Gita Overview 2 (2.1-2.30)

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
the heart will tell you. And, sometimes, even the great saintly persons are referred to as Bhagavan.
Like Bhagavan Narada. But, very rarely will they be referred to as Shri Bhagavan. So, that’s why it’s not just Bhagavan Uvacha, Shri Bhagavan Uvacha.
So, Shri refers to the Goddess of Fortune. And when the Lord is accompanied by the Goddess of Fortune, by Radha Rani, Lakshmi Devi, then He is complete. In fact, Bhagavan, if He does not have any energies, He is actually Brahman.
That means, the absolute truth is important. Prabhupada explains this by Aishwarya Puri, Kodiji, Vatswami. We will discuss this more elaborately later.
But, the absolute truth, when He is devoid of all potencies, whether material or spiritual, He is called as Brahman. That absolute truth is Brahman. The absolute truth with material potencies, but no spiritual potencies, that is Paramatma.
And the absolute truth with both material and spiritual potencies is Bhagavan. I’ll explain this. And the absolute truth without any potencies is Brahman.
So, what is the characteristic of Brahman? Brahman is just pure existence. Just eternal existence. What does Brahman do, according to the Mayavadi understanding? Brahman just exists.
All actions, all discussions, all desires, they are all in the realm of illusion. So, Brahman, in that sense, has no potency. Go in the Bhashya, go to the Vedanta Sutra itself, where it says that Brahman has chit-shakti.
So, therefore, the idea of Brahman without chit-shakti is not based on this scripture. So, that means, if you have the three levels, if that absolute truth has no chit-shakti, that is actually Brahman. The Brahman in the Mayavadi understanding.
Now, then, you go further. So, what is the advantage of the Mayavadi understanding? It is that at least they understand that there is something eternal beyond the temporary material world. But they have not understood that eternal has some attributes.
Now, one step above that is Paramatma. Paramatma is the absolute truth with material potencies. Because according to pure Mayavad, this world is just an illusion.
You know, Shankaracharya asked the question, who created the world? The answer would be that the question itself is meaningless. Because the creation doesn’t exist. The creation doesn’t exist, so creator also is not required.
It’s just an illusion. So, actually, Prabhupada explains, this is an offence to the creator. This world is very beautiful.
And to say it just doesn’t exist, to say that this painting is not good, okay, it’s an insult. But to say it doesn’t exist only, that’s a far greater insult. So, Brahman has no potencies.
The absolute truth has no potencies, that is Brahman. At the Paramatma level, the yogis understand that this Supreme Lord, this absolute truth, is the supervisor. He’s controlling the material world.
Therefore, he has material potencies. But what is the characteristic of the Supersoul? He’s sitting as if detached. And the Supersoul itself does not perform any pastime.
Therefore, when we understand the absolute truth has material potencies, by which he creates the material world, then that is a higher realisation, that is a Paramatma realisation. But the Bhagavan realisation means the absolute truth has both material and spiritual potencies. The absolute truth creates, maintains and destroys the material world.
But beyond that, the absolute truth has its own abode, which is filled with multifarious energies. And in those energies, there is a dynamism of love. So, that is the complete understanding of the absolute truth.
So actually, the Brahman, so it’s now, what Bhagavatam says is, all this is Advaya Tattva. So, this is all Advaya. So, all these three are not different.
So, it is not that Brahman is one thing, Paramatma is another thing, Bhagavan is another thing. All one thing, but depending on the realisation of a particular person. So, now, with respect to Sri Bhagavan Uvacha.
So, he is making very clear that Sri is not the material goddess of fortune. Remember in the South Indian temples, they have Shri Devi and Bhu Devi. So, Bhu Devi is the material potency, and Shri Devi is the spiritual potency.
Sri Bhagavan Uvacha means the Lord with spiritual potency. So, the reference is very, very unambiguous. It is referring to God as a person.
And, now, what is he speaking? Uttasthva Kashmala Mitam. Kashmala is the weakness of heart. Where does this weakness come upon you? Vishyame Samupasthit.
Vishyam means this moment of crisis. So, generally, people might be cheerful and confident when normal situations are there. But when the stress comes, when the pressure comes, then what happens? Some people just choke under the pressure, and some people who can deal with that pressure, they are said to have nerves of steel.
They can deal with it. So, Krishna is telling Arjuna, how are you choking under pressure like this? Vishyame Samupasthitam. And, if you choke like this, what is going to happen in this moment of crisis? Anari Jishtam Asvargyam Akirti Karam Arjuna.
So, three consequences he is telling. Anaryam. It does not befit you.
You are Arya. Prabhupada explains that Arya is not just some blue-eyed, tall-bodied prototype which was imagined by the Indologists. Arya is a person who understands the spiritual values of life.
So, he is saying this Anaryam. For one who understands spiritual values, it is unbecoming for you. Anaryam Asvargyam.
This will not lead you to swarga. So, it does not befit your position now. It will not lead you to a good destination.
And, in the future, it will not lead you to fame in this life also. So, three consequences. It does not befit you.
It will not lead to good in the future. It will not lead to good in the present. Akirti Karam Arjuna.
Now, because the basic mode is encouragement. Encouraging to fight. So, he continues that.
And one way to encourage is by speaking sarcastically. So, Krishna speaks sarcastically in the next verse. So, two strong words are used over here.
One is Klaibya and the other is Shudra. And then to compensate, Parantapa. Actually, you are a Parantapa.
Don’t act like a Klaibya and a Shudra. So, the word Klaibya is especially hurting for two reasons. Now, Kshatriya is characterised by his manliness.
His potency is both physical and sexual. You know, he is physically very strong and he is also, Kshatriya is very virile. He can beget a lot of children.
So, he is saying, Klaibya is, you know, how are you being impotent? So, this is referring to the agyatvas. So, Mahabharata also uses the word Klaibya for a eunuch. So, Krishna is sarcastically taunting Arjuna.
You played the role of a eunuch. Have you actually become a eunuch now? So, you know, for Arjuna, it was, for all the Pandavas, it was a very humiliating period. But especially for Kshatriya to act like a eunuch was very, very difficult.
But, so, he is reminding him that, Klaibya mahasmagama partha na itattva upapadyate. This isn’t who you. And then, for a Kshatriya to be called a Shudra is also great.
So, these are like two verbal slaps. So, this sort of weakness of heart is characteristic of a Shudra. Oh, Arjuna, you are the conqueror of enemies.
So, arise. So, Parantapa is saying, you have to conquer many, many big abhinis outside. They are waiting there.
Why are you getting overpowered by enemies inside only? You know, by weakness of heart, just give it up and rise and fight. So, Arjuna feels chastised. But, Arjuna counters.
He says, this is not weakness of heart. I feel that I am actually behaving in a very, I am thoughtfully considering my decisions. And I am thinking what should be a civilised person’s conduct.
So, he counters Arjuna in the next two verses. But then after that, he expresses that I don’t know what to do. Ishubhi.
Ishubhi means I should offer flowers in worship. How can I offer arrows to them? Dronam cha madhusudana. So, now, he uses the word madhusudana, but he also uses more words for Krishna.
What are the words? Arisudana. So, actually, he is one of the distant ancestors of Krishna is a person named Madhu. So, actually, Madhu is the father of Vrishni.
Krishna is often called Varshini. So, Vrishni is like the great grandfather of Vasudeva and Devaki. So, he is their father of Madhu.
So, he says, actually, Madhu is my grandfather. I don’t kill him. So, Krishna, Arjuna says, I am using this word to emphasise the point that yes, Madhu was your enemy.
Arisudana. So, he says, you kill your enemy. You don’t kill your relatives.
So, how is it that you are asking me to kill my relatives? Will you kill Sandipani Muni? Or will you kill Ugrasen? If you want, then how can you ask me to kill? How can you ask me to kill them? Kill my grandfather and my teacher. Then he continues in the next verse. This same line of argument.
Yeah. So, now, if you see, Madhusudana is a common name that is used for Krishna. Now, the point here is that Madhusudana is, in this context, what is it referring to? That Madhu is also an ancestor of Krishna.
So, does Krishna kill his own ancestor? So, as Madhusudana, if we take it literally to mean that even Madhu who was killed at the start of the creation when he was studying the Vedic literature, there is no ambiguity. But if we take that meaning, then there is a redundancy. Redundancy means the same point is being repeated twice.
So, Madhusudana and Arisudana. So, why these two words are used? So, Vishwanath Chetavar explains that this Madhusudana Krishna is, Arjuna is using specifically to draw the contrast. Madhusudana, that is not the demon Madhu which is your relative.
You don’t kill him. Whom do you kill? Arisudana. That any Madhu you kill.
So, why these two Sudana are used? To explain this, Vishwanath Chetavar explained that this could refer to his ancestor Madhu. Then he continues this line of reasoning in the next verse. Everything we enjoy will be tainted with Rudhira’s blood.
So, he is saying that how can I possibly kill my Guru? He says he is a Guru and he is a Mahanubhava. So, how we Mahanubhava? Because he says that actually if you see Bhishma, Krishna may ask him that actually he has fallen down. He says, no he has not fallen down because he has conquered lust.
He has auto-circuit of conquering lust. He has even conquered time. He has Iccha-mrtyu.
Therefore, he is not only Guru, he is Guru and a Mahanubhava. Mahabharata describes that actually if the Guru does not behave properly, then even the Guru can be rejected. So, Bhishma has a quote that was in the Mahabharata.
One should reject the Guru who is proud, does not know proper behaviour and who becomes engaged in full life. So, the scriptures give us the instruction to go to a Guru and the scriptures tell us that the Guru should be given up also. So, then Arjuna is saying that no, he has conquered lust, he has conquered time.
How can he be faulty? Krishna says, but yeah, he has not conquered lust and time, but he has been overwhelmed by attachment to money. He has been contaminated by wealth. And actually just before the war starts, at that time, when Yudhishthira goes to meet Bhishma, Bhishma spoke some beautiful words over there.
Arthosya purusho daso, dasas tu arthanok artho na kasyachit iti satyam maharajo baddhos ne arthe na kaurvai. Very simple words. Arthosya purusho daso, that the purusha, the living being becomes a servant of wealth.
But, dasas tu artho na kasyachit, but money does not become the servant of anyone. Iti satyam maharajo. O Maharaja Yudhishthira, it is the truth that, what has happened to me? Baddhos ne arthe na kaurvai.
That by the wealth of the Kauravas, I have become bound. Of course, we know this is an external reason. The internal reason was that Lord wanted him to fight.
But, so now, Arjuna expresses his determination. He says, okay, even if he is Arthakama, Arthakama, even still he is my guru. Tu guru unheva.
That’s why the word guru comes twice. It comes in the third line. Tu guru unheva.
Even if he is Arthakama, still he is my guru. And if I fight and kill him, the spoil that we enjoy will be tainted with blood. So here, at this point, Arjuna sticks to his determination of not fighting.
But then, he contemplates, okay, what are the options that I have? And he sees only darkness everywhere. That he describes as undecided. So this is the last reason of Arjuna not fighting.
The fifth reason, which we discussed yesterday. Indecision. What should we do? If we fight, our relatives will be killed and our spoils will be tainted by blood.
But if we don’t fight, then we will either be killed or we will have to go and live as beggars. So there are three options for Arjuna. And none of them are palatable.
Kill your relatives, be killed or become a beggar. And none of them are palatable. Now, when before the battle, Vitharashtra is so cunning, he sends Sanjay as a Shantidut.
He sends Sanjay as a Shantidut to the Virat Raj, when the Pandavas come out of Agyatvas. And he says, very, very cunning, Yudhishthir, you are such a righteous and dharmic person. And ultimately, all of us, even after we acquire wealth and freedom, we have to renounce the wealth and freedom to take vanaprastha.
You are so advanced that even in youth only you have taken vanaprastha. You have already become adapted to the renounced mode of life which all of us have to eventually become adapted to. So, why don’t you, why do you want to fight such a big war? Just continue the way you are living and you will attain the perfection of life.
Don’t cause unnecessary battles. So, how cunning, how Dharma can be twisted. So at that time, basically Sanjay says, you have become habituated to begging arms, continue begging arms and living.
So, actually the Pandavas don’t literally beg arms, they stay in the forest and they get fruits and roots to eat. So, at that time, Krishna replies on behalf of Yudhishthir Maharaj, he says, a Kshatriya accepts only two arms. He says, it is victory or death.
When he is fighting, the way he begs is by fighting and he accepts only two arms, either victory or death. So, you decide which arm you want to give us. So, Sanjay goes back and he conveys that message to Yudhishthir Maharaj.
That doesn’t work. But the point is, in the previous verse, Arjuna has said that it will be better for me to live by begging. But he says, no, I cannot.
He gets confused. So, Madhusudana Saraswati is also an Acharya who has commented on the Bhagavad Gita. Now, like Sridhar Swami, Madhusudana Saraswati is a very enigmatic person.
Sridhar Swami, as we know, officially was in the Advaita Sampradaya. But he was a great Vaishnava. So, actually, just like sometimes spies go inside the enemy camp and explore the arm, everything over there.
So, Sridhar Swami, to actually be in the Mayavada Sampradaya, and there he would create appreciation for Bhakti, not just as a subordinate means to Gyan, but as an equivalent means to Gyan. What is Mayavada’s idea? That you can practise Bhakti till you become purified and then you can come to the level of Gyan. But he said, no, Bhakti itself is a means to ultimate realisation.
So, that’s why we see that, so what happened, because he was officially under the Mayavada Sampradaya, so sometimes some verses had to be Mayavadi interpretations. And that’s why we see what happened, Vallabhacharya, Vallabhatta, when he came to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s house, what was the accusation? He wanted to write another commentary, Sridhar Swami’s commentary. And what was the reason he was giving? He was saying, you know, he interprets everything according to context.
There is no consistency in his teachings. But actually, it’s not a lack of consistency, there’s a transcendental purpose. But Chaitanya Mahaprabhu understands the purpose of Sridhar Swami.
And therefore, he allows, he actually chastises him for trying to refuse Sridhar Swami. So, from Sridhar Swami onwards, there was this whole community of Bhaktas within the Advaita Sampradaya. So, they were actually Bhaktas, but officially, nominally, they were Advaita Sampradaya.
So, Madhusudana Saraswati was also a person like that. And his stand is confusing. Sometimes he seems to be a Jnani, sometimes he seems to be a Bhakta.
So, Krishna paradapi tattvam aham na jaane. That’s a famous verse that he quotes. He says, I don’t know any truth higher than Krishna.
So, he’s written a commentary in the Bhagavad Gita called Gudartha Deepika. And Vishwamitra Thakur quotes it several times. And most of the time, he quotes it to, and he says, Madhusudana Saraswati says this, and this is correct, and he supplements it.
And one or two times, he quotes it to contradict Madhusudana Saraswati. This is wrong. So, it’s a little enigmatic.
So, only an Acharya can take some Mayavada Sampradaya Acharya’s, Mayavada Sampradaya teacher’s commentary and use it. But here, Vishwamitra Thakur quotes, or Acharya quotes very interestingly, Madhusudana Saraswati traces what is the purpose of the first chapter. He says, that actually, many of the commentaries in the Bhagavad Gita, secular commentaries, they just start from the second chapter.
He says, what is the use of the first chapter? It’s all just historical names and details, and the real message is the philosophy. Start from the second chapter. So, they feel the first chapter is very unimportant.
And of course, some of them go further, and this is actually the Mahabharata mythology only. And all the names also become unimportant. But Prabhupada explains, because all these are characters connected with the Mahabharata, which is connected with Krishna, so even the names are purifying.
That’s why we recite the first chapter also. But Madhusudana Saraswati gives a further analysis. He says that the first chapter establishes Arjuna’s qualifications as an ideal disciple.
This verse culminates Arjuna’s qualifications. So, what are the qualifications? He starts from 1.31, where Arjuna says, Nachi Shreyo Anupashyami Hathva Sajana Mahave. So, Shreyo Anupashyami.
I have not seen a long-term benefit in this. So, a disciple should be able to see long-term, not short-term. So, if we want to be short-term, then actually Surajayal doesn’t hold much interest.
Material life itself is more interesting. So, Arjuna is thinking long-term. That’s his first qualification.
Then 1.32-35, he explains, Kinnorajena Govinda Kinnorajena Govinda I don’t want Rajya, I don’t want Bhoga. So, he demonstrates detachment from worldly life. So, he says, I don’t even want the three worlds, what to speak of this earth.
So, he demonstrates detachment not only from the next, from world again in this world, but also world again in the next world. So, he demonstrates detachment. And then, after that, it’s interesting, 1.43, when he says, Narakheniya Tamvaso, Bhavateetyanushushruma, that those who destroy the family tradition, they reside in hell.
So, now, this indicates that Arjuna knows that there is something called the soul beyond the world. Isn’t it? Otherwise, how will he think of Naraka or Sarga? Obviously, world is going to be destroyed. So, who is going to go to Naraka? So, Arjuna knows about the next life.
And he knows, to some extent, about the difference between the body and the soul. And then, in 1.38 and 1.39, he shows lack of, he shows absence of greed. He says, they are blinded by greed.
They are blinded by greed. But we can see. Therefore, why should we fight? So, like that, he demonstrates in the previous chapter four qualities.
Long-term vision, detachment, absence of greed, and knowledge of soul. And in this verse, he indicates the real recognition of the futility of material life. Futility of material life.
Because whatever he chooses at material level, it’s all going to be frustrating. And this point will be illustrated more in 2.8. That is, even if I go to Swarga, actually, it’s not going to solve my problem. So, the first chapter is not only just giving Arjuna justification for not fighting, but in subtle level, it is establishing Arjuna’s qualifications for discipleship.
So, now, in the next verse, Arjuna will admit, yes, Krishna, what you said is correct. You said that I was succumbing to weak-heartedness, So, he says, Actually, yes, I have become weak-hearted. I don’t know what to do.
And this admission of one’s ignorance is the beginning of knowledge. To the extent we think we know, Kena Upanishad says that one who thinks he knows, does not know. One who knows that he does not know, knows.
So, Arjuna says, I do not know. So, he’s asking, So, he’s asking, you know what he’s asking? He’s asking, long-term, what is the benefit for me? Tell me definitely for that. And dharma samudha chetaha.
What is the dharma? I am bewildered about it. So, why am I bewildered? In the Mahabharata, Arjuna only tells, while discussing with the Pandavas, that the path of dharma is very sukshma. It’s very difficult to understand it.
So, at this point, Krishna is a little hesitant. He says, Arjuna, we are friends. And, anyway, this is a temporary problem.
We just fight and win. Everything will be solved. Or, if you want, you can just go to Vyasa or somebody else.
So, Arjuna makes it very clear. No other solution will work for him. That’s why he discusses the next verse.
Which indicates, his conviction that a material solution will not solve the problem. Sovereignty like the demigods in heaven. Sovereignty like the demigods in heaven.
So, he says, if I win this war, at best I will get this kingdom. But what to think of the kingdom? Even if I get all the three worlds, I will not be satisfied. So, actually, ultimately, what makes us happy or miserable is not our possessions but our emotions.
What makes us happy or miserable is not our possessions but our emotions. If something has made us very miserable, then all our possessions are of no use to us. So, he is saying, I am internally undecided.
I am internally miserable. So, this is drying up my senses. And therefore, external possessions, they are not going to help me in such a situation.
It is described in Maharajas’ past times that he wanted a son and he didn’t have a son. All the other things that he had, they were like a garland for a hungry person. So, it’s of no use.
So, actually, he is saying, he is having emotional turmoil and possessions don’t help. So, actually, our modern society works very hard to acquire possessions but it knows practically nothing about emotions. How to deal with emotions? What to do with emotions? And therefore, there is this whole concept of emotional intelligence which comes up.
People are emotionally sensitive. But most people are very, very insensitive. And because their emotions practically speaking, torture them and destroy them.
So, managing the emotions is something which is Arjuna is saying, my emotions have overpowered me. Therefore, this external possession will not be able to help me. And then, now, again in the next verse, Arjuna says, I will not fight.
But there is a difference between I will not fight at 1.46 and in 2.9. What is the difference? Here, he has handed over the problem to Krishna. He says, I surrender to you. I am asking you some questions.
So, till I get the answers to this question, I am not going to fight. So, in that sense, there is a difference. He is surrendering.
So, now Sanjay starts speaking. Sanjay uvacha evam tuta darshi kesham gudakeshe na dhantaka nayot jyoti govindam uptva tu shrim bhavuva nayot jyoti govindam So, he has become silent now. I will not fight.
So, actually, he says, I will not fight. But he is ready to hear from Krishna. And now, Krishna starts speaking.
So, before he speaks, there is some focus on the facial expression of Krishna which comes. Vishwamitra Chakraborty elaborates. So, there is a contrast.
Vishwamitra is Arjuna. He is lamenting. But Krishna is Prahasan.
He is smiling. So, how can Krishna be smiling when Arjuna is lamenting? The word is Prahasan. As is smiling.
So, why as is smiling? Because, you know, Krishna, whenever Arjuna would act in an inappropriate way, Krishna would just laugh sarcastically. In the Mahabharata, we see, he laughs sarcastically. What is this you are doing? But now, that sort of joking is fine among equals.
But, you know, if a disciple tells some problem to his spiritual master, the spiritual master starts laughing. You know, that will be mortifying for the disciple. So, because the relationship has changed, initially when Krishna saw this, he said, why are you acting like this? But now, because he has surrendered, so, actually, Krishna recognises that laughing at this point is inappropriate.
Therefore, the smile comes on his face, but he checks it. Prahasan he was. As is smiling.
So, a friend has become a disciple now. And now Krishna will start speaking. So, in Krishna, this is actually words.
Krishna starts speaking, and it’s very interesting the first and the second words that he speaks. Before, we go to the more often quoted verses, but let’s see, the first two words are very significant. Now, Jiva Goswami does a parallel between this word, which is the beginning of Krishna’s instructions, and 18.66, which is the end of Krishna’s instructions.
Although Krishna speaks for 5-6 more verses after that, but after that, basically, it’s phalashruti, the glory of speaking the Bhagavad Gita, hearing the Bhagavad Gita, studying the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna’s instructions end with 18.66. So, the common element of both 1.11 and 18.66 is maa sujaha. So, there it’s more explicit, don’t lament.
And here it is, wise person don’t lament. So, here it is more implicit. So, the essence of the instruction of the Bhagavad Gita is that although there will be many sources for lamentation in this world, a wise person should not lament.
And how can one avoid lamentation? That Krishna describes by the repeated thing, think of me, remember me. So, a devotee, as we say, instead of doing chinta, he does chintana. So, if we just use our mental energy for, dissipate our mental energy in worrying, then we get no result from it.
On the other hand, if we fix our mind on Krishna, that leads to purification and advancement. So, maa sujaha, actually lamentation or worry, the lamentation and worry in one sense are similar. Lamentation can be about past, worry is about the future.
Lamentation, this went wrong, that went wrong. But essentially, both of them are draining emotions. So, once there was a lady who had a constant fear that I am going to get cancer.
And every three months she would go to a doctor. Every three months she would go. And after 22 and a half years, that means she went to the doctor 90 times.
And after that, the doctor said, you have got cancer. See, I was telling you 22 and a half years ago. So, see, actually, if somebody was suppose going to do some investment in shares.
And you know, if 90 times the investment prediction goes wrong, and after that it goes right. You know, we will fire such an investor. But worry is such a thing, that it makes us waste our mental energy on so many problems, so many situations which don’t materialise on me.
And then eventually when one of the hundred worries materialises, we say, you are right, you are right. So, that’s how worry drains our mental energy. Of course, this doesn’t mean that one doesn’t prepare or plan for the future.
But the point is, after we have done what we can in preparing and planning, beyond that, the essence of Krishna’s instruction is don’t lament. Don’t lament. And he uses a very interesting one, gata-asuna agata-asuna.
Asuna means the life air. Gata means to go away. So, gata-asuna means those for whom the life air has gone away.
And agata-asuna means those for whom the life air has not gone away. That means those who are living and those who are not living. So, now, Baldevidya Goswami gives a deeper meaning.
He says gata-asuna refers to the gross body. And agata-asuna refers to the subtle body. Because life air goes inside and outside in the gross body.
But agata-asuna, the life air doesn’t go in the subtle body at all. It doesn’t go in or come out. So, the wise person, the pandita, don’t lament for the gross body or the subtle body.
And that will be, an interesting analysis will come in the next verses, where at the gross body level, we have pains. Like the heat and cold. And at the subtle body level, we have happiness and distress.
So, both of these, wise person is not disturbed by that. And, now, it’s very significant, even before refuting the bodily conception, Krishna refutes mayavada. That is how categorical and clear Krishna is in the Bhagavad Gita.
So, that’s the next verse. So, there was never a time when we were not there. I, you, or all these kings.
So, Ramanujacharya, he does most of his polemics. Polemics means argumentation. In his Sri Bhashya.
Sri Bhashya is commented in Vedanta Sutra. His first verse, what is the first verse of Vedanta Sutra? So, Sri Ramanujacharya has a hundred page commentary So, he says, how does the Brahma Jijnasa arise in his own? There itself, he refutes mayavada. So, in his Gita Bhashya, it’s relatively simpler.
He doesn’t go into too much polemics. But, he’s argumentation, refutation, he does in this verse. 2.12 and then in 13.3. These two verses, he uses strong argumentation.
Prabhupada, more or less, refutes Ramanujacharya’s argument. So, his argument is very simple but very powerful. He says that the mayavadi idea is that our sense of personality is just a temporary illusion.
Actually, all that exists is mayavadi. Who was asked this question? Are you God? Do you have any doubt about that? So, he said, actually, not only am I God, you are also God. So, don’t doubt anything about it.
We are all God. It’s a very popular philosophy. But, what is their idea? That our sense of duality.
Now, I, you, this is a temporary illusion and eventually we will merge into one. So, if this were the case, then Krishna is talking about individuality even in the future. He is saying, individuality about what? All of us, you, I and these kings, all of us are going to exist even in the future.
So, if individuality were an illusion, temporary illusion, how could Krishna talk about it in the future? And there are three level arguments. This is the first argument. First argument is, how can there be individuality in the future if all of us are going to become one impersonal whole? Then, the Mayavadis argue that actually, this individuality that is talked about is conventional.
It’s at the bodily level. We talk, I, you, but what is Prabhupada’s argument? Look at the words before, look at the words after. 1.11 is condemning bodily conception.
Dehino smrita dehe is condemning bodily conception. So, why suddenly Krishna will talk at the level of bodily conception? Isn’t it? And another level of argument is, even if we say this is conventional, then, still the problem arises, if Krishna’s individuality is material or spiritual? If Krishna’s individuality is material, then he is just another conditioned soul. If he is another conditioned soul, then there is no use of taking instructions from him because he is also an illusion like us.
Then, then you just shut up and don’t comment on the Bhagavad Gita only. Or, if he is an enlightened soul, then, when he is enlightened and he is speaking like I and you, he cannot be under illusion. So, when Krishna is speaking I and you, if that is illusion, then his whole Bhagavad Gita is illusion.
There is no need to refer to the Bhagavad Gita only. But when Krishna is saying I and you, if that is not an illusion, if Krishna is in reality, then Krishna’s words are reality and I-you duality is eternal. It’s a very strong argument.
Baladeva Vidyaputra repeats the argument and Prabhupada takes the same argument. So, now Krishna is basically saying all of us are eternal. But now, how can all of us be eternal? Because all of us are going to die.
So then, Krishna makes it more specific. What is it that is eternal? It is not the body, it is the soul. So, now Arjuna is drawing upon a very interesting, Krishna is drawing upon a very practical example.
Right now, we may say that actually my body is simply growing. My body is not changing. It’s not that I had a childhood body and now I have a youth body.
It’s the same person, the body is just growing. But actually, we can look at it from a biological point of view, from the bodily point of view, we know all the cells in the body keep changing. How many years? Seven years.
And now, the reductionistic scientists, they try to reduce everything spiritual to everything material. They try to say that actually, our sense of individuality comes from the brain. And this was to some extent tenable because the notion was the brain cells don’t change.
Whatever brain cells we have got in our childhood, that’s what we live with and eventually they just die out. And that’s how people at old age they start losing their memory. But now, researchers have found that brain cells not only die, they are also replaced.
New cells also come out. And this is devastating to the materialistic hypothesis. Why? Because if we were just like a computer, and in a computer I have a hard disc.
Now, if the hard disc were just changed, then all the data would be lost. Unless I do a proper data transfer. But there is no system of data transfer.
When the cells die and the new cells come up in the brain, it’s not that there is a transfer of data from this cell to that cell. So, actually, something like 10,000 neurone cells die every day. Huge number.
And if so many cells are dying every day, then there are approximately 1 billion neurones in the brain. It’s a very complicated thing. So, how does our… For example, if my sense of my name is stored in a particular part of the brain, and those cells die, I’ll forget my name.
But it doesn’t happen like that. So, our basic day-to-day knowledge, it continues on. Therefore, actually, from the biological point of view, everything is changing.
But still, I remain the same. So, who is it that remains the same? So, that is actually the soul. So, you see, just as we see the body changing in this life, through boyhood, through youth, through old age, similarly, the body will change, but the person will remain the same.
So, the fact that I remember my childhood body, whereas the childhood body is gone, that means I am not the childhood body. I am something different from the body. So, if I had also changed, then I would not remember myself to be the same person.
So, now, I was talking about gatasun and agatasun as gross body and subtle body. So, actually then, in that case, Krishna is differentiating in 2.13 between the soul and the gross body. And in 2.14, He will differentiate between the soul and the subtle body.
mātrāṇas pariṣṇās tu kaunteya śītauṣṇa-sukha-duḥkha-dā ārha-māhāi no nitya tānti-dikṣa-svabhārata I must learn to So, he is on tolerance. So, tolerance with respect to, actually, here he is talking about heat and cold as an analogy. Just as you tolerate heat and cold, similarly, you tolerate happiness and distress.
So, heat and cold are at the physical level and happiness and distress are at the mental level. So, tolerate both of them. Why? Because we can remember.
Sometimes, boys ask this question, I can logically understand that I am different from my body, but how can I understand that I am different from my mind? So, how we can understand is that we can observe our emotions. We can remember our emotions. Or even now, sometimes, we can conceive ourselves, I am outside my body.
I can observe myself. And we can also observe our emotions. So, generally speaking, we tend to identify with our emotions.
But it is possible for us to sort of distance ourselves from the emotions as well. So, because we can distance ourselves from the emotions, that means we are not our emotions. So, emotions are actually the content of consciousness.
But what is consciousness itself? Emotions are the content of consciousness. Just like there is a room. In the room, there is something which is the content.
But the content of the room is not the room itself. So, like that, emotions are not consciousness itself. Emotions are the content of consciousness.
Tolerate your emotions also. And I think this will be the theme in the 14th chapter especially. Prakrishna talks about the three modes of material nature.
Emotions are induced by the modes and just tolerate them. When Arjuna asks this question first, he says, There he describes, in 14.21, Arjuna asks, how does one transcend the mode? In 14.21, the first answer he uses is Prakash, illumination is the characteristic of goodness. Pravrutti is the characteristic of activity.
And Moha, illusion is the characteristic of ignorance. So, he says, When these come, don’t be resentful. When they go away, don’t hanker for them.
Udasi, Nivasi, all these are products of the modes. So, distancing ourselves from our mind is vital to the process of Jnana. In Bhakti, we try to focus on developing higher emotions.
But here Krishna is saying, tolerate your emotions. How do we differentiate ourselves from our intelligence? Good question. Actually, now we have to understand the use of the word mind.
When you talk of the mind, the mind can be used in a very specific sense to refer to one component of the subtle body. That is mind, intelligence and ego. So, one component of that is the mind.
But in a more generic sense, the whole subtle body can be referred to as the mind. And in the teachings of Sankhya, actually it is described that mind, intelligence, ego and antahkar, the internal senses. All four are of the same substance.
They are same substance but different functions. They are same substance but different functions. So, in that sense, we cannot categorise this is intelligence, this is mind and this is ego.
But we can categorise in terms of the so basically, if you see the essence of the subtle body is emotions. Now, when there is intelligence, there is discrimination. This emotion is desirable, this emotion is undesirable.
But thought and emotion are the two faculties of the subtle body. So, in that sense, before we will discuss this a little bit more in the sixth chapter. But basically, thought and emotions are both a faculty of the subtle body.
And we can say that thought is of the intelligence and emotion is of the mind. But essentially, they are all of the subtle body. And just as we can observe our emotions, we can observe our thoughts also.
For example, if we start thinking of sense objects, then when we start getting emotionally agitated, that time we become aware of it. Or we become aware of it before I am thinking of this. So, I have not yet become agitated.
So, the emotions have not yet come, but the thought is there. So, if we check at the level of thoughts, it’s easier. Once it gets at the level of emotions, it becomes faster.
So, in that sense, we can observe our thoughts and emotions. And if we say that thought is a faculty, because we can observe our thoughts, so we can say that we are different from the entire universe. Thinking, feeling, willing are the progressive functions of the subtle body.
You can call it the mind. Now, what does the intelligence do? Intelligence differentiates which thoughts, which feelings, which intentions. So, in that sense, the difference is only with respect to functionality.
So, if I am choosing a particular thought and if I am rejecting a particular thought, choosing a particular emotion, rejecting a particular emotion, that means I am actually using my intelligence. So, you can’t make exactly categorical division. This is the function of mind, this is the function of intelligence.
So, thought is of the mind, of the intelligence, and emotion is of the mind. It’s not like that. Actually, the whole subtle body is involved in the mechanism.
But, in general, for the functional purpose, we see that the mind is more or less spontaneous. Spontaneous, not in the right sense, but in the wrong sense. And intelligence is more contemplative.
So, now, after describing tolerance, tolerance is not easy. But Krishna will inspire Arjuna towards tolerance by telling about the fruit of tolerance. So, this is the first verse in the Bhagavad Gita that refers to immortality, to eternity, eternal existence.
Study in happiness. So, what will happen? He is eligible for Amrutatvaya Kalpate. Kalpate means eligible.
Amrut is immortality. He is eligible for eternal existence. So, actually, tolerance, the lack of tolerance traps us in a very small world.
And the ability for tolerance liberates us into a larger world. Some simple example. Suppose, if we are going in a crowded train, and some people just can’t tolerate the crowd.
This person is pushing, that person is pushing, this person is doing that, this person is doing like that. And if the mind gets so caught in that closed world of the train, that you can’t think of anything else. Okay, now this is the way I am.
Now, let me read something, let me chant, let me discuss. Let me neglect it now. I can’t change it, let me neglect it.
If we can just tolerate it, then we become free for so much more things. So, the lack of tolerance traps us in a very small world of the mind. The small world of the mind is based on its likes and dislikes.
So, I like this, I don’t like this. Suppose, there is some food item that we don’t like. Then, from the moment we see that food item, I am so much caught in those thoughts.
But okay, it’s not that every day I have to eat this, and it’s not that it’s the only thing I have to eat, there are other things also. Let’s put it aside, put it in a perspective, and we can move forward. Then, you know, we can discuss something, we can hear some lecture, we can plan some future services.
So, actually, a lack of tolerance traps us in a small world. Like, if we are going in a crowded traffic, and suddenly somebody just cuts across, and then somebody is going to get angry, what are you doing? That person has just gone away. That person has just gone away, and we are simply wasting our time thinking about him.
Okay, he’s done it, let’s forget it. So, tolerance can liberate us from the mind’s small world. So, how do we actually distance ourselves or recognise ourselves to be different from the mind? It is by tolerating the emotions.
And then, actually, if you tolerate the spiritual understanding, then not only there is a bigger world, there is an eternal world that will become liberated. Should we have a five-minute break? So now, Krishna will elaborate this further, and say that there are actually two principles. There are two tattvas.
And then, after introducing these two tattvas, in the next three verses, he will elaborate these two tattvas. nāsato vijyate bhāvo nā bhāvo vijyate sathā Indirectly, Krishna is chastising Arjuna that you are not a seer like this. Those who are seers, they understand the difference between the two.
But you don’t understand it. Now, these are typically Upanishadic verses. The Vedas are more filled with hymns and praises of the Devatas.
And the Upanishads are filled with philosophy. And the Upanishads are especially written in enigmatic verses. Enigmatic means very puzzling.
What does it mean? Even 1.11 was a part of Upanishadic. gatāsuna gatāsuna chanaṁ śocanti paṇḍita. This is even more.
Of the non-existent, there is no endurance. Of the eternal, there is no association. This is why they have understood.
What does it mean? So, there are people who are very intellectual. They need something for their intellect to churn on. These things are presented very simply for them.
There is no fun in this. Therefore, the Upanishads see the soul’s sense gratification is physical as well as higher. So, physical sense gratification is provided for in the karmakāṇḍa section of the Vedas.
You do this, you will get a beautiful spouse, you will get wealth, you will get progeny. And intellectual sense gratification is provided in the Upanishads. Shankaracharya says, vedānta-vākeśa-sadāramanta.
You know that verse? What is that? kopīna vantau khanubhāgya vantau bhikṣāṇya-mātreṇa tuṣṭi vantau vedānta-vākeśa-sadāramanta khanubhāgya vantau How fortunate is a sannyāsī! kopīna vantau khanubhāgya vantau bhikṣāṇya-mātreṇa He just takes bhikṣāṇya and he just eats that. And what is this? And what does he do? What is his life’s passion? Vedānta-vākeśa-sadāramanta So take one vedānta-vākeśa-sadāramanta and what does it mean? What does it mean? Actually, if you see, like I was telling, the Vedānta-sutra, if you just want to read a Sanskrit, within 30 minutes you can read a full Sanskrit. It’s very, very short aphorisms.
Now, actually, the first four verses of the Vedānta-sutra, he takes the first four verses of the Vedānta-sutra. These are basically less than 10 words. And he analyses that actually on these 10 words the Māyāvādī and Vaiṣṇava Ācārya have written more than 100,000 pages.
Of just these 10 words. And actually, one full section of the book of Paramātmā-sandarbha, one section is the Chatu-sutrī-tikā. Chatu-sutrī-tikā.
So actually, our Rādhikārāma and Prabhu, here comes our Ravi Gupta, he has done his PhD in the Chatu-sutrī-tikā of the Paramātmā-sandarbha, of the Chatu-sandarbha, of Jīva Goswāmī. So, actually, it gives a lot of intellectual sense gratification. So these sort of verses, of the existence, there is no cessation.
Of the eternal, there is no cessation. Of the non-existent, there is no endurance. So basically, the Māyāvādīs try to refer to this, actually this world is unreal and only Brahman is real.
But that is not what exactly Krishna is saying over here. Krishna is saying that actually, the spiritual is real and the material is unreal in the sense that it is temporary. It is temporary.
So, Prabhupāda explains that reality means that which is never vanquished by time. So anything that is vanquished by time is not real. So if we see a dream, during the duration of the dream it appears to be real.
And if we define reality from physical terms, the dream may even have physical effects. You know, if we are being chased by a tiger, we may be sweating, we may wake up and we may be panting. But when we wake up, nothing there.
So, now is the dream real or is it false? Actually when we wake up, we understand it is false. Till we have woken up, it is real. So similarly, this material existence, when we go back to the spiritual world, we will understand it is false.
But while we are here, it is actually real for us. And we have to really make the right choices by which we can wake up from this world. That’s why in the Puranjan Upakhyan, a very interesting thing comes up, that the last instruction that Narada Muni gives, that Shukla Goswami talks about, that for the essence of all the Vedic literature, is that whatever has happened, whatever is happening, and whatever will happen in the future is a dream.
This is the essence. And then immediately, Maitreya is being asked by Vidura, he says, you told me the Prachetas satisfy the Supreme Lord by the Rudra Gita. So what was the result of their satisfaction? I know that they attained liberation, but what else did they get? What happened to them in this life? If you see it in sequence, first he said, everything that happened in this world is a dream, but then Vidura is asking, tell me what happened to them in this world? That means, that a devotee’s life in this world is not unimportant.
Why? Because a normal dream, when somebody is dreaming, you can just slap him or put some water on him and he will wake up. But for waking up from our dream, there has to be a prescribed process that has to be followed. There is a particular way of living that has to be adopted.
So by which, actually, in one sense, for a devotee, it is not that from the dream we wake up from the dream into the reality. Rather, for a devotee, the dream transforms into reality. Because, the dream is that we can enjoy separation from Krishna, that we have existence independent of Krishna.
The reality is that we are servants of Krishna. So when we start serving Krishna, this dream itself transforms into reality. So in that sense, what is real is not, what is false, the material world is real, we are real.
But what is false is that we belong to the material world. We can enjoy the material world. The Mayavadis say the whole material world is false and our sense of self-conception is also false.
But it is not true. We are real, the soul is real, the world is real. But the idea that we can enjoy this world is false.
So Krishna is telling this. And then he illustrates this. What is it that is eternal, what is it that is temporary.
So in the next verse he will tell what is eternal. So now this verse is a little technical. And this verse is the first real verse where the Mayavadis get a chance to come in.
Because you know, 2.12 was very heavy. So here they get. That pervades everything.
The Brahman pervades everything. So now, Prabhupada explains. Sarvam refers to simply the body.
And it is very logical. Because if we see, Krishna is not talking anywhere about the all-pervading absolute truth here. Again, look at the context.
Generally, one of the rules of understanding scripture, the Mimamsakas gave very systematic rules for understanding scripture. One of the rules, always see the context. How does a section begin? How does a section end? And based on that, understand what should be there inside.
What should be there within, should be consistent with what is there in the beginning, what is there in the end. So if you look at this section, before this, what came was the body. He is not talking about all bodies or the one soul which pervades the universe.
And immediately after this, the next verse will be So this body is perishing. So he is not talking about the Vishwa at all over here. So in that sense, Sarvam will refer to the body.
It doesn’t refer to the whole Sarvam in the sense of the whole universe. Now Ramacharya gives a very brilliant insight to explain this Sarvam. He says, actually the main theme of this verse is Avinashi.
That the soul is indestructible. It cannot be destroyed. And he says that this Yena Sarvam Idam Tatam has to be understood in the context of Avinashi.
Because if you see, before Yena Sarvam Idam Tatam is Avinashi. And after that is also what? That the soul cannot be destroyed. So he gives a very brilliant understanding.
He says that normally when one object destroys another object, one object destroys another object by pervading into that object. When a knife kills a person, the knife goes inside the person. If a fire burns something, fire goes inside.
If water destroys something, water soaks into that. So for one object to destroy another object, that object should pervade into that object. But he says the soul is so subtle that the soul pervades all other objects.
And therefore the soul cannot be pervaded by any object. So here Sarvam refers to all the elements of material existence. The soul pervades all the elements of material existence and therefore none of the elements of material existence can destroy the soul.
And this will be corroborated in 2.23 and 24 where Krishna will tell nainam chinnam chastra nainam dhati pavakam. So he describes that in this way he refers to bhumir apo nalavayi kham bano buddhir eva chal. None of these can destroy the soul because they cannot enter into the soul.
The soul enters into them. So how can they destroy? And then here he describes that actually ina sarvam idam tattam that the soul pervades the whole body. Now you may ask, if the soul pervades the whole body then is the soul like some air which spreads everywhere? How does the soul pervade? The soul pervades by consciousness.
So actually Baldevudhyabhujan in the Govind Bhashya describes the soul is gyanasvarupa and it has the attribute it has the quality of gyanasvarupa. Just like a bulb is here. A bulb is situated in one place and the bulb spreads its light.
So now the light is the energy of the bulb. The bulb stays in one location but its light spreads everywhere. This is like that the soul is like the source of consciousness and consciousness is the energy of the soul.
So Prabhupada gives the example just as the active principle of medicine. It is ingested into the body, it spreads everywhere. So like that the soul is situated in the region of the heart but from there it spreads everywhere.
Another word that is used is Nobody ever can destroy the soul. So Arjuna’s first concern was how can I kill my relatives? So the section 2.11 to 30 is basically addressing Arjuna’s first argument. That actually you are saying that how can you kill your relatives? But they are not going to die.
And that now will be emphasised in the next verse. So now in this verse Krishna talked about that which is eternal. That which is Now in the next verse he will talk about So now he says the body is anyway going to be destroyed.
Now Deha is singular, Deha is plural. So this is to refer to the two bodies. The gross body and the subtle body.
Both the bodies are destructible. Therefore don’t be preoccupied with the two bodies. So don’t be preoccupied with the hurt that will happen physically.
Don’t be preoccupied with the gross body or to the emotion that will come to the subtle body. They are both destructible. And now an interesting word here is Apramesa Apramesa means immeasurable.
So now how can the soul be called as immeasurable? So immeasurable here does not mean that we say immeasurable doesn’t mean immeasurably large. It means immeasurably small. Immeasurable basically means beyond measurement.
So what can be beyond measurement? Because it is so big or because it is so small. The soul is very small. And the soul is not an object of conception.
Later on Krishna will talk about Achintyobhyam. So we cannot contemplate on the soul. We cannot measure the soul with our material senses.
So in that sense it is Apramesa here. And now after describing this Krishna will come to Arjuna’s practical question about killing the relatives. Actually how can, if you understand the soul is eternal, then how can anyone kill anyone? … … … Slay is not nor is slain.
So now we can understand nor is slain is one part is ok. The self is eternal so it is not slain. But the self slays not.
What does that mean? That is actually very deep important. What he is saying is that actually the soul is ultimately the non-doer. The soul can act impelled by maya or it can act impelled by Krishna.
But the soul in the ultimate sense is the non-doer. So Arjuna is telling Krishna why are you asking me to kill? But he says you think that you are killing or they are being killed. Both is false.
Because ultimately the soul is not the doer. … Now exactly what does it mean the soul is not the doer? You know one time I was giving a class. … Now it raises several questions.
When we say that we are not the doer. So what question does it raise? Why should I do anything? Why should I do anything? Well that is an inappropriate question. Because even if you say why should I do anything, you will surely be forced by the modes to do something.
So the idea that we are not the doers has to be very carefully understood. And this will come repeatedly in the Bhagavad Gita. We will discuss it especially in the 5th chapter.
Where Krishna talks about aetiology. Aetiology is the causation. Who is the actual doer? But here Krishna is telling that actually the soul is spiritual.
The soul cannot act at a material level. In the sense that the soul is not affected. The soul is not actuated.
So now he emphasises further the indestructibility of soul once again. By talking about this famous verse which again comes in the … … … … … … … So now here Krishna for the first time … Ajah means unborn. Now if you literally take something which is unborn that would mean it is non-existent for me.
Because it never came into birth. But Ajah does not mean that it does not come into existence. What it means is that birth means beginning.
So birth would correspond with death. So it does not have any beginning. And that’s why again it has not come into being.
It will not come into being. That does not mean it doesn’t exist. But it exists outside the time domain.
So therefore the idea of coming into being does not apply to it. It exists eternally. So the Christians have the idea that the soul that every time a man and a woman unite a new soul is created and their idea is after creation the soul becomes eternal so it’s like you have partial infinity, half infinite, it’s infinite forward but not backward so that does not make any logical sense first of all and secondly the problem comes up and why do different souls want different situations? so they can’t explain that at all so then life becomes like a rigged race let’s say people have to run a 100 metre race and then at the starting point some people are starting at the 0 metre mark some are starting at 10 metre mark, some at 20 metre mark, some at 30 metre mark some are already at the 100 metre mark so then what is the point of the race? now how does that make? it means that if we consider that the goal of life is material success then we see some people are already materially successful some people are already born in wealthy families some people are, if the goal is to acquire material knowledge some people are already born with a lot of intellectual power so it becomes like a rigged race somebody is already put ahead why does God do that? and even if we consider that life is meant for spiritual development not material development still life will appear rigged from the Christian point of view because some people are born into Christian families so they directly have a chance to accept Jesus and Jesus is the only way, there are no other ways according to their philosophy so some people have directly right from the birth opportunity to take shelter of Jesus other people, they may hear about Jesus from someone they may not hear and some people may never hear of Jesus so that means right from the beginning only the whole life is rigged and then you are judged for that so it is very arbitrary therefore, I mentioned that once when I had gone to Bangalore so we started discussing I said, Prabhupada Nagarjuna, thou shalt not kill he said, why do you kill? actually, he realised that he was in trouble so he said, actually if you are so concerned about killing why are you bothered about the animals? you can actually at least stop the babies from being killed in the womb I said, oh good, so you oppose abortion? so a catholic church opposes abortion some protestant churches have allowed it he said, of course abortion is murder and I asked him, what happens to the aborted child? the aborted child, you say Jesus is the only way back to God and the aborted child never got a chance to take shelter of Jesus and he has only one life so it is aborted in the womb so he never got a chance to take shelter of Jesus so what happens to him? he said, oh because the child is innocent God will take him back to him what is the goal of life? it is to go back to God he said, why not abort everyone? he said, how can you abort everyone, that is bad he said, is going back to God good or bad? he said, that is good see, if he is born, he may never take shelter of Jesus and then, if he doesn’t take shelter of Jesus, he will go to hell and you will be responsible for sending him to hell because you didn’t abort him so, actually, we respect Jesus but Jesus himself said, I have many more things to say you have not the ears to hear so, yes, we respect Jesus for his compassion but the message that he has given is philosophically very inadequate and one major reason why atheism spread in the west and through the west, now even India is because Christianity was intellectually very unsatisfying as compared to Christian philosophy so, actually, atheism seemed a more intellectually satisfying alternative and that’s why, if Krishna Consciousness is presented properly the understanding of the soul and the body is so powerful you can actually transform a person’s life not just from a practical point of view even intellectually, it is very very satisfying so, actually, the posthumous journey of the soul posthumous means after death the posthumous journey of the soul to the next body is not something which Prabhupada emphasised very much in his teachings so, Prabhupada mentioned this once, I think, in the 13th chapter but apart from that, that is not something Prabhupada emphasised repeatedly so, in general, depending on the karma the soul can go in multiple directions and depending on the directions where it goes how it will come back will also vary so, now, when you say the soul goes down down can be three directions down can be to the lower planets down can be to the lower species or down can be to a lower status within the human species so, now, if you see there is a further difference there are lower planets, they are not the same as hell hell is below the lower planets there are seven pathas and below that there are 27 narkalokas so, down can mean either they go to hell to suffer and then they come up again or they go to the lower planets to stay over there so, basically, the posthumous journey of the soul is something which is not explicitly focused on by our acharyas in their writings so, therefore, the Garuda Puran does talk a lot about death and what happens after that and how the soul can be guided after that largely from the karma kanda point of view so, that which is mentioned that the soul falls from the rain and is eaten and things like that that is one way the soul can come but that is not the only way that the soul has to come there are multiple ways because it depends also on the soul coming from which species and even the devatas when they come it is not necessary that they have to come that way because sometimes the devatas are cursed and they directly fall and they become a snake or something like that so, basically, that account is given as an indication of how things can happen but that is not the only way that things always have to happen so, just as the soul’s presence in the body itself is inconceivable Krishna says in the 15th chapter, 10th verse so, this is utkaramantam sitamvapi this is how the soul goes from one body to another utkaramantam or for that matter how the soul stays within the body also both of these are very difficult to understand so, vimudhana anupasyam with our material senses so, basically, what we understand is the principle the principle is that as per our desires and our karma we will go to a particular destination so, the mode of the travel there is something which because at least the scriptures which our Gaudiya Acharya has emphasised bhagavatam, cc, gita, sandarbha we don’t talk much about that therefore, we don’t emphasise that too much and there are multiple gateways by which that may happen so, we focus on the principle of how the posthumous journey will take place not the details of literally from where where things will happen so, now regarding the samskaras our principle is yukta vairagya it’s like we accept the social structure of varanashram but not the philosophy of varanashram what is the philosophy of varanashram? that if you do your duty, if a person does his duty as a shudra faithfully in the next life he will become, after many lifetimes he will become a vaisya after that he will become a kshatriya after that he will become a brahmana and after many lives as a beautiful brahmana then he will rise as a devata and brahma and then eventually get liberated so, that is the philosophy of varanashram this is talked about in Manusmriti and other places so, we don’t accept the philosophy of varanashram we accept the social structure this is a good way to divide society, to have division of labour but, based on bhagavatam we understand that anybody who does religious devotional service can get liberated so, our approach towards varanashram is that of yukta vairagya we accept the social structure, not the philosophy similarly, with respect to the saskaras also we accept them as cultural items we don’t accept the philosophical implications behind them that’s why when devotees pass away basically what we do is a Vaishnava festival we do kirtan, we do prasad distribution and we may go to a Vaishnava holy place for doing the last rites Gopal Dutta Goswami has written a book Satkriya Deepika where he talks about how to Vaishnavize the karma kanda rituals and Vakhtaswamy also selected some of those he also did not select all of it and he gave it because Vakhtaswamy was the first acharya who had to actually support a congregation before that the Vaishnavas were mostly like babajis so, basically what we do is in our book of saskaras it’s basically adaptation of the karma kanda rituals without their philosophical baggage the karma kanda philosophy is soul will go here, go there and so many hells and so many higher and lower abodes so we just take the culture and we see that basically the ten saskaras are means by which certain impressions can be created on a person when he’s done karva dhaan, birth and all the other things so those are very impressionable moments so we recognise the principle that there are impressionable moments in people’s lives and we use that knowledge to give devotional impressions not just pious or least impressions so we take the cultural aspect of the saskaras but not the philosophical aspect so you would like to add something? I said we have this Vaishnav song that we sing and we basically glorify the Vaishnava and have it in a very devotional way may I try anything more? we were discussing about how the Christian philosophical understanding is quite incomplete so here now Krishna after describing how the soul is eternal that is the theme that is hammering again and again now he completes this by another rhetorical question in the next verse kill or cause anyone to kill because the soul is beyond destruction now Krishna Chakravarty says that here nityam is not referring to the soul it is referring to know that means one who constantly knows that the soul is ajah and avyayam such a person will not cause anyone to kill or cause anyone to be killed so that means this knowledge is eternal but we have to be constantly fixed in that knowledge if we are not constantly fixed in that knowledge then it becomes a problem so once Jayadev Maharaj asks is our sarupa fixed? he says our sarupa is fixed but we are not fixed in our sarupa so the soul is eternal but our knowledge of the soul is not eternal it is very unsteady so in that sense nityam refers to veda and now Arjuna says but actually I see that something is destroyed and even if the soul is not destroyed the body is destroyed the body of destruction causes pain I don’t want to cause pain to my relatives so Krishna has this analogy to illustrate how the body of destruction is actually not a cause of pain although it may seem to be a cause of pain actually it is a source of joy because it is not a destruction it is a rejuvenation, a transformation so he is telling you are concerned that you will be killing Bhishma and Drona but actually they have elderly bodies now so by dying in this battlefield because they are more or less virtuous persons they will get better bodies their spiritual bodies are heavenly bodies and in that sense they will get new clothes therefore there is no reason for you to lament and again the theme that is going on here is contrast between the body and the soul so now by telling how the change of the body is like a removal of the dress now Krishna explains in the next verses about how the soul is not destroyed and these three verses which come next are the typical example of the naiti naiti process of the Jnanis not this, not this, not this so Krishna describes what the soul is not so he describes that the soul is indestructible by any material means so to emphasise that it is just a change of the dress the body is going to be affected but the soul is not going to be affected so now the same point just because Arjuna’s main theme is lamentation at the death death is actually a non-event practically speaking so how the soul is not affected he illustrates this by he says the same thing in another way Prabhupada explains in this purport that repetition of the same point is sometimes important so that there is clear understanding so now he will describe the same in a one word describer so there are these four things which are described in the first two lines they are basically related with previous line, previous line itself previous verse and after that he describes some more qualities nitya, eternal sarva-gataha this is also another word which can be misunderstood sarva-gataha if we take it literally it will mean it is all-pervading but now the word gataha gataha necessarily doesn’t mean pervasion actually vyapta means pervasion vyapta is to pervade gataha comes from the word gati to go sarva-gataha means that it can go everywhere it can go everywhere it can go up, it can go down or it can get out all three are possible it can go up and down in the middle world it can get out, sarva-gataha and Prabhupada uses this to explain how there is life on other planets also Prabhupada has a simple argument he says you see on this earth even a small crack in the ground you will see some worms inside some ants inside so he says that Krishna uses space so efficiently on this planet and then he creates all the planets such a waste of space there is no life on it so now even scientists are becoming more and more open to the possibility because of many reasons one reason is that there are lot of sightings of UFOs and that sort of unidentified flying objects which are not explicable another thing is that they are realising the universe is far vaster than what they thought and therefore the possibility of even life according to their understanding how do they know whether life is there they basically look for conditions suitable for life as we know it they look for water they look for a condition suitable temperature and they look for oxygen but even on the earth, deep under the ocean they have found life which is which doesn’t require oxygen there are bacteria deep within the oceans crust which drink nitrogen dioxide and eat stone and they never get to see sunlight they never get to breathe oxygen and they still live on so these are called extremophilic organisms they live in, they love extreme conditions so now our scientists have proposed that even on the moon there may be life according to their own analysis because they say that we are not dug inside the moon to see whether there is life or not according to them there is no life on the moon’s surface but who knows, under the crust of the moon there may be life so therefore actually if science discovers life on other planets no other religion is capable of explaining that because according to all the other religions in the earth is the only planet where there is life and beyond earth there is the kingdom of god so one Christian preacher was asked if you discover life on other planets, what will be your reaction the first thing he will ask them is do you accept Jesus as your saviour has Jesus come to earth because they have such a narrow vision because they think that god has given only begotten son to the earth and has Jesus to send to us but Jesus has not gone to other planets he is on top of other planets also so it can be a very strong way of supplementing the modern scientific knowledge through the Vedic knowledge so N.S. Sadapudra, one of the scientists wrote a book called Indian Identities where he did remarkable correlations between say the movement of UFOs and the way aircraft is moving so like that he drew many parallels and it was a well received and well reviewed book so sthanur means immovable sthanur is fixed so now the fixed is what you are telling the soul is fixed in his swaroopa the soul is eternally the servant the soul cannot become the enjoyer so in that sense he is fixed achalya achaloyam sanatana now achalya if it is to be taken literally is immovable but if we take it bhagavad gita itself talks so many times the soul goes here and there in the 14th chapter in the 14th chapter he says the soul in goodness goes up the soul in passion stays where he is the soul in ignorance goes down so therefore this achalya cannot be taken literally because so many times Krishna is also telling that he will come back to me or he will go to the abode of the devatas so actually there is gauna vritti is a valid vritti all of us know mukhya vritti and gauna vritti mukhya vritti is the direct literal meaning of scripture and gauna vritti is the indirect or the symbolic meaning of scripture so gauna vritti is valid but when? two contexts one is that we cannot say that the primary means of understanding scripture is gauna vritti primarily the scripture is mukhya vritti and occasionally there is gauna vritti because if we say most of the scripture is gauna vritti then what happens is it is most of the time we are interpreting so that’s why this is Chetanappa’s argument that he says Shankaracharya uses gauna vritti most of the time and therefore the self evident nature of scriptures is lost but now the example is given when can we use gauna vritti? if somebody says that that house my house is situated on the river now no house can be situated on the river what it means is my house is situated on the banks of the river so although this may not be said over there explicitly but this is to be implied so when when a particular meaning contradicts other scriptural statements or contradicts obvious facts of normal observation then a gauna vritti may be required so we will discuss another example of gauna vritti in 2.69 ya nisha sarva bhutana that which is night for all living beings is day for the self restrained and that which is day for the self realised is day for the ordinary now if we think literally actually day and night is the same for everyone if we consider day at the time when sun rises and night at the time when sun sets so literally it doesn’t make any sense so therefore we have to take a metaphor a sort of symbolic meaning of gauna vritti so here achala means not that it is literally immovable but it is immovable except by its own desire the soul is immovable except by his own desire that means no external force can move the soul even the yamultas come and drag the soul they actually drag the subtle body they can’t drag the soul they drag the subtle body and because the soul is attached to the subtle body the soul moves so it’s like somebody is watching a cricket match and a thief comes along and starts stealing away the tea this person is so attached he runs along with the thief and keeps on stealing away the tea so the yamultas are like that they come and take the subtle body and the soul runs after that so that particular show that is being shown that particular way of looking at the world and hoping to enjoy the world so achaloyam sanatana again it becomes eternal now all are repeated all four are repeated nainam chinnam chasrani aklejoyam nainam dhati pavaka adahiyoyam so all four are repeated it’s just emphasis because Arjuna is fearful of the death of his relatives so it’s both ways being emphasised first condition I said it should not be the primary way of understanding second is when the literal meaning of that particular scriptural statement contradicts other scriptural statements or it contradicts facts of ordinary experience so especially it’s more in the first case because sometimes scripture may contradict facts of ordinary experience but it’s especially if it contradicts other scriptural facts now Krishna says something more about the soul avyaktoyam achintoyam avikaryoyam uchyate ma devam viditvayam avyaktoyam avyaktoyam it is unmanifest sometimes try to do an experiment to see you put the dying person in a glass case and then see after the moment of death is there a crack somewhere in the glass to see if the soul has gone away the soul doesn’t have to break glass to come out it can, it doesn’t have to therefore it’s avyakto it is not manifest to the material world achintya means you cannot contemplate on it except through scripture by scripture you can get some understanding apart from that you cannot get a full understanding with our material senses avyakaryoyam uchyate it does not undergo any changes it is sadhavikara shunya sadhavikara that happens to the body they don’t happen to the soul in that sense it’s eternally youthful the soul’s spiritual energy is always the same and tasmad evam viditvayam so now the conclusion is coming tasmad evam viditvayam nami shochitum ayasi, do not lament so actually this section is the main purpose of section is consolation theme, consolation will come in 25 it will be repeated again in 27, it is repeated in 26 it is repeated in 30 also so again and again shochitum na shochitum na nami shochitum na tvam shochitum that theme will come that started also, 1.11 was na nami shochitum pandita so same theme is there and then he goes further now he is going to say if you think, actually there is no such thing called soul so he is going to say now let’s take the other alternative soul is there, that’s what scripture says but if you think the soul is not there still there is no need for you to lament atachainam nityajatam nityanvam amyase mrutam taapishvam mahabaho nainam shochitum asati now that means here what he is saying is the soul is always born and soul always dies that means basically there is no distinct entity called the soul the soul is just the outgrowth of the body and the soul dies, that’s what professor Kotowski told Prabhupada, you know when the person dies when the body dies, the person also dies so this was the philosophy of in the Vedic culture of philosophy charvak in Indian philosophy there are totally 9 systems of philosophy so 6 systems are called as orthodox and 3 are called as heterodox heterodox means, orthodox means those which accept the Vedic literature authority so which are these 6 systems anyone knows ok we will not go into the names now because we will come to this later we will not go into the names of all the speakers there is nimamsa, nyaya yoga, vaiseshika vedanta, that is the last one more is sankhya so the 6 systems of philosophy all accept the Vedas and there are 3 schools which have developed in India which did not accept the Vedas buddhism, jainism and charvakism so with charvakism we can use the word materialism basically Krishna is referring to materialism over here and he is saying even if you don’t accept the soul still there is no reason to lament because ultimately the body is just a set of chemicals and ultimately it is going to be destroyed so you know some scientists are also saying like this actually because they say there is no soul they say therefore if your hand catches fire as strict scientists we should not say that my hand is pain we should say my c-fibres are firing my c-fibres are firing actually they try to deny the whole concept of consciousness and emotions because they say there is no such thing as consciousness and emotions but that just doesn’t work because ultimately they themselves have emotions everybody has emotions Prabhupada was told by this there was one scientist who got a nobel prize for his theory that everything has come by chance so Prabhupada gave a simple reply if everything came by chance then even his theory came by chance why give him the nobel prize everything except the chance theory came by chance so Krishna is going to take that position now and how does he argue now dhruvam janmandu tasya cha dasmada parihar ye arte nastvam shochito marhasi so one thing that is clear is everybody who is born is going to die now Krishna actually doesn’t abandon the Vedic position only as Buddha he does that Krishna doesn’t abandon the Vedic position he takes us to the ultimate goal of the Vedic teachings that is pure devotion to himself so he is telling first of all everybody is going to die and even after everybody is going to die they are going to be born and this cycle is unavoidable therefore no need to lament that is unavoidable if something is anyway going to happen our lamentation is only going to worsen the problem better do something to cope with it rather than worsen it so Krishna in one sense does not talk about the non-Vedic position in continuous verses he just refers to it in the 26th verse and he comes back to it in the 28th verse but in the 27th verse he again goes back to the Vedic position so in the 28th verse he describes so basically if we are just chemicals and the chemicals suddenly come alive at a particular time and that life which is there is just epiphenomena just certain phenomenon which results somehow from the chemicals and what is the use of that so anyway it is going to change the chemicals Prabhupada talks about conservation of energy in Mahatisa the chemicals are not going to be destroyed they are going to be transformed and if you are nothing but the chemicals then you are not going to be destroyed you were unmanifest before you will be unmanifest later so actually materialism is not only meaningless from an emotional point of view it makes life very pointless but even from a logical point of view what is the purpose of living if one life is all that I have and actually see it is like a race if you have to run a 100 metre race somebody has already put a 70 metre somebody has already put a 10 metre and it is a race in which you are running and suddenly when you are running anybody may be disqualified at any moment suddenly you are pulled out of the race also you get a permanent injury you get some mental insanity or suddenly we die so life becomes just like it just becomes a so much reduced to chance so actually there are three theories to explain life when we see life one is that everything happens by chance there is no God everything happens by chance then again life is meaningless like I said somebody starts at 0 somebody starts at 20 metres somebody starts at 50 metres somebody already 100 metres so then life is meaningless on the other hand if we accept God and still insist on one life then also life becomes very unfair because life is like a race but different people have been put in different positions in the race so why are there different positions if it is not chance if it is God’s will then God becomes arbitrary God becomes capricious and then it feels that to have faith in this kind of God is very difficult it is the only philosophy that makes sense why is there so much variety and apparent inequity in this world because by our own past karma so the materialistic philosophy it makes no sense because life becomes so inherently unfair and that’s why if you are unmanifest before temporarily you are manifest again you become unmanifest can we discuss tomorrow we are little over time you can remember the question we will discuss tomorrow because this topic is not that exhaustive we will just complete two verses now this section we will get over at 30 now after rejecting this philosophy then Krishna acquires one point that understanding the soul is not so easy why people may think that there is no soul he integrated that in Achintyayam in the previous verse but now he elaborates that in a very paradoxical and very intriguing verse Prabhupada explains why the soul is amazing the same soul can be in a microbe thousands of it can be on one book table and the same soul is in a mighty elephant or a whale’s body how is it possible the same soul can be in such a big body that is amazing Baldevidya Bhushan has a very interesting analysis this adjective can apply to any of the three subsequent entities that come in the verse Prabhupada says that some people see the soul as amazing some people hear of the soul as amazing so here the amazing is applied to the soul some people hear the soul as amazing people hear also how can there be a soul they can’t understand it but then he says amazing can also apply to the people some amazing people see the soul what kind of vision they have that they are able to see the soul some amazing people hear about the soul very few people get to hear about the soul some amazing people speak about the soul they go out and preach some amazing people hear about the soul some amazing people even after hearing don’t understand how people can just go on doing materialistically and then the amazing can also apply to the verb that is some see the soul as amazing some hear the soul some amazingly see the soul some amazingly speak about the soul some amazingly hear about the soul some amazingly don’t understand about the soul so it can apply to all of these then after that after acknowledging that the soul is ultimately amazing it’s inconceivable so exactly how the soul pervades the body gives energy to the body that’s very difficult to understand and then Krishna says the conclusion is that actually the soul is eternal and therefore you need not lament do not grieve for anything this is basically a consolation section started with nanu chochitam and four times Krishna talked about not lament so now Krishna has given an intellectual understanding to Arjuna that the soul does not die but how does that knowledge of the soul to be transformed into practical action so okay I understand I am not the body I am the soul and therefore I should not lament when somebody dies but what does that mean so then if I understand I am the soul how do I live one thing is I will not lament when I die so then how to bring the knowledge of the soul into practical action so Krishna will talk about it at two levels from 31 to 37 he will talk about karma kanda and from 38 to 53 he will talk about karma yoga so this knowledge is like the backdrop for what will come in the future so when he talks about karma kanda and karma yoga that means based on the knowledge of the soul how one should act so we will discuss that tomorrow