Conceiving the Inconceivable

Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Jai Guru Sweet is the fragrance of the new yoga nidra with many stories and statements and fully opened by the distortion of Krishna, the destroyer of impurities so the flower has statements in it and as the flower blossoms initially it is a bud and it comes in contact with the sun then it blossoms outwards so like that the Mahabharata is filled with many stories, just like a flower is made of stone and statements, so statements are the components of the flower, so like that the stories are the components of the Mahabharata but what is the essence of this whole flower, actually the hat, blossoms out in the contact with Krishna so if we read the Mahabharata without the Vaishnava understanding then the Mahabharata appears to be just a lot of stories and sometimes the stories also appear to be of confused morality sometimes even the virtues people seem to be acting immorally and sometimes even the people of the vicious side seem to have some virtues so without the focus on Krishna Mahabharata appears to be confused but the essence of the Mahabharata blossoms out when the focus is on Krishna so there are two ways of looking at the relationship between the Mahabharata and the Bhagavad Gita one is of course the chronological in the Mahabharata one particular event is the narration of the Bhagavad Gita so that comes in the Vishnu Parva which is of course the longest parva in the Mahabharata that is one way of looking at it the other way is actually speaking the Bhagavad Gita is an immense version of the Mahabharata or another way the Mahabharata is the expanded version of the Bhagavad Gita that means whatever is taught in the Bhagavad Gita is demonstrated in the Mahabharata and whatever is depicted in the Mahabharata has to be understood through the eyes of the Bhagavad Gita so if we study the Mahabharata without the eyes of the Bhagavad Gita we don't have the advantage of understanding Krishna as God and without that understanding Mahabharata appears very confusing so in the Mahabharata this particular incident in the Bhagavad Gita from the length point of view it is extremely small the Mahabharata is 110,000 verses and the Bhagavad Gita is 700 verses out of 110,000 that means less than less than 1% 100 would make it so it's very very small but although it is so small it is the most significant and the significance is because it gives the prism by which we understand the whole Mahabharata so now in the Mahabharata if we compare the Mahabharata and the Ramayana in Valmiki Ramayana Lord Ram's divinity is not revealed anywhere directly Lord Ram is not revealed directly to be God because the starting question of Valmiki to Narad Muni when the Ramayana starts is please tell me the characteristics of the ideal person and if Lord Ram is depicted as God who God is so high above us that God cannot be an ideal person for us, he is God I am a man, I am a human being I cannot act like him so in order to ensure that Lord Ram is seen as a model human being Valmiki Rishi doesn't directly explicitly state that Ram is God although it is implicit in the Ramayana it is clear if one reads the Ramayana it is clear but that is not the explicit statement and of course subsequent literature on Ram Lita they make it very clear and there are all the songs of the Vaishnavas which also make it very clear but as compared to this ambiguity that is there in the Ramayana in the Ramayana Lord Ram's divinity is not directly clear to Valmiki Ram it is there but it is not explicitly stated but in contrast with that Krishna's divinity is stated clearly in the Mahabharata and yet Krishna is not the centre of the Mahabharata this is the curiosity, Ramayana Lord Ram is the centre but his divinity is not explicitly revealed in Mahabharata Krishna is told to be the Supreme, his divinity is explicitly revealed in many places but he is not the focus the focus is the Pandavas and how the Pandavas go through so many adventures and disasters in their lives and how they stay fixed in their devotion to the Lord and how the Lord helps them periodically that is the essential state so in the Ramayana the Lord is the focus whereas in the Mahabharata the devotees are the focus now in one sense the Bhagavatam also the devotees are the focus if you see the narration of the Lord Maharaj is much more than the narration of Narasimhadev the Narasimhadev starts from 1st chapter 7th canto, description starts from 2nd chapter 7.2 to 7.10 actually Narasimhadev occurs in 7.8, prayers are offered in 7.9 and then it is over so 8,9,10 is the chapter number of Narasimhadev but Rajaraja is 2 to 7 and he is also there in 8,9,10 so in that sense we can say that is the Mahabharata similar to the Bhagavatam the focus of the devotees not exactly because in the Mahabharata in the Bhagavatam the devotees are clearly understood to be devotees it is explicit Lord Maharaj rejects all Karmakand he is actually just a pure devotee he is rejecting everything for the sake of God whereas with respect to the Pandavas the Pandavas are devotees but they are also exhibiting Kshatriyas and as Kshatriyas they find Bhima has many Kshatriya qualities which at first glance may not seem very emotional he gets angry anger is not a deficiency of a devotee but from the mundane point of view or from the ordinary conception of spirituality anger is not considered very spiritual so that's why even if the Mahabharata is talking about past times of the devotees still the fact that they are devotees is not explicitly focused why is it not focused on? it is very interesting what Krishna says in 4.2 and 4.3 in the Bhagavad Gita is that जखालेनेहमाता योवो नष्टः परंदमा that by the power of time that knowledge which I have given to the sun god जखालेनेहमाता योवो नष्टः परंदमा is now lost so now Krishna is telling that knowledge is now lost now this now is 5000 years ago and that now is the society we live in the Mahabharata so that means even at the time of Krishna even at the time of the Mahabharata the pure Vedic culture was not there so I hope this point is clear the knowledge is lost at this time the Bhagavad Gita is only a philosophical message but what were the events happening at this time they are revealed in the Mahabharata so in the Mahabharata we see that Drona is a worshipper of Shiva Drupada is a worshipper of Shiva and there are all sorts of records of worship going on in the Mahabharata although of course Krishna Supremacy is known but if we just study the Mahabharata the whole Bhagavad Gita Krishna shows his Vishwa Roop and after Krishna shows his Vishwa Roop after that Arjuna has Karishya Vashu and the whole Bhagavad Gita is over and Krishna is about to start the war at that time Krishna tells Arjuna wait offer a prayer to Devi by the blessings of Devi you will be able to win the war now if we read the Mahabharata what is happening Arjuna gets on his chariot and offers prayers to Devi and Devi appears over there and offers her blessings and she says I bless you that you will attain victory but then there is a line which many people will overlook what is that, he says that actually when Vasudev is there with you there is no need for my blessings because he is the supreme lord so that is there so in the Mahabharata the word Krishna is not used very frequently the word primarily used to refer to him is Vasudev and that is one of the reasons why the mundane scholars say that Krishna of the Mahabharata and Krishna of the Bhagavatam are two different persons they have their strange theories but the word Krishna is not so much used because Krishna is the intimate name of the absolute truth so the point which we are making over here is that in the Mahabharata if we see it from the eyes of the Bhagavad Gita then we can understand the Mahabharata properly on the other hand if we study the Mahabharata in isolation without the philosophical vision of the Bhagavad Gita the Mahabharata will be confusing so the events in the Mahabharata events depicted in the Mahabharata are understood through the eyes of the Bhagavad Gita and the principles taught in the Bhagavad Gita are demonstrated in the Mahabharata so in that sense there is a symbiotic relationship between the two so one helps us to understand the other and the other demonstrates the first one now if we come to the Bhagavad Gita itself in the Bhagavad Gita Krishna is clearly revealing himself as the absolute truth although he reveals himself as the absolute truth there can be some ambiguity sometimes so the topic which I am discussing today is the three aspects of the absolute truth as understood in the Bhagavad Gita so first I will explain what I mean by this topic and why I chose this topic the absolute truth is Achchintya now what is Achchintya? it is inconceivable for us words and concepts are tools words are tools for communication concepts are tools for contemplation unless there is some concept what will I think about but actually the absolute truth is beyond both words and concepts because it is both beyond verbal tools and mental tools it is beyond verbal tools and beyond mental tools but then we don't have any tools apart from words and concepts if I want to communicate what I have understood then I need words if I want to understand what you have understood I have to use words and if you have understood something even for you to think about it some concepts have to be there so words and tools are the only tools that we have words and concepts are the only tools that we have but Krishna is beyond words and tools so then how do we understand it so how about feelings how about communicating through the feelings yes we will come to that actually beyond the words and the tools is the revelation and revelation sorry words and concepts is the revelation and revelation includes feelings I will just come to that in a little later so now here in this picture the absolute truth is referred to by the readings Param Brahman Brahman, Jagadeshwar, Bhagwan Parameshwar so all these names are used to refer to that one absolute truth now as I said there are words and there are concepts but the absolute truth is different from the word and the concept but there are these words which are used to refer to the absolute truth so if we see sometimes if we study the scriptures without the assistance of Guru Sahasrath it can be very confusing in the 9th canto of Srimad Bhagavatam Lord Ram's pastimes are described and at the end it is said Lord Ram Atma Jyoti Raghata in this way Lord Ram entered into Brahma Jyoti Lord Ram is entering into Brahma Jyoti and the way it is described is also very paradoxical what it is said is Lord Ram placed his feet in the heart of his devotees and then entered into room it is even more confusing he placed his feet in the heart of a devotee that is a devotional expression that requires a personality and then he entered into Atma Jyoti Raghata why speak something like this this will seem very confusing so now we will repeatedly find in the scriptures some references which seem to be totally mayavad and this might be there even in the Bhagavatam not to speak of other books but what do they convey to understand that we have to understand the full picture so now again what I want to say I don't know whether it is conveyed by this picture what I am trying to say here see on the right is the words on the left is the concepts picture of the Absolute so now this picture needs different words to refer to the Absolute so I said Brahma Kunshottanishwaraparam all these words will be used these are all referring to the Absolute the arrow directed towards the Absolute now the scriptures use these words interchangeably that means we understand it according to our body of Vishnu philosophy that Brahman or Brahma Jyoti refers to the impersonal aspect Bhagavan refers to the personal aspect Paramatma refers to the transitional aspect Paramatma is both personal and impersonal what does that mean Paramatma is surely personal, he is a person but Paramatma is not having personal reciprocations with him so Paramatma is a transitional between Brahman and Bhagavan so Paramatma does not perform pastimes so the personal emotions are not revealed so much by the Paramatma so now we understand this difference based on the body of Vishnu philosophy but the scriptures when they use the word Brahman that does not necessarily refer to the Brahma Jyoti the word Brahman is a generic reference to the absolute truth the word Brahman is used as a reference to the absolute truth now we need to understand which feature of the absolute truth is being referred to to understand what I am saying maybe I can talk on historical perspective actually the conception that the absolute truth is divided is understood as three aspects Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan this is revealed by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu this is not explicitly stated in the scriptures now of course we have the famous verse 1.2.11 but this verse does not tell everything that we take from the verse all that it tells is that there is a non dual truth and that non dual truth is known by three names Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan but that Brahman refers to the all-pervading aspect, Paramatma refers to the localised aspect, Bhagavan refers to the transcendental personal aspect this is not mentioned in this verse so all the verse says is that tattva is known by the wise people by these three names so actually speaking if we don't have the Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's revelation then what the scripture is saying becomes very difficult to understand now we may say that does this mean that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has imposed his philosophy on the scriptures not exactly how it is that there is an analytical way of studying and there is a synthetic way of studying so what is this analytical and synthetic for example analytical is the analysis means division, separation for example if we want to learn say German then we will take a grammar book this is a noun, this is an adjective, this is a verb and we will try to analyse it all we will try to understand but when we learnt our mother tongue we never got into this is a noun, this is an adjective, this is a verb we just heard other people speaking and we started speaking and we learnt it quite well so after we started speaking language fluently then we went into school and then we learnt this is a noun, this is an adjective, this is an adverb this is a verb, this is a pronoun and then maybe what confidence we had we lost that also so the analytic way of studying is actually suited for studying a dead language not a living language what is the difference between a dead language and a living language a living language is a language that we converse so if it's a conversational language we learn it not so much by studying it but by talking it discussing it, hearing it so the normal way of understanding scripture is not just by isolated studying it is by living the culture it's like how does a baby learn a language when the baby hears the mother, father speaking the brother, sister speaking and then he starts speaking so that is a natural thing we also have a Krishna Vamsa, this is more caught than taught it's caught, that means we hear others practising and we learn to practise so see the scriptures the Upanishads now we say the Upanishads are Shruti what does the word Shruti mean it comes directly from God but then even if it is coming directly from God still there has to be a medium it has to be an instrument through which it is that's why we have the various scriptures and they are spoken by certain sages so that is the revelation of God that has come to certain sages, for example Ishopanishad is spoken by Swami Mohamadu as a glorification in prayer offered to Yajnavata that is Ishopanishad so Swami Mohamadu is deep in prayer offering prayers and that time the Rakshas come to attack and devour him and when he sees this perverse movement he has already renounced the world and he has set his mind on taking transcendence this incident is described in the first chapter of the 8th candle and there the words are similar Ishopanishad Ishopanishad Bhagavatam same verses there more or less so basically this is referring to different kalpas but the point is that even the Shrutis are revealed they are revelations directly but the revelations always need a medium a human medium so now again when the Shruti when the Shrutis are being spoken at that time the revelation is complete when the revelation is there the complete absolute truth is seen but after the absolute truth is perceived or seen through revelation then we have to use the tools of this world to communicate that so then there have to be concepts and there has to be words so there is the revelation, then there is the conceptualisation and there is verbalisation the three stages so revelation, conceptualisation and verbalisation so then when the verbalisation happens actually unless we get the revelation we can't really understand the verbalisation that's why the scriptures are understood not just by studying but by practise purification and realisation so what happens is if we just look at the verbalizations this scripture says this, this scripture says this and the two are contradicting and there can be conflicts and wars over them or if this is a concept, if this concept doesn't make sense then I can keep just breaking my head, it will never make sense to me because ultimately that which is beyond words is put in words the Mahabharata says the absolute truth is beyond words so we have to just go beyond all words that is not the Vaishnava understanding Vaishnava understanding is that actually we can use words as tools for glorification of God to be revealed in this world and for the purification of our own mind words themselves are not complete descriptions of the absolute truth but they are magical tools for our purification and for the glorification of the Lord himself so when we use the words to glorify Krishna we cannot catch Krishna in the words but we purify him that's what it means to go beyond all words because all words are product of words but that is false, because words are something which even the Mayavadis have used you see, the 272 tells the story of when there were some Mayavadis who had come to Philadelphia and they had all Buddha hoardings Jesus meditated and became the sacrifice divine, Jesus meditated and became the sacrifice divine and Buddha meditated and became the enlightened wisdom divine and Krishna meditated and became the love divine you meditate and become the supreme divine so that was the story so the devotees decided to go for the programme and then the two Mayavadis both of them took long to come here two hours they took and at the end any questions they asked and seeing him raising his hand people could understand these are people from different organisations so nobody else raised their hand because they wanted to see what a Christian will be so they just paused and looked everywhere else but nobody was raising their hand so reluctantly they said yes what is your question? so you said that Krishna meditated and became God but Krishna killed Buddha when he was less than one month old so when did he meditate to become God? suddenly this two Mayavadis looked very hurt suddenly one of them said words words and there were some of the Mayavadi followers they were proud of words and there one of them said do you not understand words are the product of illusion and words are the cause of illusion truth and reality lie beyond the words don't increase illusion by words Braja Sarupu was very clever he said wait a minute two hours when you spoke words were not illusion when I ask one question words become illusion so the idea is the Mayavadi philosophy itself is very contradictory and Vedanta Desikar is a prominent Acharya in the Shri Sampradaya after Ramanujacharya he is called as a Tarakaratna the jewel of logic so he hammers the Mayavadis in this part he says if you say everything is Maya are scriptures Maya or are scriptures real if scriptures are real that the scriptures are real then there is some differentiation because there is a scripture there is a scripture, there is a scripture there are these words so there is absolutely not one differential homogeneity and if the scriptures are not real scriptures are false then there is no use of scriptures then why are you commenting on the scriptures and why are we discussing and debating scriptures so therefore so here what we are discussing is that the words are the tools for us to try to communicate our understanding of the absolute so when the scriptures view these words and say Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is describing Sarvam Kalmopitam Brahma so these words are a result of a revelation that is expressed in words so now when the word Brahma is used what is being referred to by that word Brahma that can be understood only when one gets revelation till that point it will be an ambiguity so we think that Brahma refers to the Brahmajyoti but the scriptures are not like that the word Brahma can also refer to the personal aspect of the absolute because from the scriptural point of view all three are one Advaya Advaya means non dual so it is not like, Bhaktivinoda Tagore gives a very interesting example for this he said that just as if there is a very delicious sweet say Rasgulla is there now when the Rasgulla is cooked in the kitchen and when it is cooked in the kitchen at that time which is a fragrant food item Rasgulla so the fragrance comes over here now when the fragrance comes over here what does it mean there is a Gulabjamun now I go forward and then I see the Gulabjamun then I see the form over here and afterwards I go and taste the Gulabjamun then it comes in contact with my tongue so now it is not that the source of the fragrance the source of the shape and the source of the taste they are three different objects they are all one object but depending on my distance from the Gulabjamun I perceive one, two or three when I am far away I perceive only the fragrance so now similarly the absolute truth is one but when I perceive only the Sat aspect of it that level of realisation is called as Brahman when I perceive the Sat and Chit aspect then it is called as Paramatman when I perceive the Sat, Chit and Anand aspect then it is called as Bhagwan so in that sense now if say the Gulabjamun were given three different names by those who perceived it only as source of fragrance those who perceived it as source of fragrance and taste and those who perceived it as fragrance shape and fragrance shape and taste so say you call it Gulab 1, Gulab 2 and Gulab 3, just for the sake of nomenclature, so now Gulab 1 Gulab 2 and Gulab 3 are not three distinct objects and even if I am using the word Gulab 1, actually I am referring to Gulab Jamun similarly, when the scriptures are using the word Brahman that means in our understanding we say it is Gulab 1 that means it should be Brahma Jyot but when the word Brahman is being used actually the object that is being referred to is the same, so Brahman is non-different from Bhagwan so when the scriptures, the Bhagavatam is saying that Lord Ram went into the Atma Jyoti so now we think of the word Jyoti to refer to the all-pervading Brahman effulgence, but that is not the only name of Buddha actually, the word Bhagwan can also be used to refer to the impersonal aspect because they are not different, and the word Brahman can also be used to refer to the personal aspect, so that means, see on this side is the word that are referred in the scriptures, so these words are expressions of the revelation their words are the expressions of the revelation and that's why when the revelation is being expressed the words will be used interchangeably it is one absolute truth that is being perceived, and depending on how it is perceived, it is called Gulab 1, Gulab 2, Gulab 3 so Gulab 1, Gulab 2, Gulab 3 are over here and then the absolute truth is Gulab Jamun, over here and then on this side now among the various words that are there so you can have Gulab 25, Gulab 23 Gulab 88, whatever you may have you can have any names, now because this one particular word 1.2.11 contains these three specific words so Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Jiva Goswami said that actually, there are so many names in the absolute truth, why has Suta Goswami taken these three specific names over here vadanti tat tat pravitas, now this is if you look at the flow of the section Divinity and Divine Service this verse comes at a very crucial point it comes at after it is described as this is supreme dharma then once you practise so how the absolute truth is perceived by those who are bhaktas with gyana and vairagya that is the previous verse described and then this verse describes how they perceive, so it comes at a place in the Bhagavad Gita where the absolute truth is revealed in a complete and concise way complete and concise, it's complete but it's not large, it's concise so Jiva Goswami says that these three are used in this verse because these three words refer to three specific aspects of absolute truth so that means gulab 1, gulab 2, gulab 25, I have one on this side and among these 25 names three names are selected in this particular gulab 1, gulab 2, gulab 3 and they refer to specific aspects of the absolute so when they refer to specific aspects of absolute, that is the understanding which we use for our analysis, but it is not the only understanding from this side of view, gulab 1 is equal to gulab 25, is equal to gulab 25, there is no difference, so Prabhupada writes in Aishwarya Purpho that the speed, the light and the fire are in analysis different but in synthesis they are one, in synthesis we cannot differentiate so like that gulab 1, gulab 2, gulab 3 actually in synthesis on this side they are one but on that side they are different so when the scriptures refer to brahman, paramatma, bhagwan, they are all referring to that one absolute truth but for us to understand that which can be only truly understood through a revelation there is some sort of analysis that is given by Chaitanya Guru and that and for the sake of that analysis ok, the absolute truth has a all-pervading aspect, the absolute truth has a localised aspect the absolute truth has a transcendental personal aspect, so now we have to use some names to refer to that so brahmajyoti or brahman is the name referred to the absolute, all-pervading aspect, paramatma has a localised aspect and bhagwan has a transcendental personal aspect so this is the nomenclature that is used by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Jiva Goswami to help us understand that which is ultimately beyond our understanding to help us give some understanding that's why we see in the Bhagavatam itself, there is the word that that but now when we have the whole conception that actually why mukti should be over you from the scripture point of view mukti simply means going beyond multiple systems, it can be going to the brahman, it can be going to the Vaikuntha, it can be going to the holocaust, all three so it's when we study scripture from particular perspective, it brings clarity but it can also cause confusion, why it can cause confusion, because the nomenclature that we use to understand scripture, that is very valuable to understand the concept, but that is not always the nomenclature that is used in scripture so moving forward let's understand the difference between the Mayavadi and the Vaishnavi so the Mayavadi says scripture is as I explained earlier, go beyond words but what is their idea they say that ok there are contradictions in scriptures, somewhere it is said that they are one with god, somewhere it is said they are different from god, now how do we reconcile these contradictions Shankaracharya adopts a simple strategy, he says that there is this scripture, there is Mahavalkya and there is Laghuva there is a truth, there is a great truth and there is a minor truth, actually minor truth is just a commentary of saying it's false it's false basically you have to go beyond and what he says is only there are five there are pancha maha there is aham brahma, sri pradyanam brahma and like that there are four five maha everything else is a laghuva so basically what the Advaita Vedanta, the Mayavadis do is, the statements in scripture that agree with their philosophy, they are mahatma everything that doesn't agree, laghuva and it's a very convenient way of dividing scriptures and then wherever any verse is found contradicting their philosophy laghuva now naturally when something like this is done if you divide the scripture into true and false, they won't say true and false, they'll say maha and laghuva but that's what it effectively implies then when they have a concept of the absolute truth the concept of the absolute truth that they have is filled with flaws and two main flaws of Mayavadis, first of all is if brahma is the only thing that exists then from where does maya come if sarvam khalvidam brahma then nothing except brahma, then where does maya come from and second is if we are all brahma then how have we come under maya these two questions have tormented mayavadis for more than a millennia they try to wiggle around and they say actually actually does maya exist or does it not exist they say actually it is simultaneous, existent non-existent, indescribable entity now what does that mean, this is an emoji it is indescribable so now if you say it is indescribable then the point comes up does brahman exist, of course brahman exists then are we brahman of course we are brahman then why don't we perceive ourselves that we are brahman, because we are under maya, does maya exist they say yes maya exists then brahman is not the only thing that exists brahman is the only thing that exists maya is just an illusion but where does the illusion come from they have no answer so then what they try to do for this is they just use the idea and they punch it, it is all beyond words but what ranamacharya and jingo swami do is something very different they say that every single word of scripture is true you cannot fracture or rupture scripture into mahabhagya so all scripture is true although there may be some hierarchy in the evaluation of scripture there is apamohit, rajamohit, damasya, puranasya but all scripture is true and the solution if there is a contradiction in the scripture is to find out how to reconcile the contradictions and not to just reject the contradiction by saying one is true and one is false so now is the absolute truth personal or impersonal there are both kinds of statements in the scripture so what the mayavadis say wherever the absolute truth is said to be personal that is false, that is laghuva where it is said to be impersonal, that is mahabhagya so then, jingo swami and chennan mahabhagya, this is not right so the scriptures say that word is personal, scriptures say word is impersonal both are true now how can both be true at the same time that is achievement so the difference between achintya sometimes we may use achintya for anything and everything you know if some devotee behaves in a very strange way the word is achintya we can use it that way but that is not the philosophical sense of achintya so what achintya means as chaitanya mahaprabhu as jingo swami said scriptures do certain statements and the scriptural statements are true now how they are true by our finite human intelligence you may not be able to understand and our inability to understand the truth of the scriptural statements indicates their inconsistency that is not a flaw in the scripture that is a deficiency in our intellectual capacity whereas as compared to that what is anirvachaniya anirvachaniya is that similar no, it is entirely different because what they have done first they have imposed their philosophy on scripture by saying this statement is true, this is false and then after that they face logical problems so first they have gone against scripture imposed once on philosophy and scripture then when this philosophy faces logical problems to evade the logical problems this is anirvachaniya so anirvachaniya is basically an escape way to avoid logical discussion, to avoid serious logical discussion whereas achintya is an admission of human humility in face of the greatness of the absolute the two are very different and that is why when the mayavadis see all the verses about bhakti and bhagwan all that they have to say is this is all lower level we have to go beyond that to merge in brahman but when the vishnus see the word brahman fine, this refers to one aspect of the absolute this is not the highest aspect that is also a valid aspect it is a valid aspect and those who want to aspire for it, they can aspire for it that is not the complete religion of the absolute so now in the bhagavad gita we have this 9.4 verse first of all we have to recite this mayatatamitam sarvam mayatatamitam sarvam together mayatatamitam sarvam jagatatam ekatam urdhina mat sthamini sarvabhutami nacham teshva vasthita so this is a well known verse and here in the italic tradition if a verse is to be referred to more specifically so 9.4 is the verse 9.48 refers to the first line 9.48 refers to the second line so here A and B refer to the brahman aspect mayatatamitam sarvam jagatatam ekatam urdhina by me in my unmanifested form the whole universe is covered mat sthamini sarvabhutami in me the whole universe is sheltered so now if we don't understand this now this refers to the paramatma the paramatma maha vishnu is sheltering the whole universe atavah bahunate lakim jantena atavah dhima nishadhyaham urdhina ekam sheena ekam sheena I have one fragment this is the paramatma and then nacham teshva vasthita I am not situated in this world that refers to the bhagwan so for example taddure taddvantike that absolute is far away that absolute is very close now one level is all it's impossible to understand but when we see it from the framework of brahman paramatma bhagwan we understand taddure refers to bhagwan taddvantike refers to the paramatma who is inside of us tadantarasya sarvasya tadusarvasya asya bahayata tadantarasya sarvasya refers to again it refers to paramatma tadusarvasya asya bahayata refers to madhava so actually when we see scripture from this analysis then the scripture makes profound sense and that's why what Sarvabhattacharya said is that when Chaitanya Mahaprabhu gave his explanation he said I have never heard the Vedanta Kshatriya been explained so coherently as you have explained because what Shankaracharya did was he just structured the scripture into two and he said ok this is the Mahavakya, this is the Bhuva but what Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did was he accepts scripture to be true but understand how we can reconcile the apparent contradictions so in the background we have a little more time we can continue this so in 6.28 to 31 again 6.28 refers to brahman 29 refers to paramatma and 30 refers to bhagwan and again the same thing will come to teach after us so I will discuss this in the next class are there any questions I will quickly summarise what I discussed so I started by talking about how the absolute truth is beyond words and beyond concepts concepts are alphabets for contemplation words are alphabets for communication so when in Vishuddhi the absolute truth is revealed the revelation gives a complete understanding but when that complete understanding is to be thought of using the mind or it is to be expressed using words then the same clarity is not there because it is a synthetic and analytic way of studying so the revelation is like a synthetic synthetic vision, complete understanding but when we study the scriptures what is happening is it is analytic, something is spoken here something is spoken there how do we get a coherent understanding when one who has got that revelation can give it to us so Shetan Mahaprabhu is God himself so he explains that the absolute truth has three aspects and the three aspects to understand that we refer to the fragrance, the shape and the taste of gulab jamun and gulab jamun's different features may lead to different names but they all refer to the same object and when we understand the complete picture then we can understand which aspect is being referred to in the scripture in particular any questions? great and for the revelation why not use it only for like a single like maybe gulab jamun twenty five gulab jamun why not use only one gulab jamun so that people don't get confused like you said Ramayana dharma why not use only Bhagwan so everyone can understand so why not use only one word to describe the absolute truth there are different reasons one reason is that so Acharya described it is said that the lord maintains everyone now that maintaining is not just in terms of providing rains but which cools them that maintenance is also in their intellectual conceptions so the gyanis want to speculate so now if the absolute truth is made very simple for them they will have no problem of speculation so they need that and they need that and most intellectuals they find Ravindra Rajput is so simple it is too simple they think actually simplicity is an ornament not an official but firstly the scriptures do give provision for the intellectuals speculators you always speculate that is the meaning of Krishna's respecting our freedom and giving the specificity to use our freedom second point is that Krishna's glories are infinite and they cannot be described in one word for that matter all words ete na sarve vyakhyata vyakhyataha Vinasutra describes that all names are ultimately used to describe him ete na sarve so what is the meaning of one name all names are not enough to describe and let the king who is rescued from the Jarasandha he glorifies lord Krishna and he says I wrote choice poetry glorifying you and offering prayers to you but now when I have met you I am feeling as if what is my glorification he says I have called the emperor of the world as the landlord of a small village he says my glorification is too laudable so you know there is one south Indian poet he says that my dear lord I glorified you so much I thought I was very beautiful but now when I have seen you I am feeling that my glorification is insulting what does it mean so that is the second point third point is that Krishna Krishna loves his devotees when we say that he is redeemed through his devotees Krishna loves his devotees and he wants to reward his devotees so when he wants to reward his devotees certainly they will take the ultimate reward like going back home back to God but at the same time he wants to reward them in this way but the devotees don't want anything of this world devotees don't want anything of this world so because Krishna wants to reward them in this world also Krishna gives them in a sense monopoly over that which is the most precious thing in this world and that is the way to get out of this world so the knowledge of how to get out of this world is unused to anybody in this world without the knowledge the devotees may not understand so it's not so much that the scripture is ambiguous it's more that we have our preconceptions because of the scripture so when we study and then serve devotees and get their blessings then we see actually beyond the conclusion there is nothing so the scriptures if you see in one sense there are so many scriptures and and and many scriptures and all of them have many meanings and then we have a little time and so many obstacles must be there so what is this is given in everything in the Srimad Bhagavatam and Srimad Bhagavatam one of them is like this but overall Krishna has told us that this person is saying Brahman he is not as a friend of me to us so Bhagavatam one makes it very clear that's why if you study the Bhagavatam then you will know but if you go into all the scriptures when it is a it is a great jungle what happens na bhuktaye na muktaye the person doesn't enjoy also doesn't get liberation also and if you see that way even Srimad Bhagavatam says it is a study of scripture like a child crying alone in the wilderness when there is no relevance of Krishna then without that even the study of scripture is like a child crying alone in the wilderness and that is what is happening with the condition he said I have studied so many scriptures and I was so confused you know please tell me and there he actually in that context he said sadhan sadhise shri nayanishthi so Krishna three points Krishna makes scriptures and some of seemingly ambiguous because there is room for the Gyanishthi secondly one word is also not enough all words are not enough Krishna wants to give his devotees scriptures which by their blessings they will know the scriptures what about the feelings so how it is there are thoughts and there are feelings so the sahajiyas allow only your feelings and the Mahabharata allow only your thoughts the Gaudiya Vaishnavas they harmonise thoughts and feelings so what is the idea our thoughts have to be enlivened by feelings and our feelings have to be directed and regulated by thoughts by the peoples our thoughts have to be enlivened with feelings that means the academic scholars they study about Krishna for them Krishna is just like a laboratory specimen a historical laboratory specimen they have no bhakti for Krishna and that's why they can never understand Krishna we think about Krishna and thinking should not be like somebody thinks of as a laboratory object thinking has to be devotional so our thoughts have to be enlivened with feelings at the same time our feelings have to be directed and regulated by thoughts thoughts are spiritual so one lady came to me she said Prabhupada when I was in Jagannath Jagannath started pulling away my saree so Prabhupada said nonsense, Jagannath is not attracted to a body of flesh and bones and blood and mucus so this is what this says here so our thoughts have to be regulated and guided by speech so feelings are important I'll just continue with another pastime one day Prabhupada was at one place and he asked why do you say that Krishna is God so the devotee said because Bhagwan exists I don't believe in Bhagwan Prabhupada said ok because Bhagwan exists nobody got the answer when I chant Hare Krishna I experience the existence so I know Krishna is God the devotees were surprised Prabhupada went to another part of the body and there when they heard the same Prabhupada got the same question so why do you express Krishna as God there was one devotee from here also so he thought I know the answer so he was just waiting when will Prabhupada ask me Prabhupada said yes when I chant Hare Krishna I experience the existence Prabhupada said your ecstasy is Maya he didn't know what to say then Prabhupada said we accept Krishna as God but Bhagwan Gita says Krishna is God so what does it mean actually it's a symbiotic process the scripture gives us the direction and the practise gives us the experience so if we fragment the two if we divide the two I only have scripture but I have no experience then it's theoretical I have thoughts but the thoughts are not alive or dead but if I say I only have the experience but I don't have the scriptural guided thoughts then my thoughts will go in any direction so certainly our feelings are important but our feelings have to be regulated and guided by the scripture then we are holistic different people may have different views but there are two issues here one is is it based on scripture the Vaishnavi view is not no the scripture is giving their own morality for them everything is equal whether it is Karmadana whether it is Brahman for them they are equal for scripture everything is equal doesn't mean that there is no conception of the absolute the words that are used to describe the absolute truth are used interchangeably see when we say there is a very concrete absolute truth absolute truth is not a hazy subjective conception it's a concrete reality there is a real absolute truth and once a person has perceived the absolute truth after that perception that is expressed through words so when the expression is there different words are used interchangeably but that doesn't mean that everybody everybody can have their own idea of what the absolute truth is but the absolute truth is one from the scriptural point of view all the scriptures are giving a verbal expression for that one absolute so then what we need to do if we want to understand it we have to look at the scripture and see which analysis of the scripture gives a holistic understanding of all the scriptures so it's not that anybody can give their own conception then there is no need for scripture the scripture is not is not value free it's open for anyone and everyone whatever you want to interpret scripture if you look at it in totality it's giving an understanding now only different philosophers different philosophies they may just take one side and neglect all the other sides when I say this is also based on scripture it may be based on scripture but it's only based on one part of scripture it's not based on a holistic understanding of scripture so that's why although different people may have their different conceptions we have to see which conception ultimately agrees with the scripture and not just agrees with one section of scripture but it really harmonises various sections of the scripture and puts them in a proper holistic perspective that Mayavad doesn't that Mayavad surely doesn't Mayavad may be intellectual it may be philosophy everything is false there is just a drama that is real but it is not scripture actually speaking the scripture Ramacharya argues that more than 95% of the scripture is talking about devotional subjects there is Bhagwan and there is Bhakta so that means what Mayavad does is 95% of the scripture is just internal it's just relegated to the level of Bhagwan which is not true that's why what Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said is Swata Praman Shastra that is scripture is self evident if you interpret scripture the self evident nature is lost so interpretation is required but interpretation is called as Lakshana Vritti Gauna Vritti and Abhidha Vritti Chaitanya Mahaprabhu used the word Lakshana Vritti and Abhidha Vritti Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said that Lakshana Vritti should be used only occasionally it should be used very infrequently Lakshana Vritti is not the constant way of interpreting scripture look at the whole Bhagavad Gita where do we need Lakshana Vritti may be when Yani Shastra that we need Lakshana Vritti what does it mean most of Bhagavad Gita is only Lakshana Vritti it can fix everything can I ask a question Absolute truth is already concept of absolute truth is already given in this only thing is that person may seem may look at in a different way but not understanding the whole purpose of this Thank you Can I ask little bit about this feeling many times absolute truth is beyond words and our words are just only point on the direction of sun our words are like a stick our stick is not sun and our words are not absolute truth our words are not good but how about the feelings because if you are saying the Lord makes a matter of all from the Pancha Tattva and everything else because sometimes some preachers say the feelings are actually spiritual feelings are part of the soul and not part of the matter matter don't have feelings See, our feelings can be spiritual but they are not necessarily spiritual at this stage for example when a man sees a woman there are feelings they are not spiritual feelings those feelings also originate from the soul because consciousness originates from the soul but they are expressed and directed towards the material level they are directed in the material direction now when we start studying and practising Krishna Consciousness we may experience some devotional feelings we may take darshan of the deities we may chant and dance and sing these are devotional feelings at the same time because of our premonition stage even these feelings will not be constant today I have the feelings, tomorrow I lose the feelings then my bhakti has to be beyond the premonition stage because feelings will be unstable feelings are the fruit for our bhakti at least in the sadhana bhakti stage if we make feelings the fuel for our bhakti then our bhakti vehicle will not run much feelings are the fruit not the fuel but if we depend too much on feelings then we will get lost that's why sadhana bhakti, the first part is vaidhi bhakti vaidhi bhakti means be dependent not on feelings but on vidhi may be we neglect or reject feelings it's not a question of rejecting feelings feelings whenever we get devotional feelings we need to be grateful to Krishna Krishna has given us glimpse of what lies ahead for us surely feelings are important but at our stage the primary motivation for practising bhakti should come from vidhi so actually raganuga bhakti is also part of sadhana bhakti sadhana bhakti is vaidhi bhakti vidhi bhakti is raganuga bhakti so in the initial stage it is a thought guru dada shastra said i must do it but vidhi is what motivates that is our feeling then as we move from vaidhi bhakti to raganuga bhakti at that time the feelings will become our feelings so along the journey if feelings come along that is fine be grateful to Krishna for the feelings and then we use those feelings as inspiration to keep moving forward so the feelings are certainly valuable but we should not be overly dependent on the feelings we should be dependent or we should take our frustrations in the instruction of the spiritual master in the instruction of the spiritual teachers and at the ultimate level yes feelings are the experience is the highest pramana when somebody experiences the beauty of Krishna at that time the person does not need any other pramana all other person I have seen Krishna that is guru dada then if you are looking in our level we have mixed our our shastras and our feelings they are mixed together so we don't deny our feelings but we don't depend on our feelings it's not dependent some days I may not feel like waking up in the morning but still I wake up and churn my rounds some days I feel like I am happy, I do it, I am grateful to Krishna feelings are wonderful but they should not be the fuel for our bhakti that is the meaning another point if you are looking of brahmavans that pray to the Krishna I believe 10th canton 14th chapter 26 he says actually mukti and illusion both are illusion because they don't have substance in the same way darkness and light both are illusion when we are looking from the perspective of sun and if we are looking from the perspective of sun what I am getting from that there is no material and spiritual world there is no illusion everything is fully surcharged and then we see Krishna's personal presence everywhere there are 2 different issues here see at one level Chaitanya Mahaprabhu says sarvatra hai nija ishta devastu he does not see moving or non moving he just sees Krishna everywhere that is the perfection but the beginning is first we have to differentiate between matter and spirit this is the body this is the soul that is the beginning and that is the objective what philosophy calls as ontological reality ontological reality objectively is what this is matter, this is spirit so it begins by differentiating and by differentiating between matter and spirit we learn to focus on spirit and as we focus on spirit and devote ourselves to spirit then we get more and more connection and perception of Krishna and when we get perception of Krishna at that time we realise that Krishna is existing not just at the spiritual level but he is also pervading the material level and at that time see actually material is potentially spiritual because it can be used for Krishna's service whatever we use see now it is said that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu whenever he saw any forest he thought it was Vrindavan whenever he saw any river he thought it was Yamuna so now was Chaitanya Mahaprabhu committing a mistake that is the glory of his vision that everywhere he was reverberating so although whichever river he saw, he saw it as Yamuna still he did not stop and wait over there only he still went to Yamuna that means that actually there may be a perception beyond the perception there is objective reality also so yes it is good that whenever I see any river I think of Yamuna and I think of it also as Yamuna but still I should not forget that there is a Yamuna which is there and I have to go there so at our level our spiritual journey begins first by differentiating matter and spirit and after I differentiate between the two then I move forward and when I connect with Krishna then I can see both matter and spirit are energies of Krishna both can be used in Krishna's service then again there is the sort of transcendence of the difference that spiritual life begins with differentiation see Kanishka Adhikari does not see the value of devotees Madhyam Adhikari differentiates this is a devotee, this is an innocent person, this is an envious person and then again Uttam Adhikari transcends, everybody is a devotee of Krishna so we cannot go to the uttama level without going through the Madhyama level just as we have to differentiate between different human beings similarly we have to differentiate between matter and spirit and then later on we can transcend that ok is it clear? so yes from Krishna's perspective there is no difference between matter and spirit but at our level of sadhaka, we need to differentiate this is material, this is spiritual and then so when I differentiate in this way this is male, this is female you know I may say they are both souls but I am not seeing the souls, I am seeing the body at this level and I may get agitated if I am interacting with a female body so therefore I have to differentiate although they are souls, I have to differentiate differentiating to sustain our sadhana rules and regulations in that level so Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was so elevated but when that when he heard a song of Geeta Govind he ran towards that person but when Govind told him that's a woman he stopped and froze at the level of Radharani's separation from Krishna he just didn't see who was she, he just attracted so wildly but then when he was around he said yes so he differentiated so even Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu differentiated not to speak of us we also have to differentiate ok looking from this aspect then we didn't differentiate then we looking from the holy place one of the fenced holy place is the measure holy place from the border if I say this is Mumbai and this is Vrindavan and when I cross this border then I enter Vrindavan and when I out of this border when I out of Vrindavan it is an offence to the colleague that's a different way of understanding the word offence what that means is to consider the holy name to be just like another geographical place that's an offence, what that means is to think that there is nothing more to the holy place than its local geography just like it is said that to consider the deity to be material is an offence now what does that mean, actually the deity is made of material elements deity is made of marble or stone or whatever but to think that that is all that is there to the deity that is the offence to say that Charanamruta is water that is offence, Charanamruta is made of water but because it is contacted Krishna because it is permeated Krishna's mercy to think of it only as water is false, to think of the deity only as matter is false to think of the holy place as only a geographical entity is false what does it mean it means that beyond the geographical location of the place there is the spiritual world where the same holy place is existing and that has manifested already still at objective level Prabhupada went to America and preached but still he got the Americans back to Mayapur he told them to come for Yatra Devotees were saying it is very expensive to go for Yatra Prabhupada said it is expensive to feed the devotees also you have to bring them to Yatra so one of the limits of devotional service is that go travel to holy places so that is a misunderstanding of the principle to say that I should not think that the holy place is a geographical place that doesn't mean that I should not differentiate between Mumbai and Vrindavan they are different places what I shouldn't think of is that Vrindavan is just one geographical location on the map of India, that's all that is there to Vrindavan that is Vrindavan certainly there is a difference between Vrindavan and Mumbai obviously there is a difference he is always at the same time saying this temple was a this temple is different this temple this is the because glorification is happening over here so this is Vrindavan manifested over here but when we sit in the train and we do kirtans and Vrindavan is there see there are two different things there is one a manifestation because of the devotional expression this place becomes manifested but there is also an eternal connection this place is non-different from the spiritual world because there has been continuous glorification of the Lord but before the devotees came over here was this place spiritual? not necessarily now onwards because the world is new it is sanctified whereas Vrindavan is not like that it's not because some devotees went and glorified the world that Vrindavan became not because some so that means like Rupa he established New Vrindavan but still he told even devotees from New Vrindavan to come to Vrindavan why? because still there is a difference there is same and there is difference in the punishment but the original can never be supplanted supplanted means it's done away with because of something else but certainly it's important so it is said in the Vrindgarastas have Deities at their house and they are told to say that the Deity in your house is an expansion of the Deity that is in the temple at the same time to serve the Deity at your home you should not stop coming to the temple you should not say that I have to do puja, I have to do bhoga so I will not come to the temple although I would say the manifestation in the temple is far greater because there are so many devotees there is such high standard of service there is so much bhakti so whenever there is an additional manifestation that is to expand our bhakti not to limit our bhakti so that means if I am practising bhakti in Mumbai I shouldn't think Mumbai is not different from Vrindavan so I don't need to go to Vrindavan see, that was the other argument that devotees that Vrindavan and Vrindavan are not different but that doesn't mean that devotees when they go to Vrindavan, they don't need to go to Vrindavan but where to find this balance that is the guidance of devotees guidance of senior devotees because some devotees are really just running to go to every yatra ultimately we will see this holy dharma by our service attitude not just by going to the physical place yes, exactly so we stay in the other places where we have our seva with the service attitude we go to the holy dharma for yatra with the service attitude both ways senior devotees become our guides to be together with the scriptures I have another class at 5.30 thank you very much you are welcome we have exactly the same Krishna only is providing it is written there even he gives us chance if we want to serve him either way, he is only facilitator if we want to enjoy, he will facilitate by some material benefit if he wants us to serve him if we want to serve him, he will allow us to progress so how do we know which is which because we can say, ok, Krishna is only providing us Krishna is only providing us desires for mental enjoyment Krishna is only providing us Krishna has told us the scripture what we should do life in material existence is like being given a multiple choice question right answer and the wrong answer both are coming from the teacher but if I take the wrong answer I get the blame, teacher doesn't get the blame why? because the teacher gave me the education this is the right answer, this is the wrong answer if I don't study and I take the wrong answer, I get the blame and the teacher doesn't get the blame similarly, Krishna has given us the knowledge of the scripture what we should do and what we should not do then after that, Krishna gives us a choice do you want me or do you want Sanskrit education this is like multiple choice question we have to choose what we want so for that, that's why, if we don't study scripture, we will get completely confused so studying gurus and scriptures we are associating with Vrindavan Shastra regularly, that will give us the understanding, it is, everything is coming from Krishna, but everything is not taking me towards Krishna see, the beauty of a woman is also coming from Krishna, but the beauty of a woman doesn't take me towards Krishna the beauty of the deities is also coming from Krishna that takes me towards Krishna there is Daivir Bhuti and there is Asuri Bhuti when a devotee sings Kirtan very sweetly, that is Daivir Bhuti but when a materialistic singer sings a Bollywood song that sweetness of that song is also coming from Krishna the melody of the song melody of the singing, but that is not taking us towards Krishna, that's why we need Guru Sadhu Shastra to understand which is the right option, which is the wrong option so this again, life is like a multiple choice question if we have different options of serving, like this place or that place or this way or that way so how do we know which is going to serve, this is what Krishna wants us to choose if you have different options for service then generally speaking like for example, someone might say that devotees are taking great risk they have a renounced daughter, she is saying she is staying in Mumbai, because she wants to serve whereas someone might say that I rather not go to Mumbai and practise in a highly profiled place so that at least I can maintain high standards and I may not fall in risk of getting trapped no, this ultimately depends again on two things we need to have a senior devotee whom we can trust, who knows us well that devotee will guide us and secondly, we have to be sincere pray to Krishna, and sometimes we may do wrong also but over a period of time we realise ok, this was what I did, that was not right so we take guidance externally through devotees, internally we pray and try to take guidance from Krishna and after we do our prayer decision we observe ok, I did this, but he says not let me go to Krishna he says let me be more subject to my own, let me not do this let me not do this, but once you have chosen your location or service then the more serious decision then you have more thought for it more thought has to be given so once you have taken that decision, it's all over then what do you do? no, then, bhakti never, bhakti cannot be stopped by any material situation, so we can always continue then you deny yourself an opportunity to you know, go, by making a wrong choice and then no, it's not a permanent deficiency, it's not a permanent deficiency it's a permanent damage, whatever the situation you always have a chance to survive it may be more difficult, it may be less difficult that's why major decisions should be done after giving due thought adequate thought should be given like dham and some other place, so wherever we are, if we are going to dham also we are going to service, if we are staying here and serving here, it's also for service so we might not have a drive and the potential to maintain the service attitude if we are not in dham or in temple if we are going away from temple for some reason that's obvious, that's why the primary principle of devotional service is to be in association, so in association, we do services, sometimes for our services, we go out of association sometimes for our services, we may have to go out of association we may go to some other place where we have to preach, we have to come back to this primary strength comes from association, we can't do it association elsewhere also, we may no, then we have to decide, see the questions you are asking, you have to ask a person counsellor, you have to have a counsellor and you have to ask that counsellor questions so it's.