be an obstacle. So if we have faith in these things that on their own they stand, they have significance, they have substance, that’s an impediment.

So the analyzation is simply to be able to analyze what’s there, what one actually has one’s faith in. Then one can see, is it Kṛṣṇa or not?

So that’s the point. So one is trying to say the direct method means under the direction of Kṛṣṇa’s, how do you say, faith in Kṛṣṇa under the direction of the spiritual master, that’s what should be there. Any faith that’s there from our previous impressions, that can be, that will be an obstacle.

Does that make sense? Yes. You said that mode of goodness can look like the mode of ignorance. It means you have, no, mode of ignorance, not mode of goodness can look like mode of ignorance, mode of ignorance by good talking can look like mode of goodness, because by, you can speak things, just like, how do you, I mean, what are you told when you, you’re going to a second-hand, you know, car lot? What is the guy that’s there telling you about this car? It’s just like new, or it’s even better than new because it’s been fixed.

So, but the point is, is where are you? You know what I’m saying? So you forget your situation and become enamored by what the guy is saying. So he’s able to turn it around.

You know what I’m saying? Because opposites look more similar than what’s in the middle.

Does that make sense?

You know what I’m saying? Liberals aren’t fighting with someone who’s balanced, or conservatives aren’t fighting with someone who’s balanced, they’re fighting with each other, because that’s where the common point lies.

You know what I’m saying? So they’re both extreme, but in the same topic, just opposite. But the extremity in the same topic, that’s the common point. The balanced person is not extreme.

So therefore, where’s the connection? You know what I’m saying? There’s nothing to engage with.

Does that sound okay?

Okay, so that’s what the 17th chapter is giving us.

18th is very developed.

Chapter 18, Conclusion, The Perfection of Renunciation. Kṛṣṇa explains the meaning of renunciation, and the effects of the modes of nature on human consciousness and activity. He explains Brahman realization, the glories of the Bhagavad-gītā, and the ultimate conclusion of the Gītā, the highest path of religion, is absolute, unconditional, loving surrender unto Lord Kṛṣṇa, which frees one from all sins, brings one to complete enlightenment, and labels one to return to Kṛṣṇa’s eternal spiritual abode.

So verses 1 to 18, work combined with knowledge brings liberation. So this is then verses 1 to 12, summary of karma, verses 13 to 18, summary of jñāna. This is the conclusion, so it means everything that’s in the whole book will be touched upon, just like everything that’s in the book will be given in its basic seed form in the second chapter. The field is set in the first chapter, that’s where it’s situated. The knowledge begins in the second chapter, so that’s all the fundamental points, and then the conclusion will be in the 18th. Verses 19 to 40, entanglement in the modes. 19 to 28, knowledge, actions, and performer according to the modes. Verses 29 to 35, understanding and determination according to the modes. And verses 36 to 40, happiness according to the modes.

Verses 41 to 48, worshipping the Lord through performance of one’s occupational duties is true renunciation.

Because we’ve been describing before that activity should be done without desire for result. So now we’re going to learn what does that mean without desire for result. Just like before it says once you perform one’s activities without being controlled by the modes, so then you have to define the modes.

So now it’s gotten to that point, so what does that really mean? Because we’ve always said before is that activity performed for the Lord, knowledge for the Lord, meditation on the Lord, so we get that idea. Then it’s on the Lord, but what does that mean on the Lord? Then it’s with devotion. And so how one’s going to be able to understand the fine points of the activity for the Lord, knowledge for the Lord, meditation upon the Lord. So that’s these up to 13 to 17, because they’re going to give this. Now here will be the conclusion showing how it practically applies. Because the thesis is the point, the conclusion is the practical application of that thesis.

So it’s the same thing, it’s just the applied thesis.

Verses 49 to 66. From jnana-yoga to pure devotional service. 49 to 55. From jnana-yoga to brahma-bhuta. 56 to 63. Working in pure devotion. And 64 to 66. The most confidential knowledge. Become a pure devotee of Krishna.

Then, verses 67 to 71. Preaching and studying Bhagavad-gita. 72 to 73. Arjuna is determined to act according to Krishna consciousness. 74 to 78. Sanjaya’s prediction.

Okay. So I guess we’ll start this tomorrow.

So we’re getting there.

A lot of short chapters.

Yeah, well this one is… Not so short. Yes, well this is like a… I mean, we had chapters like this before. There were 18, 20 pages like that. We got through them, so we can also have faith that we can get through this one also. Like that. So this one will be easier because any question that goes back to previous chapters is actually covered in this chapter. So now, from this chapter, it won’t be a problem to ask questions and take us back.

Yeah, but the other chapters… Because they’re based on an understanding of what was being given in the first six chapters as techniques, and in the second six chapters as analyzing its application, how to connect it in devotion. So that was the difficulty in questions there. But now we have come to a stage where that won’t be a problem anymore.

Om Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare

Sign In

Register

Reset Password

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