Gita applied Chapter 1 – Duryodhana’s illusion is short-sighted, Arjuna’s illusion is far-sighted

[Talk at ISKCON Silicon Valley, San Jose, USA]

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna I am grateful to be here Amongst all of you today And I will be speaking on How the Bhagavad Gita Can be applied in our lives In 3 sessions over the next 4-5 days And So today I will be speaking on the first chapter I will divide the first chapter Into 4 broad parts First is Duryodhana’s vision Then is Arjuna’s vision Then is Arjuna’s confusion And then Arjuna’s Decision So 4 broad parts I will take it in And I will try to follow in Vaiseshi Kapoor’s 4 steps Where after each part will stop and we can have some reflections So all of you can help me in that So the Bhagavad Gita Begins with a very interesting Perspective So generally The Same thing can be Presented from different perspectives Say if some devotee Is to be recommended for some post For some initiation or for some service And then we want to support that devotee You say Okay he had problems earlier But he is stable now But If somebody is opposed to that devotee He is stable now but he had problems earlier See the facts Are entirely the same But just change the sequence And then the whole Import changes So similarly See all of us Approach things from particular perspectives So the Bhagavad Gita’s Beginning is Bhagavad Gita As the name suggests The song of Krishna But it begins neither with Krishna Nor with Arjuna The Bhagavad Gita Begins with Duryodhana In fact even before Duryodhana It begins with Dhritarashtra In fact it begins with Dhritarashtra And Duryodhana It begins with First is Dhritarashtra’s words That the Bhagavad Gita Starts With you could say A godless vision A pious vision Then A spiritual vision So a godless vision Is what Dhritarashtra and Duryodhana have The same Situation how Dhritarashtra and Duryodhana See through a godless vision Then Arjuna is seeing it through A pious vision But piety That piety doesn’t really help him It doesn’t resolve his confusion In fact piety can also Lead to confusion and then The Bhagavad Gita provides A spiritual vision which Krishna gives So in that sense It’s a complete journey We have different kinds of people Some people are wise And some are otherwise So we could say Duryodhana and Dhritarashtra are otherwise Arjuna is wise But even the wise get confused So Let’s begin with Dhritarashtra is asking That If we have the verse We can put the verse and we can recite it We will recite together Dhritarashtra Vacha Dharmakshetre Kurukshetre Samavetayuyotsavaha Mamaka Pandavasyaiva Kimakurvata Sanjaya So this begins That’s ok This can be the Sanskrit itself So this begins basically with The Principle of Attachment The word attachment can have many different meanings In this context When we are attached To someone We are more concerned about What they think of us Than about them That means whether that person is Thinking good about me Is feeling happy with me That is more important than what is good for the person So if a doctor If a small child says I don’t want injection And the doctor Thinks the child gets upset with me So I will not give an injection Then the doctor will fail in the duty So we have to be concerned about what others feel about us But others well being Has to be of even greater concern So Dhritarashtra was attached And that’s why he could never Say no to Duryodhana And because he couldn’t say no to Duryodhana Now this war has come up And in this war He Instead of being like a neutral adult He has also become a partisan He is considering His own sons to be his party And Pandavas is not considering them to be his own And with this vision of Fragmentation So he is not asking directly about Duryodhana But he is saying what happened What did they do So now Sanjay When a question is to be answered Normally there is a wording of the question And there is the There is the intent of the question So for example If a cricket match is going on and he asks what happened in the match Now what happened If it’s an India Pakistan match We may ask what happened, did India win or not That is the question which we have in mind Similarly this question is what happened means What did Duryodhana, did my party win or not That is why now What did they do That question can be answered in many different ways But he begins With what Duryodhana did So what did they do Because he knows for Dhritarashtra Duryodhana who is the primary He was his He was his weakness So then he starts Can you go to the next verse 1.2 So there what happens He first says what Duryodhana did And what Duryodhana does Is very interesting Duryodhana instead of Instead of Going to Ok this is good You can just read down So go some verses now So what did Duryodhana do Let’s recite this verse 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 so exemplary that if they tell something, people feel inspired to do it.
But those who can’t inspire, you know, this person is doing like this, this person is doing like this, this person is doing like this, like say mantra, incited kai kai. So here Turiyodhan’s objective is to incite. Now how can he incite? That is seen by the next.
So he goes to Drona, because Bhishma, there is no scope for him to incite. But he can incite Drona. And how he incites Drona, that is the next verse.
So let’s recite this. paśyaitāṁ pāṇḍu-putrāṇāṁ ācārya mahatiṁ ca muṁ yudhāṁ drupada-putreṇa tava śiṣyeṇa dhīmatā So here he is saying, paśya, please see, ācārya mahatiṁ ca muṁ, magnificent military formation that has been done by the Pandavas. So, because most of us are Indians and Indians are quite cricket conscious.
So we’ll use cricket consciousness to increase Gita consciousness in this class. So say, if there is one team, which is a very strong team, and then the other team is not that strong. And normally the other team is not, the team that is not so strong, that team is also coming to play, they will have a little defensive mood.
That team is batting, the batting posture also can be defensive or it can be aggressive. So Duryodhana is all thinking that I have got 11 Akshakunis. In fact, Duryodhana thought that actually there will not even be a fight.
I will crush the Pandavas. And that’s why the previous night he sent Shakuni’s son to the Kaurava, to the Pandava camp to incite all of them. And he gives a message.
And now that message sent by Ulupai is so provoking that the first thing Shakuni’s son says is, like sometimes if we have to give some very, some statement which is going to agitate the other person. The first thing he says, these are not my words. These are not my words.
So he says, he reminds, Kshatriyas are not meant to punish messengers, because messengers don’t speak anything of their own, they simply give a message. And then he insults every one of them. He says Bhima, you think you are such a big powerful person? He said, I reduced you to a mere cook, where you had to cook for others.
Arjun, you think you are a great warrior? I reduced you into eunuch. And like that, Yudhishthira, you think you are a great king? I reduced you to simply a gambling aid for another minor king. And he insults every one of them.
And his thinking is that only because I insult them, so they will be provoked and there will be some fight. Others, I am going to crush them. He has such confidence, but now when he sees the Pandavas out there, the Pandavas are in complete aggressive mood.
So he gets alarmed. He said, I thought my superior numbers will mean that I will crush them. But when he sees them, he gets concerned.
Just see this magnificent military formation that has been done. And then is the key point. Yudham, Drupada Putrena.
Who has organised this? Drupada Putra. Now Drupada and Drona had an old rivalry. So what he is doing? Duryodhana, see the problem, if we inspire someone, then we know that those people are committed to us.
But if we incite someone, tomorrow if that person is incitable by us, that person may be incitable by someone else also. So if we incite someone, we can never be sure of their commitment. So although Bhishma and Drona were fighting for Duryodhana, Duryodhana was never sure of their commitment.
And that’s why time and time again in the Kurukshetra war, whenever they would face a reversal, at that time Duryodhana would actually chastise Bhishma and Drona. He would say that, if only Karna had been a commander, he would have crushed the opponents. He says, if you don’t want to fight wholeheartedly, please step down.
It’s a very insulting words. So he was never confident that Bhishma and Drona were committed to him. So he was inciting them.
You see, you taught Drupada’s son. Drona had been so magnanimous. He said, I am a teacher, let me teach whoever comes to me.
So he had taught even Drupada’s son. But he says, the person whom you had taught your enemy’s son, and now that person has formed this army and has formed this army formation. So Drupada’s son is something which will incite.
And not only that, he is your disciple. See, how we refer to people also speaks of our mentality. Say, if I want to speak to someone, I can refer to some devotee by their name.
I can refer to that devotee by whose disciple they are. I can refer to that devotee by which geographical area they are from. I can refer to that devotee by how they physically look.
Or I can say, oh that devotee who mumbles English. The very way we speak it, it indicates what we are thinking about that person. And what kind of thoughts we want to have about the other person.
So here his mentality is, he wants Drona to have that connection with, this is all connected with Drupada. Because, see, if there is a group, in a group, there might be some people with whom we are friendly, some people with whom we are unfriendly. So if we see the people who are unfriendly with, we will feel hostile to the group.
If we see the people with whom we are friendly, we will feel friendly to the group. So in that group, Arjun is there. The Pandavas are there.
And Drona is friendly towards them. So Duryodhana doesn’t want Drona’s vision to go towards Arjun and the others. So by this, he is inciting him.
Now, as he incites him further, then he starts thinking that, actually, when people incite someone or they do something underhanded, quite often, they want to clarify, I am not doing this. Like Shiva, when Daksha is offending Shiva, Daksha is upset with Shiva, he says, actually, I am not proud, I am just speaking how cultured people should behave. So indirectly he is saying that he is not a cultured person and I have enough knowledge to say how cultured people should behave.
So he then gives a comparative analysis of both the forces. Aktharashura, Maheshwasa, Bhima, Arjuna, Samayudhi, there are many who are like Bhima and Arjuna. And he gives a list of various warriors over there.
And there also, he mentions Drupada. So he wants to incite. His purpose over here is not just to give a neutral assessment.
The assessment is for incitement. And he begins with the Pandava force because he says, just see how powerful their army is. And therefore, you should fight without any reservation.
Now, interestingly, when he assesses the Kaurava forces, so can you go ahead, the fourth verse, we will not recite all of them, we will recite some of them, the fourth, fifth and the sixth verse. This is where the assessment of the Pandava forces ends. And there is one very important person he misses out.
Who is that? Yes, Krishna doesn’t come anywhere over there. That’s because what happens is, he is simply thinking in terms of who are fighting. Einstein, he said that, although science is very much based on mathematics, Einstein said that everything that counts is not countable.
And everything that is countable doesn’t count. So, he is thinking, who all are fighting? Krishna is not fighting, so Krishna doesn’t count. But this is a material vision.
Actually, the whole mood of the Bhagavad Gita is that Krishna is not active, but he guides those who are active. And in many ways, the Bhagavad Gita, the role of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita is similar to the role of God in the world. God is not directly seen over here.
And that’s why people say, where does he exist? Why does he count? But although Krishna is not directly active, but he is indirectly very active. So, although Krishna is not present visibly as an element acting in this world, it’s only we people, this person did this or this nature did this, we don’t see God directly. But God is directing the wanderings.
So, knowledge means to see beyond the visible to the invisible. That’s what the Bhagavad Gita will talk about, see from the material to the spiritual, see beyond the body to the soul. So, knowledge means to see beyond the visible to the invisible.
So, the invisible means Krishna is not acting, but still he is acting. So, Duryodhana can’t see that which is invisible. Krishna doesn’t have any weapons, Krishna is not going to act.
So, Krishna doesn’t count. So, the biggest blunder of the materialistic vision is to think that God doesn’t count. Those who think, there can be many different kinds of illusions in the world.
But to think that God doesn’t count is the most fundamental illusion. And that illusion leads to all other illusions. So, he doesn’t count God and that indicates that his mentality that God doesn’t count.
And then, when he starts talking about the opposite party, he wants to incite Drona. But then, see every time, especially a leader is speaking, there are different, you could say constituencies, whom the leader has to satisfy. So, he starts thinking, I have glorified the opponents, it shouldn’t happen that my soldiers think that I am afraid of them.
Or my soldiers shouldn’t think that they are below me, that I don’t value them. So, then he starts saying, ok, I will now speak about my forces. And then he says, my soldiers, I will speak briefly.
Only the leaders among them. So, there are lot of soldiers, but I will just speak briefly about them. And then, interestingly, when he begins, he begins with, let’s recite this verse, bhavān bhiṣmaś ca karnaś ca kṛpaś ca samitīṁ jayaḥ, aśvatthā mā vikarnaś ca saumadhattis tathaiva ca.
So, here he begins, bhavān bhiṣmaś ca karnaś ca. So, now Bhishma is a bigger warrior than Drona. But, he is standing in front of Drona.
He is talking with Drona. So, he thinks, how can I speak about Bhishma first? But then Bhishma should not feel offended also. So, he thinks, no, Bhishma is a respecter of etiquette.
So, Drona is a brāhmaṇa. So, let me speak about Drona first. Then bhavān bhiṣmaś ca karnaś ca.
Now, it is interesting, there is some, in this list, there is one name which is out of place. Can you guess which one? Karna. Why is it out of place? Yeah, Karna is not in the battlefield.
Karna had said that, I will not fight as long as Bhishma is fighting. But, although Karna is not on the battlefield, Karna is very much there in the mind of Duryodhana. So, attachment makes the absent present.
Attachment makes the absent. Although somebody is absent, he is very much there in the mind. And the first thing he talks about is, after all, Bhishma and Drona is Karna.
So, if you see the, if there is attachment, even person is absent, it is as if they are present. And when there is aversion, like one person is absent with another person, sometimes you see in a group, some people take great effort to not look at someone else. They look at everyone, paśyan api na paśyati.
They see but don’t see. So, here he mentions Karna as a prominent supporter of his, although Karna is not present over there. And after that he goes on, now the next verse, can you go ahead? So, this is, now he mentions many other Vaipal and he says, I can’t list all of them, but all of you, you are also expert and you also fight.
Sarve yuddha vicharada. And after completing this, he now gives a concluding assessment. And when he gives the concluding assessment, this is the verse where the poetry of the Bhagavad Gita comes into the picture.
The poetry of the Bhagavad Gita is, see in poetry, the same word can mean, words can be interpreted differently. And depending on what context you put the word in, it can mean different things. So, you can take a sentence, you know, one of the famous example, God is nowhere.
You know that example? A theist said, God is nowhere. And a theist came, God is nowhere. So, what he did, nowhere, he split it into now, here.
God is now here. So, God is everywhere, He is at all times. So, God is nowhere or God is now here.
You could punctuate it differently. So, here, let’s recite this verse. So, here he is comparing the two armies.
And it is interesting, that from neither side, he does not name the commander over here. Who is the commander of the Pandavas? Vishwadyumna. So, Bhent was required initially to, inside Drona, Drupada Putrena.
But now when he is comparing, he is comparing Bhishma with Bhima. So, why with Bhima in particular? Because he felt that Bhima was the foremost warrior on the Kaurava side. As Arjuna was there, Arjuna will be taken care of by Karna or Bhishma or Drona.
And Bhima, I will take care of. So, in his mind, even earlier also, Because he had a personal rivalry with Bhima. So, even before Arjuna, always he mentions Bhima.
So, here, he is saying that, their army is protected by Bhishma, their army is protected by Bhima, ours is protected by Bhishma. And when he is thinking like this, he is saying, Our forces are immeasurable. And theirs are they are just finite.
So, now, in Sanskrit, what happens? When you put a prefix, you put a prefix, the words can mean differently. Like we have valuable and invaluable. So, when you put valuable and invaluable, it is an intensifier.
But you have sufficient and insufficient. So, insufficient is not an intensifier. Insufficient is a prefix which contradicts, which changes the meaning.
Opposite meaning it gives. So, aparyaptam, if it is taken as an intensifier, that means our forces are unlimited. But if aparyaptam is taken as a contrary meaning, then it says our force is insufficient.
So, the Acharyas explained that, actually, just as Kumbhakarna, when he did long austerity and then he had to ask for a benediction, he wanted to say that, let me live forever. But somehow, Saraswati Devi came on his tongue and said, let me sleep forever. And Brahmaji said that, hey, no.
So, Saraswati Devi came on the tongue of Duryodhana also and it gave out that aparyaptam, our meaning, our force is actually not sufficient. So, the anxiety that was there in his heart, it comes out. But essentially, through this section, what is being depicted is very important, that we may do a lot of analysis of strengths and weaknesses in projects and companies, we have this SWOT analysis, strength, weaknesses, opportunities, threats.
We can do all this analysis and it is important to do it. But Duryodhana is doing this analysis, but without bringing God into the picture. Although God is very much there in the picture.
And if we don’t have God in the picture, whatever analysis we do, it will be misled. It will be misled. There is this famous atheist, German atheist, Friedrich Nietzsche.
He is infamous for having said the statement, God is dead. Now, many people quote him, but when he says that, actually, he said that in a very gloomy sense. He says, if God is dead, what he said is that, because of scientific rationality, his thinking was that, we don’t have any logical basis for believing in God now.
But he said, if God is dead, then all of existence is plunged into chaos. Because there is no foundation for anything. There is no foundation for morality, there is no foundation for ethics, there is no foundation for rationality.
So, it’s like, we are standing on the ground and just pull the ground out from under us. We just fall, and how far we fall, we won’t know. So, Godless analysis leads to, no matter how well we do that analysis, there is always the God factor, which is like, say, in programming you have, what is that? Star? What is that word for? Wildcards.
Isn’t it? Sorry? Wildcards, isn’t it? What was somebody else? Yeah, so, that’s one character, which can take many other values. So, you know, we can make all our calculations, but Krishna is like the wildcard. Krishna can play and change all our calculations.
So, Duryodhana has done a lot of calculations, but he did not consider the Krishna factor at all. And then, after Duryodhana has spoken, then the screen shifts to the Pandava side. So, Sanjay is speaking, can go ahead to 14th text.
So, both of them start blowing their conch shells, and there, for the first time now, the entry of Krishna is there. And when Krishna enters, rather than saying Krishna enters, rather the camera focusses on Krishna. Krishna is already there.
So, let’s recite this verse. So, now, the vision is shifted to Krishna. On that side, on the Pandava side, normally, in a movie, if you have a hero coming in, so, say there is some action happening, maybe some heroine is being abducted or something like that, hero comes in there.
Nowadays, the hero doesn’t come on a white horse. Hero may come on a bike or a car or something like that. So, the car comes in screeching halt.
You see the wheels of the car. Then you see the car. Then the door opens.
Then the door opens. And then you see the lotus boots of the train. So, then the hero comes in.
So, like that, what has happened over here? So, first the description is here. The chariot, first the horses are described. And then, the chariot is described.
The white horses are there. Then this magnificent chariot is there. And on that, are there these two great people.
Madhava, Pandava, Shaiva. Bhagavad Gita is poetic. So, many places, if you study this, many different names could have been used.
Krishna and Arjuna could have been used over here. But Madhava and Pandava is rhyming. So, Madhava, Pandava, Shaiva.
And both of them, Divya Shanka Pradadmata. Both of them are blowing their conches. And they blow their conches.
So, now, the conches signify a beginning. The beginning, and like we do Aarti. So, at the beginning of the Aarti, and at the ending of the Aarti, they blow the conches.
I was in Australia, I was at a farm on top of a hill in Murvilamba, near Brisbane. So, there are many western people come to that place. So, there was one lady, she asked, when you blow the conch, why does everyone kiss the floor? So, they have no idea what is happening.
Everybody bows down, they are kissing the floor. So, there are some cultural signifiers, and unless you understand what they signify, then they don’t make sense. But the idea of conches is that it’s a beginning.
So, both of them are signalling that war is beginning now. So, Krishna and Arjuna are blowing their conches. So, this is the entry of Krishna.
And after Krishna enters, now their conches are named in the next verse, and then Bhima is also described. And then all the different people, they blow their conches. And after blowing their conches, can you go ahead to 19th verse? So, here, what is the result of the blowing of the conches? Can you read this verse? The sign is So, this blowing of the conches, it was so forceful that it has covered all the ether around it, from the earth to the sky.
And that blowing of the conches itself, it became so tumultuous, that the Kauravas’ hearts got shattered. The Kauravas’ hearts got shattered because the Pandavas’ confidence came out through the blowing of the conches. So, basically, whenever any battle happens, much of the battle is in the mind.
So, if say, a batsman and a bowler are bowling, depending on how confident the batsman looks or how confident the bowler looks. People also, nowadays, of course, in cricket people do sledging to try to distract or dishearten or irritate the other players. But much more than the physical battle is the mental battle.
In the mental battle, whoever gets the upper hand, their chances of winning are more. So, when they are blowing the conches, even before the hostilities begin, at that time, they are signalling their intention, signalling their confidence. So, both, first time, when the military formation they saw, Duryodhana got alarmed.
And again, now, when the conches are blown, the conches blowing was so forceful that again the Kauravas are alarmed. So, here, not just alarmed, So, it’s interesting. Now, who is speaking this? Sanjay is speaking this.
And to whom? Dhritarashtra. So, Dhritarashtra asked what happened on the war field. So, he is saying, right from the beginning, the Kauravas were such overconfidence that they are finding the military preparedness of the Pandavas such that they become disheartened, they become demoralised.
So, in the mental war itself, the mental battle begins long before the physical battle. In the mental battle, the Pandavas are winning. Right from the second verse we see this, in the 19th verse also we see this.
So, at this point, things seem to be going in favour of the Pandavas. But suddenly, something will happen, in cricket they use the word, against the run of the play. The match is going in a particular way, but then a key batsman gets out and then everyone collapses.
So, something like that. Here the signals are that the Pandavas are gaining the upper hand, but suddenly something happens by which the Kauravas gain hope. So, that will be described from the next verse onwards.
So, what does Arjun do over here? So, any reflections, any comments, any questions? Or should we complete the whole thing and then we will discuss? Okay. Now, that was not what I wanted to hear. Okay.
I am open whichever way. Okay. So, now here, as they are observing, so, the camera started with Duryodhana, then it came to the Pandavas, then it went around in the Pandava army to describe various, what different people did and then now it comes back to Arjun.
It came, it started with Krishna, Arjun, went to the others, now it’s come back to Krishna, Arjun. And now, Arjun does something unexpected over here. Arjun speaks something.
This is not the time for speaking, this is the time for acting. He spoke those words. Now, at this point, his arrow is raised.
Sorry, his bow is raised. His bow is raised in readiness to fight, but he speaks something. Let’s see what he speaks.
Let’s recite this verse. So, I want, please take my army between the two forces, so that I can see, so that I can see who is here to fight. Now, if you go along these verses, you will see, there is a lot of emphasis on seeing.
Here, the word is NIRIKSHI. And then, the next verse, if you go to 23rd verse, just go ahead, quickly. So, here, I want to see.
You can go to 24th verse. Then, he says, when he says, these two verses, he says, I want to see, I want to see. And then, when Krishna also, next verse, when Krishna takes the, can you go ahead, next verse, there also we will see, Krishna says, So, Arjuna wants to see.
Now, it’s interesting, what exactly does Arjuna want to see? Because, say, if a cricket match is going on, there are, say, 15 players who are all on the team. Then, at the start of the match, the captain may want to know, who is the playing 11? Who are actually there on the field? Now, for Arjuna, it’s not like that. They already knew who all the warriors were there.
And whatever he had to see, he can see, he could see from his place. Why does he need to come in between? In between the two armies and see. So, actually, this is, the Bhagavad Gita depicts how a soul goes into illusion and how a soul comes out of illusion.
So, broadly speaking, we can say, the eyes are the way to the illusion, the ears are the way to the illumination. So, by over-emphasis on seeing, eyes are the way to illusion and ears are the way to illumination. So, by over-emphasis on seeing, now, of course, we have to use our eyes, but over-emphasis on seeing, that can lead to illusion.
See, if we just look with our eyes, we may not see God in this world. If we hear, we understand, then we can see God acting in the world also. So, Arjun’s over-emphasis on seeing is what leads him into illusion.
And, it’s very significant over here that when somebody goes into illusion, say, recently now, you may have heard about these two Boeing new aeroplanes, they have crashed and that caused a lot of alarm and then many countries banned those Boeing aeroplanes. So, now, suppose the Boeing does investigation and finds out, now, why did these planes crash? And they say, yes, we did investigation and we found the planes crashed because of gravity. Now, it is, well, it is a truthful explanation, but it is an unhelpful explanation.
What do we mean by that? Yeah, okay, no crash would have happened if gravity is not there, but gravity is always there. So, if gravity were the cause of the crash, then all planes should crash. So, an explanation that does not explain anything is not an explanation.
So, similarly, if somebody says, if somebody falls into illusion, somebody falls into wrongdoing, while practising spiritual life, somebody falls down, and you say, why did somebody fall down or why did I fall down? I fell down because of my conditionings. Well, that’s like saying a plane crashed because of gravity. Yes, conditionings are always there.
The conditionings are always there and if the conditionings were the cause of the fall down, then we should stay always fallen only. Because this is that we become free from conditionings. That takes a long time.
So, if now, if we want to understand, okay, what happened? Why did I fall? Or what went wrong? Then we have to look at the specific causes. Okay, I have this conditioning, but maybe at this point, I got exposed to this and that contemplation tempted me. Or this person said this to me, this person showed this, this person did this.
So, some explanations are true. Yes, because of my conditionings, I fell. But that’s not a very helpful explanation.
Because the conditionings are going to be there tomorrow also, day after tomorrow also. So, how is that going to help us to deal with the problem? So, when somebody goes into an illusion, when we slip into illusion, rather than saying, oh, it’s because of my conditionings I slipped into illusion. That’s not a very helpful explanation.
Okay, I had these conditionings, but what triggered me? What did I do by which the conditionings got activated? So, that we have to look at. So, Bhagavad Gita’s first chapter talks about this, that there is a significant, lot of things going on in the first chapter actually. First is Duryodhana’s godlessness, which is there.
Now, Arjuna is pious. At least, that’s the way it’s depicted in the Bhagavad Gita. He is pious, but not spiritual.
See, piety is a general religious understanding of things. It is not a soul-centred understanding of things. And that’s the understanding which he will show over here.
And from this understanding, he goes into illusion. So, Arjuna is not godless. So, there could be there could be godless materialism or you could say there is irreligious materialism.
And Bhaktivinoda Thakur says there can be religious materialism. And then there can be religious spirituality. When you practise religion, but that religion can be for materialistic purposes.
So, that is piety, that is sattva. And then there is spirituality. So, Arjuna is at the level of piety.
And at the level of piety, it’s good to be pious than impious. But just being pious is not good enough. So, there, how somebody who is normally in goodness can also go into illusion.
That is depicted in the first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita. So, Arjuna’s illusion is not an ignorant person’s illusion. It is a wise person’s illusion.
So, it’s like one person asked a question. I came from Australia just now. So, one person asked a question.
So, I spoke spontaneously at that time. That’s an intelligent misunderstanding. So, sometimes you misunderstand also.
But if somebody misunderstands because they know this, they know this. Is it like this? No, it’s not like this. So, now Duryodhana’s misunderstanding is an unintelligent misunderstanding.
So, he is impious and he is in illusion. So, Duryodhana’s illusion and Arjuna’s illusion, they are of a different category. Duryodhana’s illusion is because of his godlessness.
Arjuna’s illusion is because piety is not good enough. So, when Arjuna wants to go out and see, he says, who are there on the opposite side? Now, he is not wanting to see something for his sense gratification. It is not rajasic or tamasic.
When he says, I want to see, what does he want to see actually? The Pandavas never wanted that war to take place. And they tried as much as possible to prevent that war. But the Kauravas left them with no option at all.
Many people feel uncomfortable because Bhagavad Gita is spoken before a battlefield. And they say, is the Bhagavad Gita a book of violence? It’s interesting, very revealing, not just interesting, that the whole Bhagavad Gita does not even once mention the atrocities that the Kauravas had done against the Pandavas. Whenever somebody has to incite someone for violence, you know, this person did this and this person did this and this person did this, therefore, you have to take revenge.
So, not once is any of the atrocities mentioned. So, I write articles on the Gita every day. So, I recently wrote an article called The Gita is not insightful, it is insightful.
Insightful means I-N-C-I-T-E. It is not inciting anyone. It is insightful.
It is full of insights. So, the mood over here is not to trigger Arjuna to take vengeance. So, Arjuna, he is coming in the middle, he is still at the back of his mind, he is hoping maybe we can avoid the war.
But when he sees the warriors and all of them are determined to fight. All of them are determined to fight. Then, that disheartens him, that confuses him.
Now, here, let’s recite this verse. It’s 1.25. Bhishma Drona Pramukh Taha, Sarve Shyam Chamaheek Shitam Uvachya Partha Pashyayitam Samavetam Kuruniti So, it’s, he says that now, Senayor Ubhayor Madhya, get the two army, get between the two armies. So, when he is told to Krishna gets him between the two armies, Bhishma Drona Pramukh Taha.
This can mean either that Krishna brought the chariot in between the two armies but with Bhishma and Drona next to them, in front of them. Or, when he came in between, although there are many, Arjuna first of all saw Bhishma and Drona. And then Sarve Shyam, all of them kings were there.
And then, what does Krishna tell Arjuna? Okay, you wanted to see? Uvachya Partha Pashyayitam Now, here, these are the first words spoken by Krishna. In fact, there are two words, Partha and Pashya. Uvachya, Krishna said, Partha, Pashya, just see Partha.
Samavetam, Kuruniti, all these Kurus are assembled over here. Just see this. Now, what happens? In any sports, always, the opponent will find the weakest point and attack at the weakest point.
Say, if a batsman can’t bat very well against short pitch bowling, the opponent will build that kind of ball only. If a batsman can’t bat well against spin bowling, that kind of ball will only come. So, now, here, when Arjuna wants to see, as I said earlier, if you are meeting a group of people, if those whom we are affectionate to, we see them first, then we will feel affectionate towards the group.
If we see those whom we are hostile to, first, then we will feel hostile towards the group. So, here, when he comes in between, the first people he sees is Bhishma and Drona. And he is very affectionate towards them.
And thus, his whole mood changes. Earlier, he has said, Dhartarastra said, Durbuddher, Durbuddher, who are here to help this wicked, evil-minded son of Dhritarashtra. But, from the next verse, when he starts speaking, he says, Swajanam hikatham hatva.
He sees all these people, several generations of people are there in the battlefield. Can you go to the next verse? Yeah. Sarvan bandhunavastithan.
So, all of them are my relatives, all of them are my friends, all of them are my brothers. Tansameeksha. Again, eeksha.
Eyes have come once again. So, here, Arjun becomes overwhelmed by compassion. And he starts, Krupaya Paraya Vishto.
He becomes overwhelmed by emotion. And lamenting, he starts speaking. So, the 28th verse, Arjun speaks.
Basically, the first chapter is often divided into two broad parts. The first part is the Sainyanirksha Yoga. Observing of the armies.
First by Bhishma and then secondly by Arjun. And the other is Arjun Vishada Yoga. The lamentation of Arjun.
Now, Vishwanath Chakradhakur quotes another Acharya, Madhusudana Saraswati, to describe what is the purpose of the first chapter. So, now, Madhusudana Saraswati was a contemporary of Jiva Goswami. And actually, both of them were inspired by Lord Chaitanya.
And both of them went to Varanasi. Because at that time, Varanasi was the seat of learning. Prabhupada said, Varanasi is the Vrindavan of the Mayavadis.
So, that was the high seat of learning Sanskrit. So, both of them went over there. Now, Jiva Goswami’s devotion was so strong that although he learned Sanskrit grammar and linguistics from the Mayavadis, his devotion remained strong.
But unfortunately, Madhusudana Saraswati, while learning Sanskrit grammar, he also took in Mayavad. And he eventually ended up becoming a Mayavadi. But, he has written commentary on the Bhagavad Gita and he has written commentary on other books also.
And our Acharyas have quoted him where he is making useful points. So, just like Prabhupada said that we can take up gold even from a filthy place. So, Madhusudana Saraswati has been quoted and he says that the whole purpose of the first chapter is to describe Arjuna’s qualification for being enlightened.
So, till now we discussed how Arjuna went into illusion. And in one sense, Arjuna went into illusion that’s why the Bhagavad Gita is spoken to him. But, the Bhagavad Gita is spoken to him.
So many people go into illusion but the Bhagavad Gita is not spoken to all of them. Why is it spoken to Arjuna specifically? Because Arjuna, although he is in illusion, his illusion is not an ignorant illusion. It is a wise person’s illusion.
And, the subsequent verses describe his thoughtfulness. Although, his thinking is leading him to a long conclusion. But, at least he is thinking.
And he is thinking deeply. So, this section in one sense, describes Arjuna’s wrong reasoning. But, even through his wrong reasoning, his intelligence to reason is seen.
At least he is going wrong in his reasoning but he has the capacity to reason. So, that’s why there can be intelligent misunderstandings and there can be unintelligent misunderstandings. So, Arjuna, now from these verses onwards, we will see Arjuna’s qualification to be enlightened.
And, that is described broadly. Arjuna first feels, although they are about to fight a war, he is thinking, why should we fight? What will we gain by fighting? What is there to gain? So, this is a very profound question. Can you go to the next few verses? It describes the symptoms of Arjuna.
Let’s recite this verse first. So, I am seeing who? Swajanam. He is not seeing the opponents.
He is not seeing the Kauravas. See, they see the contrast over here. When Dhritarashtra was saying, He was thinking, only the Kauravas are mine.
They are the Pandavas. Arjuna is saying, they are also Mamaka. They are all my people.
Swajanam Krishna. When I see them all assembled for fighting. My limbs are quivering.
My mouth is drying. So, this is interesting. This can be explained in two ways.
One is that because of seeing this, all this is happening to him. Like we see something horrible and then there is an effect on us because of that. So, the seeing leads to that effect.
But the other could be that he doesn’t connect the two. This is what is simply happening to me. And this happening, that the mouth drying, Gandhi was slipping from his hand.
His hair standing on end. He sees these as omens. This indicates that this is ominous.
These are bad omens. These can be seen as effects of the perception or they can be seen as omens. That what is going to happen.
So, both ways when he sees it. If you go to 30th verse. We see down.
So, now here Arjuna says, uses the word nimittani. Let’s go ahead. Let’s recite this.
na ca shaknoumya vasthatum brahmati vachame manah nimittani chapashyami viparitani keshava. So, he says na ca shaknoumya. It’s not possible for me.
avasthatum. I cannot stay over here. Why? brahmati vachame manah My mind is running, wandering.
Why? nimittani chapashyami. I am seeing viparitani. I am seeing inauspiciousness everywhere.
I am seeing inauspicious omens. The Gandhi was sleeping right before a war. It’s inauspicious.
So, he is seeing all these inauspicious omens. I don’t feel like staying over here. See, this is all of us have problems in our lives.
But sometimes the problems can seem to become so big that I was at a mental health conference in Connecticut. Different people were speaking different things. So, when people become suicidal, what happens is they can’t they can’t tolerate living in their own lives.
Or they can’t tolerate living with themselves. Now, we can say life is unbearable. This person is unbearable.
This job is unbearable. This weather is unbearable. These people are unbearable.
But if I become unbearable to myself, well, I have to live with myself. If I check out of my existence, I can’t go anywhere. So, then there can be different degrees of things being unbearable.
But if we become unbearable to ourselves, if we feel, I don’t want to be present in my life, then that is not at all, that is extremely dangerous. So, most people, when they go for escapist entertainment, that is one reason why entertainment is so big is because people just can’t bear to be in their own lives. Just want to escape somewhere.
Go from here to somewhere else. So, now, when this kind of unbearable situations come in our life, we can escape downwards into illusion or we can escape upwards towards illumination, towards enlightenment. So, Arjun has come to an unbearable situation.
Things as they are, I just can’t bear them. I just can’t bear them. So, when we can’t bear things, either we can go down or we can go up.
So, the Bhagavad Gita describes how Arjun goes up. Or rather Krishna’s wisdom takes Arjun up. I just can’t bear.
And why can’t he bear? So, at one level he is saying all these inauspicious things are happening, my Gandhi is slipping. But then he starts reasoning. It’s not just these things are happening, but along with that he is thinking actually what is going to happen is also terrible.
So, then he describes, we go to next verse. So, he uses a significant word over here. Let’s recite this verse.
नचः श्रेयो अनुपश्यामि हत्वास्वजनमाहवे नकांशे विजयं कृष्ण नचराज्यं सुखानिच I do not see any Shreya, any long term benefit. So, it’s interesting that there can be different scales of perception. So, we can just look at the immediate.
A child can see only this food tastes good, this chocolate tastes good, I want to eat it. But the mother says, no enough now. If you eat more your tooth will get spoiled.
So, in one sense intelligence is the capacity to see long term. With our impulse, with our emotion, we just see the short term. So, Arjun is saying that he is seeing long term.
We might gain this kingdom, but we will lose all our loved ones. And of what value is that? So, in a sense, if you see Duryodhana’s vision was, I want the kingdom no matter what the cost. And Arjun’s vision is significantly long term.
Is the kingdom worth this cost? Now, in one sense Duryodhana’s vision is very short term, Arjun’s vision is long term, but Krishna’s vision is even more long term. So, it’s like a progression of vision. So, the impious vision is just immediate pleasure, here and now, that’s all.
Arjun’s vision is long term. His long term we will see is in two directions. Long term to what will happen to his dynasty.
And long term, about what will happen to him in the next life. Both ways he sees long term. But, both the long terms are based on the material perception.
He is thinking long term. So, we can only think in terms of our world view. If something doesn’t fit into our world view, we just can’t comprehend it.
So, he is thinking within the world view that he has, he is thinking as long term as he can. And that capacity for long term thinking indicates his readiness for enlightenment. So, he says, what will happen in long term? Can you go to next verse? So, he says, in this life, what happiness will I get? We will recite this verse.
Yes, that’s ok. So, what will we gain? It’s like, somebody, there are these athletes, when they say there is a 100 metre sprint or whatever, they win the championship. And they win the championship and then they hold it up, the medal, the trophy, and everybody claps and their loud ones are there, they applaud them, they hug them, they cherish them.
But suppose there is a competition in which to win, you have to kill everyone else. And you get the trophy. What are you going to do with the trophy? Is it a trophy surrounded by corpses? It’s useless.
So, he says, all the people with whom we will enjoy these things. He said, Arjun, for him, Bhishma was like a father figure, Drona was like a surrogate father figure. So, he said, whenever he would fight wars and he would win, he would come and report to them and they would be happy.
He says, if they are dead, what is the use of all this? So, he is thinking long term. And he is thinking, okay, I gained the kingdom, but what do I gain through the kingdom? What is the use of this? So, Arjun is thinking deeply. But, as the Bhagavad Gita will say later, he is not thinking deeply enough.
Krishna is not telling him to fight the war so that he can gain the kingdom. Krishna is telling him to fight the war to establish Dharma. So, it’s a much more different perspective.
But Arjun is thinking from his perspective broadly. So, here he says, in this life, there will be nothing to enjoy. What will we enjoy even if we gain the kingdom? So, one side he says, there will be no enjoyment.
But on the other side he says, what is going to happen? Can you go to the next verse? This is a four series of verses where he describes, again, all the relatives who are there, all the relatives who will die. And he says, what will we gain by killing all of them? I don’t want to kill them. Let’s go to the next verse straight.
Now, go straight down. So, now he says, actually, we will get sin. Now Arjun is not unaware of his duty.
He knows as a Kshatriya, I am meant to, as a Kshatriya has to fight, Kshatriya has to kill. Arjuna is not squeamish about fighting and killing. But he is thinking that what is my duty? So, he knows that the Kshatriya duty is those who are aggressors, they have to be killed.
So, Arjuna is caught, like I said, there is an intelligent misunderstanding. What is this misunderstanding? It is a dharma sankata. There are two dharmas for him.
His Kshatriya dharma and his Kula dharma. Kshatriya dharma is, I have to fight against those who are wrongdoers. Kula dharma is, that I have to protect my Kula.
I have to protect my dynasty. So, when these two dharmas pull him in different directions, he says, normally, if some aggressor is coming, we punish them. But if the aggressor is a relative, what do you do at that time? Now, at one level, we could say, it is attachment, but another level, it is reciprocity.
If say, two children are drowning and one child is our child and the other child is somebody else’s. Now, whom would we save? Firstly, we will save our child. Is that attachment? It could be, but not necessarily.
That’s what would be expected. The child will expect that. If that child is drowning and the child sees my parents left me and went to save someone else.
The kind of shock and trauma and rejection that child will get, that’s not right over there. Now, of course, it’s best if we can save both of them. So, the human relationships that are there, they are also important.
He says, these are my relatives. Now, if it is the case that to save my child, I have to drown the other child. Now, that is a different issue.
But if among the two of them, I have to save one, it’s natural that we will save our child first. And then after, we will try to save the other child also. But here he is saying that for us to gain the kingdom, to kill them.
He says, that doesn’t make sense to me. That doesn’t make sense to me. I can’t do this.
So, he says, yes, they are aggressors. They have stolen our kingdom. But still they are our relatives.
They are relatives. How can we kill them? So, he has this Kshatriya Dharma and his Kula Dharma. And he is thinking, at this point, I have to stick to my Kula Dharma.
I have to stick to my Kula Dharma. How will I get any happiness? Not only will I get no happiness, we will get Paap. We will be doing grievous wrongs.
Can you go ahead? And then he says, what will be the wrong? What he is thinking, why is the Kula Dharma more important? Is it simply because of attachment? No, he is telling what will happen if the Kula Dharma is not followed. But before that, he is very intelligently anticipating counter arguments and responding to them. So, he is saying, okay, you are caught between Kula Dharma and Kshatriya Dharma.
But, you know, you don’t want the fight, but it is your own Kula who wants the fight. So, what can you do at that time? Then this is his answer to that. And he says, they are blinded by Lobha, but we are not blinded.
So, if they are covered by Lobha, their consciousness is destroyed, so they can’t see the danger of destroying dynasty. But, we can see. Can you go ahead, next verse? Again, the same verse comes.
Third line is same. Can you just go up a little bit? Up, sorry. Let’s just keep 37 and 38 together.
You see, is there again in both the lines. They can’t see the fault of destroying the dynasty, but we can see. They are blind, but we are not blind.
We are in knowledge, so how can we not fight? Or how can we fight? So, they are acting blinded by greed, but we can’t act that way. And he says, what is this Kulakshaya Krita Dosha that he describes in the next verses. He says that, if the Kula is destroyed, let’s recite this particular verse.
dharme nashte kulam kritsnam adharma bhivavatyauta So, kulakshaya prashanti. If the Kula is destroyed, the leaders, the protectors of the dynasty are destroyed, then kuladharma sanatana. The dharma that is practised, that will be destroyed.
And then, dharme nashte kulam kritsnam. Then, when dharma is destroyed, then the whole Kula will go into adharma. So, recently, at a conference in Australia, the topic was, why hasn’t God died till now? So, the idea was that, that sociologists have been predicting the death of God for almost 150 years, but still religion is having a resurgence.
So, why are still people religious? So, there is a very interesting book about how the West lost God. Western civilisation, especially Europe, is much more godless than even America. So, what happened? The mainstream intellectual narrative is that religion is unscientific, religion is irrational, and as scientific rationality increased, then religion was rejected.
But, even among mainstream scientists, if you consider, almost 50% scientists believe in God. They may have their own understandings of what God is and how God and nature interact with each other. They may believe certain theories or whatever.
But a significant number of people also believe in God. Or rather than saying that 50% scientists believe in God, you could put it this way that, most scientists are simply functional. They do their scientific work and they don’t see their science as directly saying that God doesn’t exist or God exists.
So, there are as many active theists among scientists, broadly speaking. So, is it simply scientific rationality that led to the decline of God and religion? Now, further studies have revealed that actually religion is transmitted through the families. Now, when families together, say family goes to the church, family goes to the temple, family goes to the mosque, as the families broke down, religion broke down.
So, if you see, if there is a joint family living together, if you want to celebrate a festival, you can celebrate in a much bigger way. You want to celebrate Diwali, you want to make some Rangoli, you want to make some lamps, you want to have some feast. There are large families, they all can do it much more.
There is a small nuclear family, you can celebrate, but not that much. Now, if the nucleus is also split, and there is neutrons and protons rotating, then, then, people are basically struggling to cope with life. While religion gives returns, but religion also requires commitment to some extent.
So, to the extent the family structure falls apart, to that extent religion falls apart. So, the family is the foundation for the transmission of religion. In a sustainable way.
Of course, there is a renounced order and that is also important. But, the point is, that if there are no families at all, if people are living in fragmented units as just individuals, then there is no, even if people are themselves religious, they can’t transmit religion very effectively. So, here, what Arjuna is saying is that kulaksha, if the dynasty is destroyed, adharma will happen.
Adharma will happen. And, so, unless there is a strong family structure, that will preserve religion. Religion, for most people, does not seem to be a primary necessity.
It is a necessity, but first we need food, clothing, shelter, and after we have that, then we have religion. It’s only very advanced spiritualists who will give up these to seek religion, or to seek God. For most people, we need our primary necessities, and after they are taken care of, then we also want, these primary necessities alone are not enough.
We want something more to orient us in life, to give meaning and purpose to our lives. So, this material structure is required for spiritual advancement. And he is saying that, if the material structure collapses, then everything else will collapse.
And then, can you go ahead? Adharmābhibhavāt Krishna said this verse. Adharmābhibhavāt Krishna praduśyanti kulastriya śrīśu duṣṭāśu vārśneya jāyate varṇa-saṅkara So, varṇa-saṅkara, what this means is that, unwanted progeny. Now, that means, when I was in Australia just a few months, just a few days ago, Australia was also quite shaken because an Australian was involved in that shooting at Christchurch, in the mosque, which shook up those countries.
Now, New Zealand is overall considered to be a very peaceful country. So, now, there has been a lot of study done of people who become serial killers. Now, they may have their own agendas, but one of the things that usually happens in their lives is that, they are from broken families.
They are from broken families, they are unloved, they are uncared for. And, many people, when everybody’s life’s bad things happen. But, when those bad things happen, if we do not have a supportive structure in our life, those bad things make us bitter.
They make us resentful. And then they make us revengeful. Now, my life is so bad, why should anyone else’s life be good? See, my life is bad, so let me work to make my life good.
But, instead of that, when my life is bad, why should my life be so bad? If my life is so bad, then how dare anyone else’s life be good? And then destroy everyone else. So, varna sankara means unwanted children. Now, unwanted children means what? Who doesn’t want them? It means that, if the society is such that they don’t want to have children, or they don’t really care for children, they don’t know how to care for children.
If children feel unwanted, unloved, uncared, then when they grow up, then they are going to become anti-social. It’s just inevitable. So, when there is no supportive structure in society, then adharma goes up.
One aspect of adharma is that, people stop caring for offsprings. You have children, but you don’t really care much for them. And then, these children grow up to become anti-social elements.
So, another thing that happens is that, if there are no protectors in society, prudusyanti kulastriya. This is unfortunate, horrible part of warfare, that whenever a defending army falls, then the invading army often abuses and violates the women of the defending army. And then, in the past, there was no birth control.
So, if the women get violated, then there is unwanted progeny. And then, who will take care of the unwanted progeny? There is no one to take care of them. They grow up, then they also become anti-social, eventually.
So, Arjuna is saying over here, the fabric of society collapses, if we destroy the kula dharma, the fabric of society will collapse. The fabric of society will collapse, then everything will go haywire. So, he is talking in terms of I will get sin, society will be disrupted, and then he goes further.
He says, not only society will be disrupted, he then says, our ancestors will also be disrupted. Because there will be no one to do pinda for the ancestors. So, they will also fall.
And not only will they fall, so he is talking first, from this life, we will get sin, society will be disrupted. When he talks about another life, ancestors will fall. And then he will say that actually, we will have to go to hell.
We will just go ahead now quickly. Can you go to the 43rd verse? Yeah, you can recite this. So, utsanna kula dharmanam.
So, those who destroy kula dharma, what happens to them? Such people narake niyatam vaso. They will forever reside in hell. So, it’s interesting, does Arjuna at the start of the Bhagavad Gita know about the soul? Or does he not know about the soul? Sorry? He knows about the soul.
Yes. Or you don’t know. Laughter.
Laughter. See, he is saying that we will have to go to hell forever. Now, who is going to go to hell? Obviously, it’s not the body is going to die.
So, there is some part of us that will go to the next world. So, that there is some part of us which continues to exist and which will suffer in hell. That is known to Arjuna.
But, you know, there is a difference between the material conception, or you could say, even although soul is spiritual, you could have a material conception of the soul. Or a spiritual conception of the soul. What do I mean by material conception of the soul? That is, I am the body and I have a soul.
Laughter. So, there is a small part of me that is the soul. But I am the body.
So, that is the idea. So, he is still thinking from the primarily material centred perspective. See, there is some of these jihadis, they believe that if they die in violent acts for the sake, supposedly for the sake of Allah, then they will be taken to Jannat.
And there they will get so many virgins with whom they can enjoy. So, you know, they are thinking of, they are not fighting for Allah, they are fighting for the virgins. Laughter.
Isn’t it? So, now, they are thinking of the other world, but it is otherworldly materialism. It is their other world, but the other world is also materialistic. There is nothing spiritual over there.
So, Arjun is of course not thinking in those terms. But Arjun, although he is thinking of the hell, and he is thinking something will go, that I will go to hell and I will have to suffer there. So, he knows about the soul, but his vision is not spiritual at this stage.
So, it is narakhe niyatam vaso. Here, niyatam is used in a rhetorical sense. It is not that forever literally, but for such a long time that is like forever.
Like forever, you will have to go to hell. And he is saying, this is what I have heard from the wise people. Anushushruma.
So, the first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita describes Arjun thinking deeply. But he is thinking as deeply or as broadly as a pious worldview will allow. But the pious worldview ultimately is not enough to accommodate the reality of the world.
We have a worldview, that is we have a way of looking at the world. And we try to fit everything into the world. Into our worldview.
He stretches the pious worldview, but the pious worldview is not enough. So, unless we understand the soul as a proper entity and reincarnation, we cannot make sense of life in the world. So, Arjun, he does his reasoning as much as he can, but he doesn’t come to a proper understanding.
So, then he says, how can I do such a wrong thing? Just for greed, how can I do such a terrible activity? He can’t. And his conclusion is also, can you go to 45th verse? His conclusion is that, I will not fight. It’s better that I die on this war field without fighting.
यदी मां अप्रतिकारम् अशस्त्रम् शस्त्रपानयों धार्तराष्टास्य रणे हन्युस् तन्मे क्षेमतरम् ववेत। क्षेमतरम् It is better that I die. This is going to be a catastrophe. But I don’t want to be a cause of this catastrophe.
Yes, I know the Kauravas are going to fight. And this is a terrible thing. Sometimes what happens? Life gives us a bad option and a worse option.
Then what do you do at that time? So he feels like that, this fighting is catastrophic. Not fighting is also terrible. But better to not fight.
And then his conclusion comes that he puts aside his bow. That he says, I will not fight. विष्रुज्जः सशरम् चापम् सन्जः उवाचव एवं उक्तवार्जुन संखे रतो पस्त उपाविशत विष्रुज्जः सशरम् चापम् शोक सम्वीग्न मानसाः विष्रुज्जः सशरम् चापम् So in the 29th verse it was said that is Gandhi was slipping from his hand.
So, but here it’s not just slipping from his hand, it’s slip from his hand. Not literally slipping, he has put it aside actually. So, what was involuntarily happening, the slipping of the Gandiva from his hand, here he is voluntarily doing.
I put aside my bow, I will not fight. Now, he is not happy about this. शोक सम्वीग्न मानसाः So, sometimes we take a decision as I said, it is like the hmm it’s like the best among bad decisions.
So, we are not happy about it. But that’s what he sees that there is not a ray of hope. All the options are bad, what can I do? At least let me not be a part of this catastrophe.
So, this is a decision which he takes, it doesn’t make him happy, it makes him sad. So, now the next chapter of the Bhagavad Gita by bringing the spiritual perspective will show him a ray of light even amidst the darkness. But here, this chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, the first chapter, it shows Arjuna’s qualification, at one sense, it shows how Arjuna goes into illusion but another sense, it also shows how Arjuna is qualified for enlightenment.
So, I will quickly summarise what I spoke. Then we can have some questions. So, I spoke on the theme of today, of the first chapter.
First, it starts from Duryodhana’s perspective which is the completely godless perspective. He is a manipulator trying to provoke by talking about Drupada’s son and he is trying to do a counterbalance. So, he does a lot of calculation but he leaves out God.
So, his attachment to Karna is such that although Karna is not invisible, he mentions Karna. And his aversion to Krishna is so much that although Krishna is visible, he doesn’t mention Krishna. So, if we leave God out, all our calculations will ultimately be futile.
So, Krishna’s being inactive in the Kurukshetra war field, being visibly inactive, is similar to God’s role in the world. In that sense, the Bhagavad Gita’s setting is like a metaphor for how God acts in the world. So, then we talked about how Krishna’s entry is, that first there is the conch shell and then Krishna’s entry is there and then they are blowing their conches and in the mental battle, it is the Pandavas who win.
First Duryodhana is agitated on seeing the formidable military formation and on seeing the confluent conch shell blowing, again the Kauravas’ hearts are shattered. So, the tide seems to be moving towards the Pandavas but then suddenly Arjun goes, Arjun makes an unexpected move, not a desirable move, an undesirable move. He says, I want to see the Kauravas and the eyes are the way to the illusion.
So, when he sees, his vision gravitates not towards Duryodhana or Dhritarashtra who have wronged him so terribly but his vision gravitates towards Bhishma and Drona. He starts thinking they are my relatives, how can I fight against them? So, whenever we fall, we can’t just say it’s because of my condition. That’s like saying, the plane crashed because of gravity.
We have to look at what is the process might happen? How did we get triggered? So, for Arjun, he naturally had affection, attachment, whatever he wanted for Bhishma and Drona. But at that time, looking at them was what deluded him. So, although Arjuna is deluded, his is not a foolish delusion.
It is an intelligent delusion. So, Duryodhana’s delusion is like an impious illusion. Arjuna’s illusion is a pious illusion.
And in that pious illusion, he is seeing far. So, Duryodhana is seeing only the kingdom. Arjuna is seeing more than the kingdom.
His vision is long term but Krishna’s vision is even more long term. So, impious material gain, pious material results and then spiritual results. So, his long term vision we see, he says that okay, even if we win, if there are no loud ones with whom to celebrate, what is the use of winning? And if not only that, leave alone our celebrating, we will get sin.
Because these are my relatives. Even if they are aggressors, how can I fight against them? So, it’s an example of our child or somebody else’s child. So, I cannot drown somebody else’s child to save my child.
I cannot drown my relatives to gain kingdom for myself. Although aggressors can’t be killed, can be killed, but these aggressors can’t be killed. So, his conflict is between Kshatriya Dharma and Kula Dharma.
And at that point, he is choosing Kula Dharma. And he gives his reasoning, if the Kula collapses, if the family collapses, if the dynasty collapses, then entire Dharma in society will collapse. We talked about how in western society, it became godless, not so much because of scientific rationality but because the family structure crumbled.
There is no one to transmit religious values to children. And then if children are unwanted, children feel unwanted, unloved, and that’s what happens when there is broken families, there is unwanted pregnancies, then what happens is that the children grow up to be unloved and they become antisocial. They devastate society.
So, then Krishna, Arjuna talks about future of the world because of this dynasty. Then he talks about future beyond the world. Our ancestors will fall and we will have to go to hell because we caused all this devastation.
And thus he feels that there is no easy way out. So, this fighting is horrible but at least I will not be a part of it. And he says, I will not fight.
Although he makes a decision, but the decision gives him no relief. He puts aside his bow, but he is distressed. So, where there is only a bad option and a worse option, the Bhagavad Gita’s knowledge will show a good option.
That is the expansion of vision that happens by spiritual knowledge. That we will discuss in our future classes. Any questions or comments? So, Prabhu, thank you very much.
I have never heard first chapter to be so interesting like this. I want to hear the entire chapter. So, Prabhu, my question is, you said that how by inspiration versus incitement.
But I think that and also later you said that how Bhagavad Gita is actually never mentions like what happened, what bad they did. It’s kind of inspiration. But I see when we see the output of what is produced, the result that comes out of incitement is more.
Its magnitude is more. And even sometimes spiritual whatever outcome seems to be more. And that’s what makes people really act when rubber meets the road.
For example, Dhruva, incitement. But he did it in six months. But how many times I hear the lecture get inspired and do like strong.
It’s not. Because incitement. And even though Krishna doesn’t say any bad things, but the incitement is what made him do the action when actually the war happened for the 18 days.
Krishna had to tell them, remind them. Did you think that? Do this. Like that.
So, how do I understand that? It’s often incitement that makes us do rather than inspiration. Like it happened with Dhruva. And actually in the Kurukshetra war also, Krishna reminded Arjuna or the Pandavas at various times about the atrocities that were performed.
Yeah, it’s a good point. At one level, we could say the operational principle is yena kena prakarena mana krishna niveshet. Somehow or the other, fix the mind on Krishna.
So, we have this Bhagavatam verse also. Gopya kamad bhayat kamso dveshas chaidya daya nrupah. Some of the gopis, some of the gopis were pure devotees.
But some of the gopis were also devakanyas. They were apsaras who were attracted to Krishna because he was so beautiful. And they came out of kama.
But even they became purified. Gopya kama, bhayat kamso. So, kamsa was always fearful.
In spite of that also, he remembered Krishna. So, we could say that there are two different frames of analysis over here. So, one point is that if you can get people to do something good, whatever reason they do good, that they are doing the good is what is more important.
Isn’t it? Like a child understands that it is a medicine and takes the medicine. Or the child thinks this is just sweet and then takes the medicine. Mother’s important point for the mother is to make the child take the medicine.
So, from that perspective, if somebody can be made to do good, that is what is important. So, Dhruva was incited. Arjuna also had to be incited at some times.
I won’t use the word incited over there. It is more of reminded of the wrongs. Generally, the word incitement is used to, is used as a negative connotation.
To provoke people to do terrible things. Whereas, Arjuna had to do the right thing, but because of weakness, he was not doing the right thing. So, see, we have to function with the modes that we have right now.
I gave a class in Sydney on the 14th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita. So, I was explaining that it is not that the modes of passion and ignorance are bad. Like once it happened that in Pune and then some guest was coming and somehow their flight landed early and we had to go to receive a guest.
So, I was rushing to, I had invited a devotee scientist. So, the devotee was driving, he was coming. So, he says, Prabhu, come quickly.
I walk a little slowly because I have a limp, but this devotee was walking slower than me. He said, come Prabhu, please we have to go. He says, I am practising living in Satvaguna.
So, the important thing is that we have to serve Krishna. And if something is urgently required for the service of Krishna, it has to be done urgently. Now, it is not that habitually, if we are constantly running around, then that means that something, we have to organise our life better.
But if when something is urgently required, then we have to do that. So, when Krishna and Arjuna are in the philosophical frame of mind, at that time, the philosophical analysis and the inspiration thereof will work. But when they are in the heat of the war, at that time, that is not the time really to have serious philosophical discussion.
So, at that time, whatever will motivate at that point, that’s what has to be spoken. So, like a child, when the child grows up, the child will understand the value of the medicine and will take the medicine because it’s medicine. But when the child is small, the mother may have to make some excuse by which to make the child take the medicine.
So, for us, at one level, for specific phases in our life, a certain amount of incitement could also work. Say, if you are going for food distribution, and there is some friendly rivalry between two groups, and this group has distributed this many books, we will go more and distribute more books. So, now, that will inspire us to do some service.
That is good. So, that, if you are doing service, that is good. For brief phases, if some kind of friendly banter, friendly rivalry, friendly incitement, that is fine.
But for our overall orientation in our life, passion is not a motivation that can sustain for very long. For sustenance, we need goodness. And goodness means, we need philosophical understanding, we need good relationship with devotees, we need at least somewhat regulated life.
So, within, so, overall, within bhakti, there are times when we have deadline driven activities. And for that time, having some passion, having some incitement, that is fine. Prabhupada will also do that.
When the devotees have to organise a big pandal programme in India, and at that time, all the devotees were mostly Indians, sorry, mostly Americans in India. So, Prabhupada told them, Indians think Americans are very great people. The whole world thinks Americans are very great.
So, what is the use of you being Americans, if you don’t do something great for Krishna? Now, Prabhupada, there are so many classes here, said, we are not Indians, we are not Americans, we are souls. So, that is philosophically true. Philosophically, we are not body, we are souls.
Yes, I am a soul, but I am American soul. Or, I am an Indian soul. We cannot, we cannot entirely reject the bodily conception.
So, the idea is, use the bodily conception also in Krishna’s service. But that doesn’t mean we get attached to the bodily conception and think, think of that itself as a final identity. So, for some phases, for some intense day and night activities, incitement can work, but otherwise, for more sustainable functioning, we need, we need inspiration that comes from philosophical understanding, from warm relationships, from a regulated lifestyle, which helps us experience the joy of connecting with Krishna.
Okay? Thank you. Hi, Krishna Prabhupada. So, in the middle portion, you are describing how this perception through vision is so, is so faulty.
But in our daily lives, what we are presented with is visionary or perceivable circumstances. And, even though we may be told things that may be true, if we are not able to perceive it, we are not able to believe it, just as you described. So, how do we change this vision in a very practical manner? Because, every day in our lives, we don’t have an opportunity to stop and really analyse something.
So, how do we elevate this vision to actually be able to perceive exactly what is going on? Can you be more specific about what you are saying? We can’t perceive or believe. So, by, when we see a certain object or a certain situation, we see it with the previous conception of what we have understood. So, how do we elevate that perception from our, on a practical way? So, we see by daily functioning, our situations as we see them with our current level of vision and our preconceptions.
But how can we see something higher going on, something higher which we can’t see at that time? See, when we have to function, there is as I said, we will function the way we normally function. We can’t drastically change that. Bhakti means our purpose changes.
Bhakti doesn’t mean our, the way we act will change. Like a simple example, say somebody is driving a car which, and they are lost. And their car is noisy, it is polluting, it’s wobbling, and they are also not very good drivers.
So, now if they get to know, okay, this is where I am meant to go. They get a map, they get a direction. Now, when they get the map and the direction, what will change is where they are going.
But it’s not overnight, how they are driving may not change. Isn’t it? Just because you know the destination doesn’t mean your driving skills improve. So, we have a particular kind of body and mind and we are driving with that.
So, the body and mind has some strengths, some weaknesses. So, we can’t suddenly change the way we navigate with our body and mind. But we can change where we are going with that.
So, as far as our particular conceptions are concerned, we will function according to those conceptions only. But for what purpose we are functioning? That’s why we have Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra. These are not just four castes.
They are four broad human types. And the idea is that human psychology can be analysed in different ways. So, the way we are, that is the way we function.
But while functioning in that way, we work for Krishna. Krishna becomes our ultimate purpose. And gradually as Krishna conscious wisdom starts permeating into us, our conceptions will expand.
So, if we know that particular situations provoke us, where we tend to react in wrong ways. So, on a moment to moment basis, if we try to constantly, we work for Krishna. But to get to that level of Krishna consciousness where every moment we are conscious of Krishna.
We want to go there but we cannot artificially go there immediately. Right now, the first level is we start working for Krishna. And gradually as we work for Krishna, Krishna is at least in the background as a purpose for our life.
As we keep practising bhakti, then Krishna starts coming in the foreground. I am working for Krishna and this is what I am doing right now. So, it will happen gradually.
So, we don’t have to expect a dramatic change. We will, whatever level of perception we have, with that we function as well as we can for the ultimate purpose of serving Krishna. And if there are particular situations where we tend to get provoked and get deluded, then we can plan in advance.
Like this is the road, I have to travel along this road everyday. There is a bump over here. Then better let me slow down.
So, if there are no particular situations where we get provoked, then we plan in advance. Okay, this is how I tend to react. But I can respond in this way.
Okay, so, we can, our lives are so fast, that if we try to bring, try to make it fully sattvic, we may feel as if we can’t function only. So, what we can do is bring at least phases of sattva in our life. So, our sadhana is a time when we bring sattva.
When we come and study Shastra, there is a time when we bring sattva. And we could have some pauses for self-awareness. Maybe after we completed, say, we are doing some work, we completed one phase of the work, just calm yourself, maybe thank Krishna for whatever you are able to do.
Seek forgiveness if we did anything wrong. And then pray to Krishna, we can do the next thing. We just close our eyes, fold our hands, even don’t do that, just in our mind also we can pray.
In that way, we try to narayanayati samarpayami. We try to connect with Krishna. So, also to create self-awareness, I find three questions helpful.
Periodically asking us, What am I doing? What am I doing? I am right now speaking on the Bhagavad Gita. What am I doing? This is what I am doing. I am right now hearing the Bhagavad Gita.
Why am I doing this? I enjoy it. But I am not enjoying this right now. This is becoming boring.
But I do this because I want to become purified. I do this because I want to learn about Krishna. I want to share about Krishna.
So, if we are doing this something because of a less than optimal motive, why am I doing this? We can change that motive. So, what happens? If we don’t think this way, then, I am doing this for pleasure, I am not getting any pleasure. Why should I do it? Pleasure is there, but I am doing this for something more also.
So, why am I doing this? And then that leads to, how am I doing this? So, for example, I am sitting in the class, am I slouching? Am I erect? Am I chanting? Am I chanting? Am I chanting and taking shelter of Krishna’s holy names? Or am I taking shelter of my chair? So, broadly asking these three questions, what am I doing? Why am I doing? How am I doing? They can create some self-awareness. Does it address your question? Thank you. Yes.
Yes. By the way, till what time should I go on? Let me know. 8 o’clock? Okay.
We can have more questions in the next session. How many of you have questions as such? One, two, three, four. You can note those questions and Okay.
Okay, you let me know when to stop then. Yes, please. So, it’s not just Arjuna that thinks that the war should not happen.
There is an instance where one of the sage who is supposed to be spiritually advanced, he also thinks there should not have been a war when he criticised Krishna. Why did you let it happen? And also in religious things we have studied is Ahimsa and like non-violence and ability to forgive is regarded in very high esteem. So, like, wouldn’t like Okay, yeah.
Good question, yeah. So, isn’t forgiveness considered very valuable in religious circles? So, shouldn’t the war have been avoided? Yes. There is definitely as much as possible violence should be avoided.
At the same time there is weakness and there is wickedness. Weakness can be forgiven. Wickedness can’t be forgiven.
What is the difference? Weakness means all of us have anger, all of us have lust, all of us have greed and sometimes these lower urges they overpower our intelligence, they overpower our conscience and we do something wrong. But, afterwards we also realise, I have done something wrong. I should not have done this.
So, that’s a moment of weakness. So, weakness makes us hot-headed. That urge overcomes our intelligence or sidelines our intelligence.
Sidelines our conscience and makes us do wrong. That’s weakness. Wickedness makes us cold-blooded, not hot-headed.
Cold-blooded means it’s not that the intelligence is sidelined. It’s rather the intelligence is used to be lusty, to be greedy, to be angry. So, when somebody is wicked, after doing wrong, they don’t feel guilty.
They feel clever. Just see how smartly I eliminated this person. So, to offer forgiveness to wickedness is foolishness.
If somebody is wicked and you forgive them, they have no inner conscience. And they just keep doing the wrong again and again and again. So, when we talk about forgiveness, it is usually in, say, interpersonal relationships, where nobody is a wicked person.
All of us, under moments of weakness, do something wrong. And we shouldn’t hold it against people. But, what Duryodhana had done? He had, in a public assembly, tried to disrobe Draupadi.
This is not just an act of weakness. He knows everybody is watching. And Bheeshma, Drona, Vidura, they advise him.
And after he does it all also, there is no regret ever. What to speak of regret? There is no reconciliation. I was at a mediation seminar.
There was one devotee who came to the other devotee and said, I know you are angry with me. The other devotee said, I am not angry with you. Anger is an expensive emotion.
You are not worth it. Laughter So, when there is no, absolutely no desire for reconciliation, when Duryodhana was not ready to give a tip of a needle as much land, not only that, he was out to manipulate further. So, in that situation, forgiveness is stupid.
It is foolishness. So, forgiveness is very much desirable and essential to help go beyond moments of weakness. So, others in moments of weakness do wrong, forgive them.
But those who have wickedness, forgiveness is foolishness in those situations. Okay. Thank you.
Yes. Prabhuji, Krishna cites these 5-6 points, Arjuna cites these 5-6 points when he is explaining to Krishna that, you know, what I am about to do is not good because, you know, there is Varna Sankhya, there is Nashati Kulastriya, and he gives all this list of things. And then we go on to see that Krishna says, there is something above this that you must contemplate.
You are not seeing the full picture. But my question always is that, you know, do these points not count? Of course, they will happen. It’s a natural tendency.
If you have a war, there will be a side effect of a war. There will be certain repercussions. Is Krishna telling Arjuna, suffer the repercussions because I am telling you to suffer them? Or is he telling him, there won’t be any repercussions because I am guiding you to run the war.
And how does that apply in practical purpose to our own lives? Because when we take up to Krishna consciousness and do certain services, there are repercussions when we choose to overlook or ignore certain things. Like taking care of our, you know, we ask about doing our Pinda services or other things that we want to do. And we say, no, it’s enough if you are Krishna conscious.
But does that mean this will not happen? There are certain obligations. Okay, so when Krishna, when Arjuna is talking about certain repercussions of the war, and Krishna tells him, see the bigger picture, does that mean the repercussions won’t happen? No, not exactly like that. The war has its consequences and there are horrible consequences in many ways.
But in that situation, not fighting the war would have had worse consequences. So the idea is that if Duryodhana, a person, it’s like, Duryodhana is abusing a royal lady in public. Sometimes some very abusive men might abuse a woman in private.
Somebody does in public, that’s even more brazen. Somebody comes to a police station and abuses someone. That means that person has no fear of law at all.
So now the court, the Kuru assembly is like the police station, that is the court of justice. And there Duryodhana is doing something like this. So, if such a person were given untrammelled power, what would he have done? During the 13 years of the Pandavas exile, he did not abuse his power much because he wanted to win over his citizens.
And he knew the Pandavas were going to come. And once they came, they would be challenged. So he wanted the citizens to be with him.
He wanted the courtiers to be with him. So he restrained his lower impulses at that time. But if the Pandavas would be out of the picture, then there would be no restraint at all for him.
So, although the war had bad consequences, but not fighting the war would have had worse consequences. So when Krishna, yes, there are, it’s like, like I gave the example, the child doesn’t want to take an injection. And the doctor sees the bigger picture.
If you don’t take the injection, then the disease will be worse. Now that doesn’t mean the injection won’t hurt. The injection will still hurt.
But the pain of the injection is far lesser than the pain that will come if you don’t take the injection. So, now, if possible, if a doctor is doing a surgery, the doctor may give anaesthesia, the doctor may give pain medication, so, yes, there are repercussions of our actions and as much as possible, we try to minimise them. But we don’t have to just stick to that vision.
So, Arjuna’s scale of perception is not wrong, it is not incorrect, it is incomplete. But when we see that bigger scale of perception, that does not mean this is not valid. This is also valid, but there is a bigger vision that has to be seen.
Now as far as doing the Shraddha and other things for our family members is concerned, there are different ways. Is it that as devotees, if we don’t do Shraddha, then what will be the consequences? Will that have repercussions? As devotees, there are two different things going on over here. One is that if somebody comes already from a materially pious family, where in their family tradition, this was always going on.
Then, if that is a very important part of the family tradition, there is no need to disrupt that in the name of devotion. If your whole family is doing it, then you can also do it. Bhaktivinoda Thakura says in Chaitanya Shiksha Amrit, that a devotee’s heart is in devotional festivals.
But apart from devotional festivals, if there are also some social occasions that are going on, then a devotee doesn’t disrupt. Disrupt those by not going there. So, like say, if in India there is Independence Day, or here there is American Independence Day or whatever.
It is not that, should a devotee stand up and the national anthem is being sung. Well, what’s wrong in that? The nation is a bigger unit in which you belong and whatever is the code of that, we follow that. But if somebody has been from a family where they are never doing Shraddha, and now they have started following the Vedic literature.
So, then the Vedic literature has a lot of things going on. So, they don’t have to start following all the Shraddha rituals and everything. Begin with the devotional principles.
And just do that, that will be enough. now, for most of us, a few of us might be from families where that has been happening for a long, long time. So, what Gopal Bhatt Goswami did was that he devotionalized many of the rituals.
So, the Shraddha can also be Shraddha or Namakaran or many other ceremonies, they can be performed in a Krishna-centred way. So, as devotees, we can do that. So, how much to do? We have to see that there are primary principles in Bhakti and there are secondary principles.
So, we don’t do the secondary at the expense of the primary. Secondary should not take so much time that we don’t do the primary. And if we are just starting, focus on the primary itself and the primary itself can be enough.
Because if you are doing it in a devotional way, Krishna will take care of things. We live in a world where for most people, the life is so fast-paced that all the rituals that were done in the past, it may be very difficult to do. So, we try to devotionalize as many rituals as we can and if we can’t, then just focus on the practise of Bhakti.
It’s not that because we are practising Bhakti, we deliberately reject those rituals. There are certain situations in our Acharyas that have done that, that is primarily to demonstrate one’s Shraddha in Bhakti. But it’s not that these practises are bad.
It’s just that if you have to choose between this and this, you have to choose Bhakti. But if this can be done and this can be done, then this can also be done in a devotional way, it’s perfectly fine. Okay.
Thank you. Okay. Yes.
Hare Krishna Prabhu. Prabhu, I was just thinking about the, you were talking about the traditions that’s been coming in families. I mean, I know that many devotees, like Iskcon devotees, they feel, I mean, they might have been from a tradition where they would have been a Samartha or a, you know, completely different sect.
So, in that sense, the nucleus family actually helps them grow personally. You know, rather than being in the old traditional way, especially meant for Indian families where they are, they could be a Mayavadi, you know, where they don’t even want to hear Krishna as being the supreme. So, I was just wondering, in that situation, isn’t a nuclear family better? Okay.
Good question. So, isn’t a nuclear family better if, say, our broader family is following some other tradition and they don’t, they won’t want to hear about Krishna also? So, whatever we are practising is built on a particular foundation. So, sometimes, because the foundation is way below, we may neglect it.
So, yes, there is, okay, there is the cultural, there is the philosophical, there is the spiritual. The philosophy is what we learn, analysis, learning Shastra, analysing the philosophy, understanding. There is the cultural.
And in the cultural, there are many different things which we may do. So, say, for example, we may be worshipping Krishna. Maybe in the past, we might have been worshipping some other devata.
Our family might have been worshipping some other devata. So, now, the principle of worship, we’ve learned from our culture. And that created a foundation.
A specific object of worship, we may have evolved in that understanding. But, see, wherever we go in our life, we bring our past with us. And some aspects of that past may be what we reject for practising bhakti.
But there is much that we have brought, which is also helping us on. So, in our practical day-to-day life, if we see that, in our movement, we stress philosophy quite a bit. Philosophy is very important to understand.
And it is. But I was recently talking with Giriraj Maharaj. He is writing a book on Prabhupada’s struggles to build the Juhu temple.
Prabhupada talked with me. Prabhupada told me once that when he was in America, first with the Mishra Yoga Studio, where this Mishra was a yoga teacher, but he was an impersonalist. So, Prabhupada said that philosophically, we would argue like anything.
But culturally, we were friends. So, Giriraj Maharaj told me, it was a revelation for me that philosophy doesn’t have a sole basis with which we deal with people. For most people, philosophy is a part of their identity.
So, we sometimes make, okay, Mayavadi, that is the sole identity of a person. Well, that’s their philosophy, but they may be more sattvic than us sometimes. Isn’t it? So, we don’t know.
So, I just gave a Bhagavatam class in Sydney. You know, we have to treat people as conscious beings, not as philosophical categories. You cannot treat people as philosophers.
Yes, philosophical categorisation is important to understand. This person has this philosophy, this person has this philosophy, this person is like this. But we can’t reduce people to philosophical categories.
People are conscious beings. And their philosophy is one part of their identity. So, that, we don’t want to interact with that.
We don’t want to accept that. But there are other aspects on which we are connected. And in many ways, for practical functioning, the culture may be helpful.
So, I would say that cultural may have created the foundation by which we are practising bhakti now. So, yes, for our specific devotional practises, sometimes staying separately from a joint family, where the practises are different, is helpful. There is no denying that.
Kaliyuga is a Kaliyuga is a very peculiar age. So, because of which many of the traditional supports may now turn out to be not supports but obstacles. So, from a functional perspective, yes, if this is more favourable for our bhakti, we accept that.
But we should not be ungrateful for what we have got from our family. So, we might not have got the philosophical understanding from them, but we did get a cultural upbringing. And if we learn the principle of worship, we may change the object of worship now.
But the principle of worship, that goes with us. So, we are grateful for what we have got from them. And even if we don’t get the philosophy, we may have to adjust certain things for our particular practises.
But don’t think, we don’t reject the past to practise our bhakti. We actually build on the past to practise our bhakti. That’s why acknowledging the past is also helpful.
I have noticed this, especially when I am interacting with college students in the western world. People come from broken families and there are so many issues. So, most of us, we came from reasonably good families and that is a blessing.
So, in the name of convenience in practising bhakti, we shouldn’t be ungrateful for all else that we may have got from our families. Okay. So, thank you very much.
Okay. Okay, last question. Thank you, Babaji, for the class.
Two years back, I was bewildered with the concept of detachment and you had really helped me understand, because some very heavy straw walls of philosophy had explained to me we are practising detachment. And I was like, wow, this seems very selective. So, what is detachment? And you had said, aversion to commitment is not detachment.
So, I have really held that tight and that’s given me a foundation. In another of your lectures, I think you have talked about intention, context and consequences. So, the question that I am asking, my intention is not to contaminate this beautiful environment, talking about money and land and all that.
The context is chapter one. I am feeling very bewildered again, just like Arjun. And the consequence I want is so that I can have a solid understanding, because my daughter is here and I want her to understand that if I am teaching what I am teaching her is correct.
So, if I can give a background, 15 years back, I had seen it. I was a very silent, powerless observer. I had seen if this chapter one, we switch it in terms of family, internal fighting over property, land, money.
And I was told I am doing it for dharma, because Lord Krishna said you have to fight for dharma. And I said, okay. I believe the source.
And then slowly I could clearly see. I had no, you know, not much technical knowledge as such in spiritual level. But I could see that wow, this is crossing many limits.
And so much so, the nephew was beaten or something had happened. And in that moment I had said, wow, I will never do that. Krishna forbid, I hope I am not at that crossroads, but I do have a nephew.
We do have lands and all that. I am telling my child that family first. If there are conflicts, if it’s about money and all, family first, family first.
Because I’ve seen this happening. That person did win, I don’t know, win is a very objective, subjective word. But I can see they are enjoying material comforts and all that.
But it has a, you know, ramification on their family dynamics. But I am teaching my child family first. So, am I teaching my child, hey, we take a step back for family or do I teach them to be aggressors? I am very confused.
So, normally if there is a property dispute, sometimes people can become brutal and they may rationalise it in the name of Dharma. But then we should put family first and property and such conflicts, we shouldn’t escalate them too much. So, what is the teaching of the Bhagavad Gita in the light of the first chapter? Okay, this is going to come in the second chapter elaborately.
But see, Arjun is thinking that there is a choice between property and family. And he says, better just protect our family, why go for property? And that’s a perfectly reasonable and very valid argument. But there is a bigger dynamic over there.
It’s not just property and family, it is property, family and duty. Duty means what? That this is not just two families fighting over property. They are two royal families and there is a kingdom which they have to govern.
There is their citizens they have to consider. So, they have a duty to their constituencies, to their citizens. And to abandon the whole citizen, all the country to a wild person like Duryodhana.
That would be failing in their duty. So, it’s like if it’s just a conflict between two people, okay, you want this property I don’t want a nasty conflict, you just take the property, go. It’s over over there.
But this is not just a property dispute between two, they are both royal families they are kings. And as I said, Duryodhana was a heinous person. He, if he had got untrammelled power, he could have done terrible terrible things.
So, the Pandavas, if you want to see that way, yes they did put family first for a long time. It was only a choice between family and property. When Bhima was poisoned, the Pandavas did not retaliate at that time.
Even in Varanavarth, when they were burnt alive, attempted to they didn’t retaliate at that time. When Draupadi was dishonoured, a particular line was crossed. But even then the Pandavas were ready for a peaceful negotiation.
But even that didn’t work. When Duryodhana, see there are different kinds of rejection also. And Duryodhana said I will not give even the tip of enough land to put the tip of a needle through.
What does it mean? It means he is not interested in any negotiation at all. It’s not just he is saying no, he is exulting in his cleverness and arrogance in saying no. I give this example, I think last time we invite somebody for a programme and they say that, you know actually I have this engagement so I can’t come for the programme.
That’s a no to the request. But if somebody says even if I die, my corpse will not come to your programme. So, that is not just a no to the invitation for the programme, it is a no to the whole idea to the person banging the door in the face.
So, Arjuna’s, Duryodhana’s rejection was like that. So, there is a bigger dynamic going on. Yes.
Definitely, it’s simply a dynamic between property and family. Then property is not worth, most often it is not worth having long familial disputes. So, you could say that property is rajas, family is sattva or if you want to put both of them in rajas, at least property is like a grosser rajas, family is subtler rajas.
But here, when he is talking about duty, it was a difficult duty for Arjuna. So, it’s like if you want to change the example, it is that there is a judge and the judge’s own son has been accused of a crime. Now, should the judge put his job first or his family first? Well, he has to put his justice first, isn’t it? He has to do justice over there.
So, the Pandavas at one level they were the contestants in the war but they are also royal citizens. So, they had to consider the cause of justice over there, not just for themselves but also for their community at large. And we can’t translate the Mahabharata’s conflict simply into say today’s property conflicts.
That there is a property conflict between two family members or whatever. You know, there is a one of the wealthiest person in India when he passed away, he passed away without a will and his two sons fought very bitterly. So, apparently there is an Indian historian who has written a book about that conflict and he has called it the modern Mahabharata.
So, now, you can call it like that but Mahabharata’s dynamic is very different. It is not just a business empire, it is actually a kingdom where they have to maintain Dharma. So, yes, if you are teaching family should be first and property can be sacrificed for the sake of family, it is a valid teaching, definitely it is good.
But the Bhagavad Gita is talking about duty in that context because they are ruling families. They have to consider their duty to the citizens also. So, can we continue? Okay, you tell me.
Okay, quickly. You can repeat. So, Vaishya Chakrababu called from Japan just now as I went out to take that call.
So, he is offering you his obeisances and he is thanking you for the wonderful Krishna Katha that you are doing today and that you will continue to do over the weekend and he is praying that you have a long life and that so that you can do more of this wonderful and unique teachings that you do. Thank you. Thank you very much for the reading.
Thanks to Vaishya Chakrababu also for the blessings. I sometimes say that a travelling preacher’s job is actually a very easy job. It’s like sometimes politicians go to some slums and they pose with a small child from the slums and they take a photo and they think, this politician is so kind hearted.
But as soon as this child passes some water or something, they give that back to the mother. So, like that, the local managers of project, they have to take all the responsibility of counselling, mentoring, guiding, managing. So, it’s a huge responsibility and it is only because the managers take up that responsibility that travelling preachers can also do some service.
So, I am grateful to be here and I am very grateful for Vaishya Chakrababu’s blessings. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna devotees.
So, we would like to thank S.G. Shetinacharan Prabhu one more time for the wonderful, insightful class on the first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita and we would also remind you that he will be giving the class on Saturday morning and Sunday evening and there we will continue in-depth discussion on the chapter 2. So, please join us for those sessions. Also, we have some of the books that Prabhu has written. There is actually Wisdom from Ramayan, which has insightful do you want to speak about? So, most of you may have seen this book last time.
This is about 20 incidents from the Ramayan narrated and explained practically. So, why did Ram abandon Sita? That has been explained elaborately as well as when bad things happen, how do we respond? When do we accept it as destiny? When do we act to counter it? So, Ram, when he was exiled, he accepted it as destiny, but when Sita was abducted, he didn’t accept it as destiny. That’s explained over there.
And this, I’ll show the card deck. There are several other books. Some of these are old.
This is Gita for Daily Enrichment, 365 Reflections on the Bhagavad Gita. And this is a card deck with 365 quotes on topics like nourish yourself, nourish your devotion, nourish your relationship. The quotes inspired by the Bhagavad Gita.
So, this you can put on your desk, even in your office and that can inspire some discussion with your colleagues or at home you can have and your children can also read out a quote and then you can explain to them. So, this is very useful to trigger interest in the Bhagavad Gita and to have a quick reminder of the Bhagavad Gita’s wisdom as practically applied in our lives. So, you may find this useful.
Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. … … … … … … …