Let personal conception of God lead to personal dealings with God’s parts

[Bhagavatam class on Srimad-Bhagavatam 03.28.20 at ISKCON, Perth, Australia]

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
so today morning we’re discussing from the the section where how to meditate on the lord is described and meditation is itself a activity which or rather it’s a thought process which can refer to many different things at one level it can just refer to deep thinking i’m meditating on the subject that means i’m thinking deeply about a subject so meditation can refer to the mode of thinking and meditation can also refer to the object of thought how i am thinking and what i am thinking about sometimes at one level we can say that people who are mad after sports mad after cricket they can be lost in thoughts of cricket now in a generic sense we could say they are meditating on cricket but we will just say that they are lost in cricket the meditation is generally on some deeper truth some higher reality meditation is the deep thinking which enables us to perceive reality beyond whatever is normally observable for us so normally when somebody gets lost in ordinary thoughts you say you’re daydreaming so if we consider the material reality is what we perceive around us now above this is spiritual reality and we could say below this is fictional reality or fictional experience that means either we were dreaming we are daydreaming or it may be that somebody else has spun a dream with their imagination and they have created a novel they have created a movie and we are watching it so we may get lost in a sports match in a movie in a novel and that can also be a place where we are deeply absorbed but usually meditation is not about just the mode of thinking it is also about the object of thought so it’s generally when we go to when we pursue things beyond the material we pursue deeper realities that is when the word meditation is used so here when we move from the material to the spiritual the natural process of evolution of consciousness is to move from the personal to the impersonal why because in this world we see personality we see form we see variety we see names and all these become the cause of illusion temptation and then degradation we see look at we see somebody they look attractive we taste some sweet food we there are so many tempting objects which are essentially what is the object it’s a form taste colour shape all those things so we think that if i had to go beyond illusion then i had to go beyond the forms i had to go beyond personality so in a sense going from personal to impersonal is a natural step in spiritual evolution the problem comes when this first step is considered to be the ultimate step that if somebody considers that oh everything personal is false and everything impersonal is the real we can consider say that if you have a x y axis graph then there’s a negative axis there is zero and there’s a positive axis so material form material personality they are on the negative axis and from there we come to zero that means we go beyond form we go beyond personality but then beyond the zero there is a positive x and the positive axis there is spiritual form there is spiritual personality in the past times of past time of gajendra he offers a prayer to lord vishnu which jiva goswami quotes in his shat sandarbha to stress how the supreme lord or the absolute truth is personal he says we do not know what is the form what are the activities of that absolute truth and he says i offer obeisances to that absolute truth so he says therefore i offer obeisances that transcendental absolute truth that absolute truth is brahman it is spiritual reality then the word brahman sometimes we use to refer to the impersonal aspect of brahman of the absolute truth but generically the word brahman refers to the great one that which is huge that which expands over great reality so brahman can refer to the impersonal aspect but brahman can refer in general to the ultimate truth and the vedanta sutra says at that time it is not saying it is not enquire about the impersonal effulgence of the absolute the word brahma can refer generically to the absolute truth so specifically it can have some particular meaning which we discover discuss when we are going into philosophical technicalities but here brahman has unlimited energies so here there is a oxymoron oxymoron is the english form of speech or a literary device when two opposite ideas are brought together if you say that you know if you say to someone you know you are an intelligent fool what do you mean neither i am intelligent or i am foolish somebody is intelligent using the intelligence to come up with a foolish idea justify a foolish idea it is an intelligent fool or sometimes a suicide is an act of courageous cowardice actually to end one’s life sometimes people go on the railway track and they lie down in the railway track they lie down in the railway track at that time when they hear the whistle the sound of the railway coming they get up and maybe future not now to end one’s life requires courage but when one is ending one’s life because of frustration and inability to deal with life’s problems that is cowardly so it’s courageous cowardice so it’s called oxymoron and two different two opposite words are brought together means that absolute truth has no form and that absolute truth has many forms so how can it be that the absolute truth has no form and has many forms he concludes such is the astonishing activity of the absolute truth the acharya has explained it means that the absolute truth has no material form so nothing on the negative axis but once we go beyond the negative axis to zero beyond there is the positive axis and there there are many forms so here when it is now now this is the natural evolution from form to formlessness from material form to formlessness to spiritual form that is how the normal spiritual evolution takes place and especially do not those who do not know about the personal form of the absolute truth then they normally move from form to formlessness so formlessness or impersonal realisation is a natural step in spiritual evolution however there are some impersonalists who say that the personal form is not the highest rather they say the personal form has come from the impersonal light so they make the personal form as transitional not as the highest truth so there’s a yogi impersonalist teacher he said that when in in india when britishers came they were very critical of the ras leela they said you know what is this how can god come by do some immoral activities like dancing with other women’s wives so then this this particular teacher immonist he said that actually now you people you christians you are acquainted with only god as the father but there are so many ways in which you can relate with god and he talks about the same five rasas he says from a distance you just meditate on god passively and you come closer you serve him as a servant then you come closer you treat god as a friend since you have no idea of god as a friend you come closer then you treat god as a child it’s the opposite of the idea of god as a parent you still come still closer then you treat god as your lover and when you come closest then you merge into god so so the five rasas he talks about those five rasas but he considers that beyond the five rasas is merging however that is not at all the mood of the bhagavatam the bhagavatam we say the at one level we can say it is a conceptual autobiography of shukdev goswami you know there is a there is a chronological or event-centred autobiography where it says this happened this happened this happened this happened that’s how they describe but conceptual autobiography is a genre of literature where people focus not on events but on concepts now how i understood this concept and how i understood that concept how i understood that concept so this evolution in the bhagavatam is not from impersonal from personal to impersonal as this yogi is claiming as this monist teacher is claiming but the bhagavatam talks about evolution from impersonal to personal the first verse of the bhagavatam talks about dhimahi satyam param dhimahi meditate on that absolute truth that supreme truth now meditation can be personal it can be impersonal but the third verse of the bhagavatam it moves forward and says that pibat bhagavatam rasamalayam muhur aho rasika bhuvibhavukaha drink the nectar of bhagavatam or become rasikas enjoy rasa rasa and rasika this is juice this is flow this is reciprocation and this is with a personal absolute so the bhagavatam describes how we move from meditation to reciprocation we move from meditation to reciprocation there are many impersonalists who may meditate on oh meditate on the light of a candle meditate on the bulb meditate on the sky prabhupada says in a lecture that yes god is great and you can say the sky is also great but how can you reciprocate with the sky can’t reciprocate so the bhagavatam talks about evolution from meditation to reciprocation and for that purpose here when the meditation is being described on the indwelling form of the lord now the yogis they may meditate with two different understandings the in the in the chaitanya charitam with purport shila prabhupada explains that the yogis who meditate on the supersona we can say they are the paramatma vadis there are three aspects of the absolute truth brahman paramatma and bhagwan so those who meditate on the impersonal aspect the jnanis they go to the brahman aspect the brahma jyoti now of course if they’re not offensive that means they’re simply attracted to the impersonal aspect they do not minimise or offend the impersonal those who love the personal aspect of the absolute truth they go to the personal they attain the spiritual world vaikuntha or goloka depending on which conception of god which form of the lord they are worshipping now those who meditate on the super soul in the heart dhyana one of the concluding verses of the shivamad bhagavatam is that absolute truth is the one whom the yogis meditate on the heart dhyana vastata in deep meditation they made meditate on him and what is the nature of that absolute truth his infinite attributes they are not known by the asuras or by the suras for that absolute truth i offer my obeisances so the yogis meditate on the super soul in the heart now they can meditate so we could say that the yogis are paramatma vadis there are brahmavadis paramatma vadis and there are the bhagvatas now those who meditate on the impersonal aspect of the absolute they can have two conceptions of the super soul one is that the super soul is my master or the super soul is the object whom i am going to merge into so if they think that the super soul is the object i am going to merge into then they become brahmavadis they descend to brahman level if they understand that the super soul is the object whom i am going to be devoted to not the object for merging is the object for serving a devotee has no urge to merge no urge to merge we have a urge to serve so if they understand this the super soul is the object for serving then they rise to the personal understanding and they attain the supreme now here when the stress is being made uh both in the verses and the purport bachelor prabhupada that meditate on each aspect of the lord okay meditate on his lotus feet meditate on his calves meditate on his knees meditate on his thighs meditate on each part of the body now why is this important and prabhupada says that if you just meditate on the full form then it can be impersonal how because for those who are meditating with the impersonal conception they often think that the form of the lords is simply a tool it’s a tool to go from the worldly reality to transcendental reality we are naturally attracted to forms if you get attracted to worldly forms we’ll go into illusion so therefore let’s meditate on some divine form and by meditating on on the divine form we rise upwards till we come to pure spiritual consciousness and then we go beyond the form so for such people the which particular form they are meditating on is not that important that’s why they say you meditate on whichever form you like i’ll meditate on whichever form i like and then sometimes the gurus say okay you know you can meditate on whichever form you want you can meditate on me also if you want because i am also brahman i am also realised so in this way they treat the form as transitional and utilitarian that’s why the specifics of the form don’t matter so much for them for them what they want is to go to the spiritual reality beyond the form but for us the specifics of the form are important because we want to learn to love the person not look beyond the person yeah our focus is on understanding that krishna is the supreme reality and we need to learn to love him and to approach the personal absolute truth now we need to learn to be personal if we are impersonal in our dealings with others then we cannot approach the personal absolute truth sometimes we have the most personal philosophy but we end up dealing with people most impersonally on the other hand there are impersonalists whose philosophy ultimately is impersonal but they deal with people very personally because they consider personal personal dealing being polite being gentle being sensitive this they consider is behaviour in the mode of goodness and they think by living in the mode of goodness i will attain transcendence so that is true we need to live in the mode of goodness and they see their personal behaviour as essential sadhachara for them to rise to the transcendental now for us as sadhakas as bhakti sadhakas now we also need to function in the mode of goodness so broadly speaking in our spiritual life there are four aspects there is siddhanta there is sadhana there is seva and there is sadhachara so siddhanta is philosophical understanding this is the truth this is this is not the truth this is a incorrect understanding improper understanding sadhana is our chanting of the holy names our worshipping the deities the practises of bhakti that we know our seva is the various services we render we may go for distributing books we may help in raising funds for a temple we may do various services like that we may clean the temple this is seva and the fourth is sadhachara sadhachara is proper behaviour broadly speaking sadhachara means behaviour in the mode of goodness when shila prabhupada was asked how can we know your followers he said they are perfect gentlemen he did not at that time stress the same sadhana they chant 16 rounds every day he did not stress that they they they are personalists they worship krishna as a supreme personality they focused on what the world is going to see the world is not concerned what our siddhanta is what our sadhana is i say i have memorised all 700 verses of the bhagavad gita if i say in the words so what what is the big deal if i say you know i wake up and chant 16 rounds okay so what how does it make any difference to me so i come to the temple and do service every day every week whatever okay i also belong to the volunteer organisations i do some service there also what’s the big deal what people see is the sadhachara sadhachara means acharya’s behaviour sad is the proper behaviour so our philosophical understanding our personal spiritual practise our practical services all these are meant to lead to transformation of our acharya they’re meant to lead to help us to behave better behave more in the mode of goodness be more sensitive be more understanding be more caring be more respectful personal personal ultimately means that we treat the other person as a person and now maybe say that’s a like a tautology that’s obvious no but what does it mean to treat the other person as a person it means that other person has emotions that person has opinions that person is a individual unit of consciousness with an individual way of looking at the world now sometimes their way of looking may be right sometimes their way of looking may be wrong but still that is the way they are looking at the world and when we have certain opinions when we have certain emotions we feel strongly connected with them so even if they are wrong now we have to help them come to a better understanding in a gradual and understanding way the people will not understand us till they feel we have understood them suppose we go to a doctor and even before we describe any of our symptoms the doctor starts giving a prescription okay take this medicine take this medicine take this medicine i didn’t even tell you my symptoms hey what is this this is on if we’re still we just go to the doctor and before hearing anything from us the doctor starts doing surgery hey so what are you doing so first the patient has to explain but without the patient feeling that the doctor has understood my situation the even if the doctor gives a prescription and then it’s the right prescription the patient will not be in the frame of mind to take it so people need to feel understood before they will understand and krishna himself demonstrates such empathy in his interaction with arjuna in the sixth chapter krishna talks about how we can control the mind the same process of yoga that is described over here just control the mind keep it equipoised and ultimately you can attain the absolute and then when krishna concludes his description 6.32 in two verses arjuna expresses objection since 6.33 says yoga this process of yoga which you are telling me to practise it requires equanimity of the mind it seems impossible to me because the mind is restless this moves flick flickers from one place to another.
And then he speaks a well-known verse, chanchalam vimana krishna, pramathi ballavadraham, tasyaham nigraham manye, vayorivasu dushkaram. Says that the mind is restless, it is wild, it is turbulent, it is obstinate, it is controlling, it is as difficult as controlling a raging wind. Now, basically Arjuna is telling, the process you are telling is not very practical.
Now, what is Krishna’s response? Krishna doesn’t say, don’t be lazy, apply yourself, you’ll be able to do it. Don’t be on the mental platform. Come on, just do it.
No, no, Krishna is understanding. In 6.35 he says, asamshayam maha bahu, mano durnigraham chalam. Undoubtedly, oh Arjuna, it is true that the mind is extremely difficult to control.
Abhyasena tu kaunteya, vairagyena chagrayate. But, if you practise, abhyasa, and be detached, don’t expect immediate success. Be patient, be detached.
If you do this, you’ll succeed. And then he says, asayatatmana yogo, dushprapiti me mati, vashyatmana tu yatata, shakyo vaptu mupayataha. This one who does not control the mind, asayatatmana yogi, dushprapiti me mati.
For that person, to attain perfection is unachievable. But, if you strive by the right means, you can do it. So, essentially, Krishna reiterates the same point, that you have to control the mind.
But, he shows understanding. It’s difficult to control. If somebody says, I’m trying to chant 16 rounds, it’s so difficult.
Haridas Thakur chanted 192 rounds, why can’t you chant 16 rounds? Oh, I accept Krishna as God, but you know, I never heard of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. How do I believe, how do I accept that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is God? For non-Indians, both Krishna and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu are both new for them. For Indians, Krishna is known, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is not so well known.
So, this doubt comes. Somebody quotes, in the Vayu Puran, it is said, anyone who sees any difference between Gaurachandra and Krishnachandra will reside in hell forever. Well, it’s not said anything like that, but suppose somebody quotes like that, what are we doing? We are not understanding that.
So, sometimes, we may quote from scripture also, but we have to quote so that that person is elevated. Which words to speak at what point, how to explain what thing to whom, by which that person can be elevated, that it requires understanding. Once, Prabhupada was asked by some of his disciples, Swamiji, Prabhupada, the new disciples, they said that, Prabhupada, in the Bhagavatam, there are some astonishing figures, you know, that King Ugrasen had such millions and millions of bodyguards.
So, how do we understand this? He said, if we tell this to scholars, they laugh at us. They will say, where does all these bodyguards live in Dwarka? Where is that place for them? Where were their homes? Where were their washrooms? How did they live? Prabhupada could have answered, Krishna can do anything. He can maintain the whole world on the tip of a needle.
Yes, Krishna can do anything. But can people who are having this question have that faith? Prabhupada gave a very practical reply. He said, among all the thousands of the verses in the Bhagavatam, was that the only thing you found to speak to the scholars? We have to speak that which enables people to rise from where they are.
To instruct a faithless person about the glories of the Holy Name is an offence to the Holy Name. What does that mean? That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give instruction. But we should give instruction that people can have faith in.
Now suppose somebody comes to a temple and they want to enter the temple. Sometimes in some old temples, the steps are very tall. Normally steps may be a little height, but it is like a huge height.
And some people who are physically challenged, for them to climb up that step becomes very difficult. Then often if that temple is concerned that visitors come, they may create a ramp or they may create some staircase with smaller steps. So the idea is for people to come to the temple, we don’t have to make it difficult.
We have to make it easy. So sometimes people are at a particular emotional level, at a particular intellectual level. And if we tell them something which is like a huge step up for them, this is too much.
I will not go only. Forget it. I will not come to Krishna.
So we have to be understanding. That means we have to understand where they are at, where they are coming from. So being personal in our philosophy, in our siddhanta is fine.
Being personal in our sadhana is fine. We often emphasise very much Krishna is a person. Treat the deities as a person.
Now anybody who is impersonalist, we condemn them. But we need to be personal in our dealings with others. Personal in our dealings means we understand them.
Not that we have to agree with them. If some people have wrong understandings, then we have to correct that. But we have to first of all understand them.
The patient has to be heard by the doctor. Now of course the doctor should not forever be hearing the patient. Hear for some time to get the patient to feel that yes I have understood.
And then the doctor has understood. And then the doctor gives the prescription. So being personal means that we understand people so that when they feel understood, they will understand us.
So being personal means that we don’t necessarily have to agree with people’s opinions or people’s emotions. But if we value them as people, as a person, then we at least give them a hearing. This is how you feel.
This feeling, I understand you’re feeling like this. At the same time, this is how things happen actually. You’re feeling angry because I did this.
But I had gone there. I had to do this. That’s why I couldn’t be here on time.
So unfortunately, instead of being understanding, we sometimes become very judgemental. Judgemental means that we have certain ideas. This opinion is wrong.
This emotion is wrong. Anybody has this opinion? They are in maya. You have this particular emotion? You’re in maya.
Now people are coming from a particular background and we need to understand where they are coming from. So once we understand that, then we can address them and help them rise from where they are to one step up. So the personal aspect in our dealings is that we recognise that our purpose is not just to thrust down the truth on people.
Our purpose is to elevate people from where they are to one step up. When we try to share Krishna Bhakti, we can do it in different ways. We can do preaching in transcendence, in goodness, in passion and ignorance.
I’ll just briefly explain this. This is a whole seminar itself. But I’ll briefly talk about this as a conclusion to the point of being personal.
When we are in a mode of ignorance, we feel as if nothing is in my control. And we have certain standard routines. As soon as we see someone, they’re not the body or the soul.
No, this is maya. This world is temporary. Get out of this world.
This world is the kala. Okay, that’s fine. That’s true.
But there’s a time, place and circumstance for telling everything. If somebody has lost a loved one, and we tell them, you know, actually all relationships are temporary. You have lost this loved one, you’re going to lose all your other loved ones also.
We will be committing violence. At that time, we need to tell them that actually Krishna is your eternal companion. Krishna is everyone’s eternal companion.
Krishna is with you, Krishna is with them. And you pray to Krishna, Krishna will guide them wherever they are. And whatever you love you got from them, it is ultimately Krishna offering you that love through that person.
Take shelter of Krishna, you will be comforted. So we have to take the see the person and present appropriately. If you’re in the mode of ignorance, we just have like one track and we keep repeating it everywhere.
Whether that is attracting people, alienating people, we don’t see at all. In when we are in the mode of passion, we basically try to prove I am right. You are wrong and I am right.
And sometimes we get into arguments with people. And the arguments can become quite unpleasant and nasty. And then at the end, we may win the argument, but we may lose the person.
Because the people don’t just function based on the head, they also function based on the heart. If they feel that I have been humiliated, then they will just go away. A person convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
They’ll hold on to the same opinion, they’ll come back and try to prove that I am right. We see Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, how very gracefully he dealt with even those opponents who were defeated. The three primary intellectual confrontations Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had.
Keshav Kashmiri, Sarvabham Bhattacharya and Prakash Anand Saraswati. And not one of them did Chaitanya Mahaprabhu shame in public. He started with very great respectfulness.
And because of that which he had, they felt calm, they felt valued. And then eventually, still it was shocking for them and their views were refuted. But Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did it in a very respectful way.
When he defeated Keshav Kashmiri, his students started laughing. And he said, stop, don’t laugh, don’t laugh. He said, he respected Keshav Kashmiri, he said, you know, you just spoke so many verses today, you must be tired.
You go back to study your books, come back tomorrow and we can discuss. So he let him have a graceful exit. Now, our purpose is to help people come close to Krishna.
Now, if our purpose in the mode of passion when we are arguing it becomes, no, I will, I’ll put your nose on the ground and I’ll show the world that I defeated you. That is not the purpose. Sometimes, if some person is very strongly attached to their opinion, just end the interaction on a cordial note.
This is how you think, I understand that. This is what I understand based on the scripture, based on what I have learned. And then let’s end this interaction.
If they feel that, okay, I met a nice person. Then in future, when their thought process evolves and they want to think again, they rethink their understanding, they will be open to come to Krishna. So, unfortunately, when we do outreach, we often become impersonal because we preach in the modes of passion and ignorance.
Either just one track repeat to everyone or somehow or the other win the war, win the argument. But in the mode of goodness, we understand where people are at and we help them take one step forward from where they are. When Srila Prabhupada met Peter Barwash, who was a famous tennis player, he was quite celebrated.
So, he had a position in society and Prabhupada told him, you just help people to become vegetarian, to become more spiritual. So, Peter Barwash has written many books and at a personal level, he talks about chanting of the holy names and he tells people. But at a general level, he is more like a teacher of self-help.
And many, many people, he has got his own tennis academy. And recently, I met one devotee, who was before coming to bhakti, he was an aspiring tennis player. And he says his tennis coach was a student of Peter Barwash.
And he said, I learned from my tennis coach Krishna Bhakti and then I felt a career in Krishna Bhakti is better than in tennis. And then, he has now become a devotee. So, now, that tennis coach, he is not a direct what you would call a Hare Krishna devotee.
But he has, he has an appreciation. He has so much appreciation that he is ready to share with others also. So, there can be, some people may be ready for Krishna directly.
Some people may not yet be ready for Krishna. So, when I am speaking like this, it’s not that I am on a high pedestal. I also committed these mistakes.
In the early days, especially when there is the zeal of the new convert. Then, I was, after I was introduced to Krishna Bhakti, I was going to a company. So, we used to go in a bus.
And then, I used to chant or I used to read or hear during chant, during the bus. It was a one-hour journey. So, one colleague, he just came and asked me, what do you do this? Then, in that one hour, I like, the whole journey of self-discovery course, I just concentrated.
Everything, from beginning to end. Even when we reach the destination, wait, I have not completed. Sit.
And then, after that, normally buses have two doors. So, after that, whenever he would climb into the bus, he would peep in, see which door I am close to and then go to the other door and come. So, recently, I met him in America and we were both laughing at that.
So, now, his sister has become a devotee and he has also become very appreciative. So, but I realised that this is, we think that I have to just, it’s like all that I have learned in one transfer, I have to download everything on them. Now, just give them some understanding, let them take steps forward.
So, if you understand where people are at and try to help them rise, that is in the mode of goodness. In transcendence, we are actually filled with compassion. Right now, we may not have so much compassion.
We have a little bit compassion, but we may not have the competence that somebody in transcendence has. Our position is more like a patient who has been healed and who wants to share the healing process with others. Now, this worked for me.
Why don’t you try it out? There are great devotees like Srila Prabhupada, who may sometimes speak strongly also, but they don’t just, they are motivated by deep compassion and they can sometimes speak strongly. But the point is not speaking strongly or gently. The point is speaking effectively, speaking in a way that helps people come closer to Krishna.
So, Srila Prabhupada was an elderly person. He was so learned, so compassionate, so that he could speak strongly and get people closer to Krishna also. If we can do that, that’s fine.
But more often than not, we don’t have that compassion. The words that come from the heart attract people’s hearts. The words that come from the ego trigger people’s ego.
So, for us, we may start speaking from the heart. We are seriously concerned about people. But as soon as they stop, they don’t agree with what we are saying, immediately we move from the heart platform to the ego platform.
How dare you don’t agree with me? And then, as soon as we go to the ego platform, their ego platform comes up. And then it becomes very difficult for them to accept. Actually, Prabhupada himself was also very, very… We generally think of Prabhupada as fools, rascals.
He would say strongly. But that is not the only way Prabhupada functioned. There is… In one of the Prabhupada memories, an incident is described, that the devotees were staying at one place and next to that, there was an old lady who was staying.
And this old lady, she just couldn’t understand what these devotees are all about. Singing so loudly, dancing, wearing weird robes, having clay on their face. Just couldn’t understand anything.
And she was… She complained to the local council and the devotees were having a lot of trouble. And the devotees very conveniently… No, she is demoniac. She is opposing devotion, she is demoniac.
So, Prabhupada went for morning walk, the devotees told him about this. Then, see what happened was, when Prabhupada came back, he just went over. One part of the house, they were staying.
Another part, she was staying. So, Prabhupada went to her. And Prabhupada talked with her for 30 minutes.
Just simply, old people talk, you know. So, how are you? How is your health? Where is your son? Where is your daughter? And the devotees were there, waiting. When will Prabhupada speak about Krishna? When will Prabhupada speak about Krishna? Prabhupada will tell her to chat her in Krishna.
Prabhupada did not speak anything at all. He spoke to her nicely, he talked with her. And then he left.
And the devotees turned and didn’t ask Prabhupada directly, why did you speak about Krishna? But the question was there on their face. And Prabhupada just looked at them. Prabhupada said, sometimes, old people feel lonely.
Sometimes, old people get lonely. So, Prabhupada, here he was a great Acharya, you know, there were disciples who wanted one moment of his time. He was concerned with an old woman who was not a devotee.
She is lonely. He just went and talked with her, spent some time with her. And after Prabhupada left, this old lady, she came and said, your spiritual master is such a nice person.
And she said, he is so nice. She started, her mind opened to the devotees. And her whole attitude changed without even Prabhupada preaching one word to her.
So, the key thing is, we understand where people are at and help them rise. So, the more we become personal in our dealings with others, the more we will be able to actually attract people to the personal absolute truth and help them relish the sweetness of bhakti. And this applies even in our devotee dealings.
We will all have differences of opinion, but we understand each other, respect each other and then we move forwards. So, otherwise, if our dealings are impersonal, insensitive, then we will not be able to relish the sweetness of bhakti. Bhakti is like drinking sweet rice.
The remembrance of Krishna is very sweet. But impersonal and insensitive dealings are like sand in the sweet rice. Sometimes, in our practise of bhakti, we find that in the pot there is more sand than sweet rice.
We eat, we think, what happened? Sand came up. So, the more we learn to be personal and warm and caring in our dealings, the more we will start relishing bhakti even in this life. And as we become purified, we will relish it more and more till we attain Krishna where there is eternal ecstasy awaiting us.
So, I will summarise. I spoke today about the difference between personal and impersonal conceptions of the absolute. So, here when the yogis are being told to meditate, meditate on each limb, why each limb? Because often those who are on the path of yoga, they may have an impersonal conception of the absolute.
And they think the symbol is simply a tool. The form is simply a tool to go to the formless. But if you meditate on the specific aspects, then that means you are not treating it as a tool.
We are treating it as a person with personal attributes. The Bhagavatam is like a conceptual autobiography of Shukadeva Goswami where he moves from impersonalism to personalism. Bhagavatam starts with dhimahi meditation and comes to pibat rasa, from meditation to reciprocation.
Meditation can refer to just deep thinking, but it can also refer to the deepest object of thought. In the spiritual evolution, moving from personal to impersonal is a natural step forward. It’s like moving from negative axis to zero.
Worldly forms entangle. So, going beyond forms, we say, will be disentangling. But beyond the zero is the positive axis.
So, Krishna’s form is eternal and spiritual. So, to move, the Bhagavatam uses the oxymoron, arupaya, ururupaya. Arupaya refers to moving from, there’s no material form to come to zero.
But then ururupaya, many forms, that’s the spiritual richness of the many forms. So, through this oxymoron conveys the spiritual reality, the personal reality is the ultimate reality. And some yogis twist this hierarchy around and they say that the personal comes from the impersonal, whereas actually the impersonal that comes from the personal.
And we have the personal understanding of the absolute truth, but we also need to be personal in our conduct with others. Among in spiritual life, there’s siddhanta, sadhana, seva, and sadhachara. We stress a lot on siddhanta, sadhana, and seva, but also sadhachara, we tend to become self-righteous and judgemental.
So, when we try to share Krishna bhakti with others, being personal with them means understanding that they are individual centres of consciousness with their opinions, with their emotions, and they need to feel understood before they will understand. Just like a patient needs to feel that my symptoms were heard before the prescription is given. So, Krishna himself does that to Arjuna when he says that the mind is very difficult to control and then says, but practise, you’ll be able to do it.
And when we are trying to share Krishna bhakti, we may do it in ignorance by just having one formula for everyone, which may alienate them. We may do it with passion, where we make it an ego battle, I have to prove that I am right. Then we may win the argument, we may lose the person.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu made sure that he defeated people, but he did not disgrace them. He helped them have a graceful exit. So, we have to raise people from where they are to one step upwards.
So, if we make the step in coming to the temple too steep, people will just not come. So, it has to be accessible. So, like that, from whatever people’s emotions are, whatever people’s opinions are, we have to see what is one step up from them.
How can they evolve in their understanding? And this way, when we share Krishna bhakti, then we will attract people towards the personal aspect of the absolute truth. Prabhupada was compassionate and that compassion sometimes manifested through strong speaking and sometimes through gentle speaking. The point is not to speak strongly or gently, the point is to speak effectively, by which we attract people to Krishna.
And lastly, I talked about how when we are practising bhakti and serving the personal absolute, if we are impersonal in our dealings, then that becomes like sand in the sweet rice of Krishna bhakti. The taste of Krishna bhakti will not come because our dealings with people will be so jarring. The more we become personal, create a personal caring culture, the sweetness of bhakti becomes more and more accessible and relishable.
Thank you very much. Sometimes to keep the institution moving, there are so many things to do and that may make devotees rigid and they may become impersonal. This is what has to be done.
So, how do we deal with this? Yes, when individuals work in an institution, there are two forces at work. There is the institution’s growth and there is the individual’s growth. So, both are important.
The individual institution’s growth means that, first of all, whatever service, deity worship is there, temple cleaning is there, prasadam cooking is there. These are things which have to go on. Along with that, this individual’s growth means that it’s not just growth in stature, it’s not just growth in position.
Individual’s growth means growth in the desire to serve. It means if a devotee has come new, that devotee may be told, please come to the temple, please come for this programme, please come for this festival. But if a devotee has been around for 5 years, 10 years, even if that devotee is placed in a place where there are no devotees, that devotee should have the motivation that I want to serve Krishna.
The success, the growth of a devotee is that, wherever that devotee is put, that devotee’s desire to serve Krishna is so strong that the devotee keeps serving always. And for this, the devotee has to find and be situated in a service that is according to their nature. We all can do services as per the need of the situation, and we should, that’s our surrender.
But it’s also the maturity of the leaders by which they find, okay, how can I engage this devotee lifelong? How can this devotee be inspired? So, while doing whatever services we are told to do, we also observe which services we feel good at doing, we feel good while doing, and we are actually good at doing. Krishna says, guna karma vibhagashah. There’s qualities and there is activities.
So, we can say guna refers to comfort or compatibility. I feel comfortable doing this service. And karma refers to competence.
I’m good at doing this. I like to sing kirtans and I’m good at it. I like to give classes, I’m good at it.
I like to cook and I’m good at it. So, if this agreement is there, both comfort and competence, then that is a service we can do lifelong. So, over a period of time, we need to gravitate towards a service of that kind.
That doesn’t mean we reject whatever services we are doing. But both the institution and the individual have to have this long term vision. Sometimes the temple may be understaffed, and that’s why, whatever service is required, we may do it.
And that’s our surrender to do it. But over a period of time, the temple or the institution should have that vision that we engage devotees in a way that they can practise sustainably. So, sometimes the individual’s needs may take priority.
So, the institution’s needs may take priority. At the same time, the thing should be structured in a way that in the long run, devotees can serve in a way they are inspired to serve. So, if we find that keeping the things moving, that itself is becoming a drain, that itself is draining the devotees, then that means we are so caught in maintenance that we are not able to share, that we are not able to preach, we are not able to attract new people.
Because when the community is small, whatever is required, we will do. But as we grow, we need our space so that we can make our offering to Krishna. So, then sometimes, even if some maintenance goes down a little bit, if you can focus on preaching for some time, get some more people, then we will have more devotees and devotees can serve according to their nature.
We cannot entirely reject the institutional responsibilities. But at the same time, we cannot entirely repress the individual nature also. So, harmony has to be found between the two, where sometimes one may take priority, but overall, the whole system of Varanashram was serving according to one’s nature.
So, we need to move towards that gradually. Any other questions? Yes, Mataji. Yes, in some respects, they are actually quite advanced in their love for God.
So, I also learned that we don’t need to go there to try and convert them, but we certainly can take them like Shalom and Guru Krishnamurti. We are quite often invited to this programme, to what’s called the World Peace Programme or whatever the Peace may be. They got together, and we also got to learn, I learned a lot actually.
So, if we go for interfaith programmes, what is the attitude we should go with and how does it serve our mission? Yeah, it is important for us to not live in self-congratulatory isolation. I am so good, everybody is so fallen. I’m patting myself on the back.
I’m so good. So, sometimes we live like that. Everybody is there in Maya.
We are devotees. But actually, Bhaktivinoda Thakur, in his famous statement, Chaitanya Shri Krishnamurti says that, if I go to a place of worship where God is being worshipped in a form different from what I understand, he says, I will stand there in a respectful mood and I will meditate how compassionate is my Lord that he has assumed this form for attracting these people. Although I can’t understand this particular form, I can’t understand the specifics of the worship, but I appreciate it.
And I appreciate my Lord is so compassionate and how these people are sincerely worshipping this manifestation of the Lord. And by seeing my Lord’s compassion, my devotion to the Lord in the form that I know is increasing. So, we can get inspiration from others’ devotion to increase our devotion.
Now, broadly speaking, sometimes we interact with people primarily for conversion, proselytisation. We talk with people, we interact with them to make them into devotees. That is one way of interacting.
But Sri Prabhupada also had different ways of interacting. When Prabhupada started the Bhaktivedanta Institute, that was not just for scientists, it was scientists, scholars and basically intellectual leaders of society. And he was very clear, the objective of the Bhaktivedanta Institute is to increase the prestige of ISKCON.
Now, prestige is not in the egoistic sense, but prestige in the sense of respectability. That we are also scientists, that we also have scientific will, we also give scientific presentations. So, people don’t think of us, those people who just dance on the streets or those people who wear weird robes.
No, they see us as respectable. So, when we are doing scientific outreach, when we have a conference with scientists, it is unlikely that scientists will ever begin chanting and become sadhakas. A few may, but even if those scientists appreciate that, you know, they are good people.
These are intelligent people. I don’t agree with them, but they are intelligent people. So, then that will have a significant effect on society.
And same way with interfaith. Now, when we do interfaith, we meet with faith leaders of other communities and they have significant impact on how other people, how their broader society views us. Now, we could say that there are four broad modes of interaction.
There is insider-insider, like this programme. There are devotees speaking to devotees. There are insider-outsider.
Yesterday evening we had a programme for dignitaries, doctors and others. The new people, we introduce them to Krishna Bhakti. So, Buddhist tradition is also insider-outsider.
And sometimes from outsider-insider. We may learn to say, okay, I want to construct a temple. How do I do that? We may need to learn from them.
But there is also outsider-outsider communication. That means, people in general are going to talk. Okay, if some Christians want to know, what are these Hare Krishnas? They may go and ask their pastor.
And if the pastor says, oh, they are agents of the devil. Then, those people will not even consider us at all. They are nice people.
You know, I met them. They are also personalists. They also worship a personal god.
They are monotheists. Oh, okay. Then they will be more open.
So, we as a movement have focused primarily on the insider-outsider mode of communication. We try to speak to outsiders to make them into insiders. But the perception of society at large will not be determined only by how they interact with us.
There is also outsider-outsider communication. So, the thought leaders or the social leaders for the outsiders, if they have a favourable perception of us, then the broader culture will be receptive to us, will be not hostile to us. So, this interfaith, we have to understand the definition of success will be different.
If you say, okay, I have been doing this programme every month for whatever, for so many years, nobody has become a devotee. That is not the definition of success over there. There, we will see that it is a subtle level where people’s perceptions about us are becoming healthier.
And sometimes in emergencies, when we have issues, people may help us. When the brainwashing case was going on and ISKCON was being accused that you are brainwashing young people, at that time, in Leela Amrit, it is described how we won the case. That is true.
But how exactly did it happen? Especially, it happened once in 1976, but in 1980s also, the cases kept coming. So, it is Anuttama Prabhu, who is our communications director in America. And he was telling that actually, he worked very hard for this, for changing the outsider-outsider perception.
And he said that actually, at that time, the Christians helped us. That many Christian pastors and Christian teachers, they said, Hare Krishna is their authentic tradition from India. They are not a cult.
And it was their testimony that enabled us to, that shifted the balance in our favour. Because we may say we are so good, we are an ancient tradition. But people will say, you are just advertising yourself.
Now, when we want to buy a product, we do not just see what the company is saying about the product. If I want to buy an iPhone X, okay, what Apple says is fine. But I also want to see what independent reviewers say about it.
So, people will not just decide who we are based on what we speak. What we speak and how we speak is important. But what others say about us is also important.
So, we need to make sure that the outsider-outsider dialogue or outsider-outsider communication is at least favourable. And these kind of interactions are for that purpose. And when we are in the outsider-outsider communication, then we cannot speak like an insider or we cannot be, we are an insider, but there is a proper way to speak over there.
So, broadly speaking, we can say that we can share our message or we can share Krishna’s message in three ways. I call this as prescription. So, prescriptive, normative and descriptive.
Prescriptive means you should do this. We cannot go to a Christian and tell the giant Hare Krishna. We cannot do prescription over there.
Normative means this is the truth. This is the norm. Krishna is God and Jesus is son of God.
Christians are not going to accept that. They may, it may take some time for them. So, normative means this is the truth.
Descriptive means this is what I do and this is why I do this. This is what we believe, this is what we practise and this is why we do it. So, the prescriptive and normative modes of presentation, they come off as very dogmatic and very imposing.
So, at these presentations, at these forums, we need to have a more descriptive mode of presentation. This is what I do. We chant Hare Krishna because this is, the mantra is considered by our tradition to be a very powerful way, most powerful way of raising our consciousness and when there is descriptive mode of presentation, then people do not feel threatened.
Then, okay, I never thought of it this way. This makes sense to me. So, we can actually reshape the public perception of our movement by not, by create, by sharing in a descriptive way with the leaders of society what we are doing.
If we try to be prescriptive or normative with them, they will just reject us. So, you people are fanatic. So, to come back to the starting point, self-congratulatory isolation I talked about, that when we try to stand out, they are all mundane, we are transcendental.
When we try to stand out, we get left out. Because people say, you people are so narrow-minded, you people are so sectarian. But when we try to belong, then we stand out.
Why? Because if we go to an interfaith meeting and then we share our practises, our philosophy, actually our sadhana is very strong. Now, our sadhana, very few religious organisations have the kind of serious sadhana that we do. Our siddhanta, our philosophy is also very deep.
So, if we present at the interfaith meetings, just by being who we are and just by presenting what we do, what we believe, people can see that we are special people. So, by belonging, we will stand out. By trying to stand out, we will be left out.
So, rather than trying to be isolated, thinking that we are pure, we see that everybody is trying to rise towards Krishna, rise towards absolute truth as they perceive it. And we can also join those people, not to accept what they are believing, but to help them and through them others get a better understanding of what we are doing and thus to create less obstacles for our outreach. Thank you.
So, do we have time? Yes. So, if there is interfaith meeting, sometimes devotees may get converted to that group. So, that danger is there.
Yes. Actually, in a sense, we are every day interacting with materialistic people. We can get converted to materialistic also.
So, the important thing is that we be strongly rooted in our understanding. Not rooted, strongly rooted in the sense of being close-minded, but being firm, being convinced about our path and then, okay, what are they practising? Let me understand that. So, if somebody, because of that interaction gets converted, I would say that it is not so much because of that interaction.
It was already they were unsteady. So, for interfaith, we need to have mature people who are rooted properly in our understanding. It is not that we are afraid of other philosophies.
We are afraid that, people hear some other teachings and they will get, they will go away. It is not like that. But the point is that we have to equip people.
See, ultimately, we could say logic and argumentation is like a war. If there are police forces, they have an ordinary gun and a terrorist has a machine gun, then just because the police are right, they are not going to win. So, similarly, with respect to, when we go to interfaith, usually the people who come for interfaith, they are usually quite evolved leaders in their traditions.
So, the way they present, the way they conduct themselves, that will be quite dignified, that will be quite reasonable, logical. And it is like, they are expert fighters with their weapons. And if, say, somebody is an elephant warrior, and then to fight with that elephant warrior, we have a foot soldier.
It is not going to work. Even in armies, if two armies are going to have a joint operation together. Now, it is okay, the squadron leader will meet with the squadron leader.
The commander will meet with the commander. The commander will not meet with the foot soldier. So, we have to have that understanding that, for somebody who is going to do interfaith, they have to be rooted properly in their understanding.
And usually, it is good that interfaith not be done completely in isolation. That means, it is not one person doing it alone. That one person needs to have some other friends with whom they can share their experiences.
And then this friend can tell, okay, you know, this is, maybe you are getting too influenced by this. You have to get a more balanced understanding. Generally speaking, at the interfaith meetings, the mood is not so much of conversion.
It is more of discussion. It is, what may happen is, during the interfaith meeting, somebody may, just by the conduct of others, they may get very attracted. And then they go elsewhere, to their programme, to their personal meetings, and there they may get converted.
So, it is not interfaith alone that is the danger. It is just that, if somebody is not adequately trained in understanding and presenting, then they may get carried away by others. So, this caution has to be there, definitely.
Thank you. Yes, one. You had a question? Okay.
One last question. Somebody from an Islamic background is interested in studying the Bhagavad Gita, but cannot accept the personal form. What do we do? Yes.
Actually, it is, we sometimes equate personal and form. But Islam is, the Mayavadis, the impersonalists, they do not accept the personality, do not accept the form. The devotees, they accept the personality and the form.
Muslims are a peculiar hybrid, in a sense. No disrespect to their tradition, but their notion is, Allah is a person, but he does not have a form. So, you could, if there is a person, he must have a form.
So, they say that, there are references, in my book, Idle Worship or Idle Worship, I have given references even from the Quran, where they talk about the eyes of Allah, the hands of Allah, the ears of Allah. They try to say this is metaphorical. But if you look at the context in the Quran, it is Allah is a person who is speaking and is a person who has form.
So, generally, this is a, this is, we could say, a cultural barrier that stops them. Because in their tradition, in Islam, it is said that worshipping God in an image, that is considered to be the greatest sin. It is said to, Allah can forgive any sin, but he will not forgive the sin of idolatry.
And they consider idolaters are the persons who are going to the worst hell, and they are going to first go to hell. So, now, why do they think like this? Actually, this is there, I will explain it elaborately, all this in my book, Idle Worship, Idle Worship. Maybe you can give that book to him.
But I will explain this briefly for our understanding. This comes from Moses, from the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Quran. All of them, they have, the New Testament not so much, but the Old Testament and the Quran, they have strong antipathy to worship of God in any form.
Actually, Islam, Christianity, Judaism, they come from the same original tradition. But later on, their stress is different. So, Moses accepted the prophet even by Muhammad.
Muhammad considered, I am the last prophet, I am the seal of all prophets. So, I have given the highest teachings, the final teachings. So, in the original tradition, when Moses had got the Ten Commandments, he went up Mount Sinai, the mountain to get the commandments.
And the people whom he was leading, at that time, they took all the gold that they had and they made it into a calf and they started worshipping that calf. When Moses came down with the Ten Commandments, he was so furious. He said, why are you worshipping this God? I had gone to talk with, why are you worshipping this? This image is God.
So, he smashed that image. Stop this worship, he said. He worshipped the only one true God.
And in their tradition, whether it is the Bible, the Quran or both the Bible and the Quran, Old Testament, New Testament, there is no positive description of the form of God. So, therefore, they consider that any depiction of God is a concoction, is an imagination. And then they think, okay, God is up there and there is a depiction over here.
So, some people, they may say that, you know, you at least worship the depiction, there is some connection with God. But their understanding is that the depiction, because people are not so philosophically evolved, they say they will worship only the depiction and forget the reality. And in this way, the depicted image becomes not a representative of God, it becomes a competitor to God.
The worship that was meant for God is now taken by the depicted image. And that is why they say that because the depicted image is a competitor to God, there should be no competitor to God. And that is why they destroy the depicted images.
So, it is not just, so destroying temples, deities, this is not a part of fringe fanaticism in their tradition. This is central to their history. In the Old Testament, whenever any king would conquer any kingdom, it is described in celebratory tone.
In celebratory tone, he went to that place and destroyed all the idols over there. So, they have a very strong visceral antipathy to the depiction of God in any image. Because they feel that anybody who takes the worship that is meant for God away from God, that is actually an agent of Satan.
So, they do not consider the deities to be God, they consider deities to be representations of Satan. And they feel Satan has to be destroyed. So, they do it with self-righteousness, what they consider as righteous wrath.
So, because of this background, for them to accept deity worship is extremely difficult. Now, our understanding is that God himself is a person and that personal form has been revealed in our scriptures. So, the deity is not a depiction of God.
The deity is a manifestation of God. And that is why the deity does not compete with God and take away from God the worship that is meant for him. Rather, when the deity is worshipped, it is God himself who is worshipped.
The conception is very different. And unfortunately, even in the Vedic tradition, there are impersonals, whose arguments play into their hands. They say, actually, you know, God is not having a form, but the form is just meant for less intelligent people, those who cannot worship the formless.
So, then they say, oh, you know, you Hindus, you are less intelligent, so you need a form. We do not need a form, because we are more intelligent. So, that way they try to position themselves as superior.
And they position us as less intelligent or even as demonic. So, there has to be careful exploration. So, if somebody is coming from that conceptual background, there has to be very careful guiding of them upwards.
So, if they cannot accept the personal form, fine, let them just chant the holy names, let them appreciate other aspects of the philosophy, at least let them understand the soul. And if they practise the regulative principles, whatever way they can, their consciousness rises, then this conceptual barrier that has been there almost from their childhood, that will slowly break, it will slowly get eroded, and they will become more open to understanding God’s personal aspect. But it may take time, and if it is taking time, no need to hold their inability to accept God’s personal form against them.
Because everybody has some sore spots. Once I was sick for almost one and a half years, and for this one and a half years, the doctors could not diagnose what was wrong with me. So, there were so many blood tests that my whole arm was filled with pricks of needles for blood tests.
And finally, when one more blood test had to be done, a nurse came, and that nurse was actually almost spent 15 minutes trying to find a place where there was not already a prick. So that, now the nurse could have said that, you know, if you have so many pricks, you already have so many pricks, that’s your problem. My problem is to take the blood sample.
So, but the nurse did not do that. That is sensitivity. So, if somebody already has a lot of pricks, then you have to be more careful.
So, similarly, everybody comes with their background. So, for them, this personal conception, for those who come from Abrahamic religions, for them, the personal conception is like a very sore spot for them. Even a little touch causes a lot of pain.
So, then we, it is our responsibility to not touch them there at that point. And guide them in a way that they can gradually understand, they appreciate other aspects of the philosophy, their consciousness evolves, and then eventually they come to accept the personal form also. Bhaktivinoda Thakura has written a book on the life and teachings of Lord Chaitanya.
And there he discusses a very beautiful approach. He says, you know, is Lord Chaitanya God? He says that many people in India would not accept that. So, he says, yes, what we consider is, as far as the Vaishnavas, Gaudiya Vaishnavas are concerned, they accept Krishna as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as God.
And the many miracles that He has performed, they are the testimony for them that He is God. But, actually even demons can perform miracles. Ravana performed miracles also.
So, miracles are all not proof of divinity. He says, the important thing is, Lord Chaitanya has given the process of developing spiritual love. And if we chant the holy names, if we follow the process, we will experience a miraculous flood of love of God in our heart.
And that is the essential gift that Lord Chaitanya has come to offer. So, he says, even if you can’t accept Lord Chaitanya as God, even if you consider Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as a teacher of devotion to God, and you follow His process, that’s fine. And if they follow that process, if they get transformed, then gradually that conviction that Lord Chaitanya is God will come in them.
So, we have to acknowledge people’s sore spots and not press them there. Just let them grow in their philosophical understanding from where they are. And gradually they will appreciate these difficult aspects also.
Thank you very much.