From the mind to the heart – Practicing bhakti with our mind and without it too

[Talk at Brooklyn, USA] Video:

Any questions or comments? Namaste Saraswati Devi Gauravani Pracharine Nirvichesha Shunyavadi Pashyatya Deshatarine Vancha Kalpatarubhyascha Prapasindhubhyaevacha Patitanam Pavanebhyo Vaishnavebhyo Namo Namaha Jai Shri Krishna Chaitanya Prabhu Nithyananda Shri Advaita Gadadhara Shri Vasadhi Gaurabhakta Vrinda Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare Hare Krishna thank you very much for coming today if any of you want to sit above, that's perfectly fine you can sit here also wherever it's comfortable thank you so the topic I was trying to speak on today is beyond the mind to the heart practising bhakti with our mind and without it also so what do I mean by this from the mind to the heart so broadly speaking if we consider how our nature of our existence if I say this is the world then here there is the mind and here there is the soul so am I audible to everyone yes fine so now and this is visible also or it's too small visible ok so now now the concept of the heart where it exactly is is something which is bit mysterious so ok thank you so basically what I mean by this is generally when we use the word heart we are not using it in literal sense that is not referring to the biological organ you broke my heart well I do x-ray I still say the heart is as it is so here we are referring to the heart as the seat of emotions now at one level we could say our emotions the faculty within us which is associated with emotions is the mind because we could say that the mind is associated with emotions and the intelligence is associated with reason so emotion reason broadly we could say like that but then emotion is not just associated with the mind it is also associated with the soul because ultimately emotion comes when there is consciousness and when there is consciousness the consciousness experiences everything including emotions so with this frame so we could say now where is the heart there is a verse in Chaitanya Charita Amrit where Chaitanya Mahaprabhu says since it is my mind which is Vrindavan but then Prabhupada translates as heart over there since my heart is Vrindavan so are the mind and the heart the same thing so to understand this more important than the terms is the concept see we could say our inner world we could say our inner world is multi level and we could have say some surface surface desires emotions and we could have some deep desires emotions so now if you consider these two broadly speaking surface emotions are say we are just walking along the road and we see something attractive may be some good food to eat may be a new gadget to buy may be something attractive I just want to shop it now in that case if we had not seen it we would not have got that desire now again here I don't want to split hair too much but what is the difference between the desire and emotion desire is more an active engagement or force which causes engagement with the outer reality and a desire means I want to go out and do something I want to get it, I want to enjoy it I want to experience it whereas emotion desire is more like outward flow from our consciousness to do something from our consciousness to the external reality to the circumstance whereas emotion is more inward flow from the circumstance to the consciousness emotion is what we experience in particular situations by certain perceptions now in a sense emotion and desire are not entirely unrelated we could say emotions can create desires now if I see somebody crying, small child crying alone on the street then I feel a emotion of concern of sadness, of agony and then there is desire, I want to help this child so they are not entirely unrelated but for the purpose of analysis we could say that emotion is more a result of an outward flow into our consciousness so when something says something when someone says something I feel angry that's a emotion and when I am angry, I get the desire to beat that person, physically or maybe verbally, whatever so desire and emotion are like that, but now these also can be at a surface level or it can be at a deeper level, surface means just some circumstance, something comes up and it triggers something within me but some things may be very deeply felt by us that means that we all have, we could say various levels of desires I want to read the newspaper that's one desire but I want to read Bhagavatam that's also another desire so I like sports but I like Shastras now we could say intellectually we understand Shastra is more important than sports it's fine, but also we may say that studying Shastra is like a deep aspiration for us reading about sports, that's something I just like to do I'll do it so in that sense if we say that broadly speaking the seat of emotions is the heart so when we use broke my heart, it means the seat of emotions where we had, the emotions where it disrupted wounded, so then the heart can refer to both the mind and the soul it depends on this same thing I am inverting it like this so here we see it as a horizontal when we make it vertical so we could say the emotions which are related to the mind are at the surface the emotions which are related to the soul are at a deep level and now for us the love for Krishna is situated at a very deep level it is there, now whenever when I am travelling I often misplace and lose things so when I lose something one way I console myself is by saying I didn't lose it because I was so careless I lost it because I was so careful that I kept it in such a place that I can't remember it and now I lost it so for us some of our deep desires they are very deep but they get lost deep inside us not because we don't care for them but we make them like so important that we feel everything else has to be carefully done then I will do this like somebody says ok I want to chant but I will chant only when I can concentrate perfectly then we will never be able to chant then we will never be able to chant when will we be able to concentrate so there is always something which will agitate us so we could say that there are different levels of emotions within us so when I am talking about beyond the mind to the heart what I am meaning is beyond the surface emotions that we have to the deeper emotions that we have so how do we get to that deepest level of our consciousness so that which is really important for us how do we get to that in our life and for this broadly I said the other part of the title was how to practise bhakti with our mind and without our mind with our mind means that the surface emotions cooperate in our inward journey and without our mind means the surface emotions don't cooperate but still we persevere so what do I mean by the surface emotions now the word surface might convey that it is superficial but although they are superficial they can be very strong so broadly speaking the emotions within us we can put them in three categories one is those which are related with the soul spiritual, the other is which is related with our swabhava and the third is those which is related with our anarthas so that means that our anarthas means our lust, anger greed, envy, pride all of these triggers certain emotions within us and then now we could say both of these related with swabhava is also material it could be somebody is a brahmana somebody is a kshatriya so somebody is a brahmana they just naturally feel delighted whenever they get some new book to read some new intellectual concept to digest somebody who is a vaisya now they may not be necessarily greedy but just as soon as that subject becomes about money they perk up they perk up even when serving Krishna if it is all about philosophy it's about fundraising oh let's do something now we are going to do something now so we could say our emotions can be related with our swabhava and ultimately they are related with our soul with the soul which is Krishna so when we say we practise bhakti with our mind with our mind means we go along with our swabhava and without our mind means we don't go along with the anarthas so we want to reach the soul and then we want to bring out the soul's potential for serving Krishna for loving Krishna so within our both of these where are they situated the anarthas and swabhava both are situated in the mind both are there in the mind and we need to deal with both of them appropriately so we could say over here if the soul is over ok let me put it this way if ok in here only if I consider surface desires say if these are the anarthas then at this level there are anarthas and here there is swabhava so now if the anarthas are forming a current now that current may not take us towards the soul that current may take me away from the soul towards the world and I neglect that current so we could envision this as if somebody is rowing a boat then if somebody has to go a long distance in a boat it's important for them to catch the right current otherwise they will be rowing against the current constantly and it can be very exhausting so now if somebody tries to row against the current of their swabhava it's a life long struggle and they will soon give up, it can't be done but we all need to row against the current of our anarthas when we simply say that actually you are just all being just give up everything material, surrender to Krishna well it's not that simple everything material can't be given up certain material things which are unfavourable they need to be given up our consciousness is always flow along a particular current a particular channel we can't stop that that means there are already say paths created in our consciousness and the consciousness will flow along those channels if you say none of these channels, it's not going to work but some of these channels ok no, say somebody is very lusty, very greedy, very angry and consciousness actually flows in that direction you have to create some regulation no, I will not let it go in this direction but we all have a particular swabhava and the consciousness will flow along that direction if we try to stop that we will feel completely repressed we will feel as if I just can't do anything in the Bhagavad Gita when Krishna says nigraha kim karishyasi what will repression accomplish he is talking about your consciousness will flow along a particular channel, Arjuna you are a Kshatriya your consciousness will flow along the Kshatriya channel you cannot stop that so when we want to practise bhakti, we want to make sure that the anartha channel that we stop it the swabhava channel we activate it now sometimes the anartha and swabhava channel they also get overlapped say for example somebody is doing some service and each service requires some facility some position, some resources now if a speaker is giving a class and a speaker is very concerned how many people are there for the class now at one level it could just be genuine concern because I am sharing some wisdom and this is Krishna's wisdom I want more and more people to come but it also could be pride I want more people to come for my class than for somebody else's class so sometimes a Kshatriya wants to, Kshatriya actually has a desire to rule and to control and to delegate and to get things done now one can do that for Krishna also but while doing that one gets certain position certain authority so things when we try to go into the details always there is they say the devil resides in the details so we could say that what particular emotion is coming from anartha and what is coming from swabhava that can sometimes get fuzzy but broadly if you understand this category generally we need first the categorisation of black and white and then we can look at shades of grey we start only with shades of grey then we will never be able to distinguish anything so these things are not as simple as what this frame might say, the material emotions associated with anartha say no and the emotions associated with swabhava say yes but at least this broad categorisation of black and white if you understand then we can move forward now one I will keep this talk brief and I would like to hear from you also and then we can have more question answer discussion I will make one more point and then I will conclude with how bhakti applies within the situation say as I said there is some fuzzy zone between what is anartha and what is swabhava the very word anartha has a negative connotation to it it is something unwanted and the very word swabhava has a positive connotation that is what your nature is but if we consider some people for example are more sentimental than rational and some people are more rational than sentimental now if somebody is very emotional emotional I don't think this is erasable isn't it do we have another box I will do it over here I will apply I will show a particular I don't need much particular framework let me complete this if I need I will do it further so we could say emotion sorry and dedication and if I do I will do this for emotion we can do this for dedication also what is going on no it should be sorry ok just dedication over here so basically what I am saying is you could have four categories of people there is no emotion no dedication there is sorry this is no this is yes there is no emotion no dedication there is no emotion but there is dedication there is emotion and there is dedication there is emotion and there is no dedication maybe this diagram is little confusing but I think the four categories are clear for you so basically some people they are very emotional and any small thing happens they get so excited it's like they see a new devotee some devotee they go and give a big hug and you ask them after how many months are you meeting them after two hours really after two hours so some devotees are very emotional and somebody who is very rational why so emotional some devotees may just cry when they see the deity, they see the spiritual master and somebody so sentimental but the important thing is that some people may just have a more emotional nature so emotionality is something which we may not be able to change so much but the key thing is not how much emotion is present or absent but the key thing is how much dedication is present so if you consider this four categories there is no emotion and no dedication that will be people who are non devotees, materialists if there is emotion but no dedication those are the people who are you could say sentimentalist sahajiyas then we could have dedication but no emotion so we could say that is devotee devotees who are rational but not so they are rational but they are not so emotional and we could have devotees with emotion and dedication so they are emotional and dedicated I will repeat this once again is it clear no emotion no dedication is a materialistic person there is only emotion no dedication that is the sentimental that is sahajiya but we could have no emotion and dedication and we could have emotion and dedication and this will depend on how a person's basic nature is so some people may work very hard to decorate the deities and make sure that the janmashtami festival abhishek and everything goes on well but they may just be grave throughout and some people when the darshan opens and tears start coming from their eyes and become so overwhelmed by that now it could be that the second person is more advanced but it need not be so when we say that we practise bhakti with our mind or without our mind so here if I use the word mind to refer to our emotional side and some people who are by nature emotional they may get a lot of emotions when they are practising bhakti and that's good getting that emotion as long as they are dedicated that is the important thing they are committed to practising bhakti, committed to serving Krishna and they are moving on in their lives in contrast if they are not able to if they are not exhibiting any emotions but again they are dedicated then also that is fine so this emotion if somebody is exhibiting some emotion in relationship with Krishna now we could say is it coming from the soul may be may be not normally we talk about swabhava as brahman, kshatriya, vaisya, shudra but you could also refer to swabhava as say this particular classification of emotional and rational that is quite to some extent very deeply inbuilt so ok you go along with your swabhava emotion or reason and just practise bhakti now can emotionality be an anartha if emotionality if emotionality is if emotion becomes a substitute for dedication not only there is emotion without dedication but emotion is a substitute for dedication I have such emotions why are you expecting me to do sadhana why are you expecting me to do this, I already have the bhava when it becomes like that then it can be an anartha it is emotion without dedication need not be necessarily deceptive kind of person it might be just casual but if they consider that emotion alone is enough I don't need dedication at all then they will stagnate over there they will never move forward in fact then it becomes a serious problem so thus people are imitators, they pretend that they are advanced devotees when they actually don't make much advancement so when we talk about moving forward in our spiritual life so we may have a particular way of functioning and that is perfectly fine we can't change that so emotionality it need not be an anartha it can be just a part of our swabhava and we accept that but we don't try to repress that but we use that and move on now there is a problem with everything people who are emotional their emotional side is more active they can also get more easily emotionally wounded emotionally wounded they can get emotionally wounded very easily and they will feel those emotional wounds much more deeply than a person who is rational so if if somebody speaks something hurtful to us now everybody will feel hurt by that but somebody who is more rational they will be able to process it the world is like this, people are like that maybe they were in a bad mood or whatever they will be able to more or less intellectually process it and move on it will hurt but it won't be that much so whereas somebody who is more emotional for them to process it may not be that easy they may feel much more deeply hurt it's like with respect to shaving when we shave sometimes we cut when we cut the skin now I have seen different people when they cut their skin for some people a lot of blood comes out there is one devotee whenever he would cut it would appear as if his whole face gets filled with blood because of small wound and you say what happened some other people they have a big scar of a cut but no blood has come out scar of a cut so what happens is different people may bleed differently the wounds may pain differently so what applies at the physical level also applies at a mental level and so when there are emotional wounds different people may need different approaches for dealing with the emotional wounds some people are more rational even the emotional wounds of say somebody neglecting them, somebody betraying them, somebody abusing them, whatever those they will process more through the intellectual means for them may be understanding the philosophy reading something else that might help them more for somebody who is more emotional they may need more human empathy they may need somebody just sit down and hear and they pour out their heart they may need to be healed even in even in say psychotherapy there are different approaches there are some approaches which are say for example in cognitive behavioural therapy it's more of using the rational faculty to analyse what went wrong and to deal with it there are some other there is say for example acceptance commitment therapy another form of therapy within mindfulness which focusses more on don't try to analyse this accept it, this is the way the world is and accept it and move on and these different approaches work one approach works more for some kind of people another approach works for another kind of people so the point is that when we have to, sometimes we can go with our mind, sometimes we have to go towards Krishna without our mind but rather than thinking that there has to be one way this worked for me, this should also work for you say I read the Bhagavatam and suppose we lose a loved one or something and then just read the Chitra Kritu past time some people read and they feel very good about it ok, but somebody else may not, they may process grief in a different way so if some devotees for example when they have some loss or some emotional pain, sometimes they may feel the need to go to some healer, therapist and others may say just chant Hare Krishna study the Shastra, it will all be fine so here the important thing is not exactly what method works or what method is adopted but what method works what method works, because my mind is different from your mind and if I understand that then somebody has hurt me and my mind is also wounded by that but because I am not that emotional I can say that I can just put aside my mind and without my mind I can go towards Krishna without my mind means without caring much for emotions, I can neglect that part and move on but for somebody that is very emotional they just can't do that that emotional wound becomes such a such a blockage just can't move forward in their consciousness, they have to deal with that, so for them to go, they cannot go without their mind, they have to go with their mind that means they have to deal with that emotion they have to remove that blockage and then they move forward towards Krishna so when we are practising Bhakti, each one of us has to have this individual application of Bhakti where there are certain universal principles or even certain universal, there is a universal purpose that we are pursuing but we all need to have, customise our practise of Bhakti so that we can move beyond the mind to the heart that gradually our spiritual connection with Krishna can become activated and then can become the centre of our life so I will summarise I spoke on this theme of how we can move from the mind to the heart in our practise of Bhakti so basically I started by talking about how the mind and the soul, they can both combined be referred to the heart in the sense that heart is the seat of emotions and sometimes our emotions come from the mind, sometimes they come from the soul so talk about multiple levels of emotions within us desire is what outward flow of our consciousness toward the world, emotion is a response to the inward flow of consciousness from the world, so when we talk about these we want to, we all have at a surface level some emotions we need to go beyond them to the deeper level now then we discuss that at the surface level there can be two there can be Anarthas and there can be Swabhava, so the Anarthas we go without our mind, that means when the mind gets agitated with say lust or anger or greed or envy, we go without it, that's where the approach of neglect the mind and move on, do your bhakti that will work but when it's a Swabhava then we cannot neglect, then what will repression accomplish then we need to go along with that toward Krishna so those emotions related to Swabhava are deeper, now what is Swabhava what is Anartha, there can be sometimes shades of grey for that but first we need to broadly understand the black and white, then we can look at the grey, then one something within the grey, for that I look at the emotion aspect, so some people are more emotional than rational and what will be their spiritual journey, so we talk about these four categories no emotion no dedication, which is people who are non-spiritualist emotion but no dedication that is sentimentalist emotion and dedication are no emotion and dedication, so emotion and dedication emotional devotion, emotional but dedicated devotees, devotees and there are serious, and dedication no emotion, medication more rational but devoted now both can be dedicated but both will respond to life situations differently. Say, when somebody is emotionally wounded, the rational devotee will not sustain so much wounds or they will not hurt them so much and they might just process it intellectually and move on.

But those emotional, they will need to process it in a different way. They may need emotional healing till before their consciousness can move toward Krishna. So by understanding, by observing ourselves and understanding ourselves, we can customise our bhakti practises so that we ensure that our consciousness move towards Krishna and gradually our spiritual emotions become activated and they become the centre of our consciousness and our heart.

Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. So any questions or comments? Yes, please.

When you were distinguishing between surface desires and emotions, I understood the surface desires when the external stimuli acts like a callus for your desire. But when you were saying that the emotions are the inward flow, I didn't understand this. Okay, I will explain it once again.

What is the difference between emotions and desires in terms of inward and outward flow? So basically, our consciousness, when we experience something, within our consciousness, there are three broad aspects. We perceive something, then we process that thing and then we pursue something. So perceive, process and pursue.

Now, perception is what happens to the senses, that is when consciousness comes or rather stimuli flows outward into our consciousness. Stimuli are flowing into the consciousness from outside. That's when perception has happened.

Now, at the level of processing, that is where we experience emotion. Normally, you could use the word processing in intellectual terms like information processing or whatever, but there can be emotional processing also. But when we process, that is when we experience emotions.

So we could say the perception has flown in the stimuli. Okay, now to confuse this further, the word consciousness also we use it to refer to two different things. We refer to consciousness as a territory sometimes, guard your consciousness.

And consciousness, we also refer to it as the energy that flows from the territory. Energy that flows from the territory. Say for example, my consciousness is caught in that thing right now.

My consciousness is caught in, somebody's consciousness is caught in sports, somebody's consciousness is caught in movies or whatever. That means, so if you consider the example of this light source, the light source and the light, the bulb and the light. So consciousness can refer to the bulb and consciousness can refer to the light also.

Of course, the difference is that light only flows outwards, but consciousness also, there is inward flow also in it. Consciousness flows inward means, when we see something and the information comes inwards. Okay, why consciousness, what I am referring to is that when our consciousness flows outward, we perceive something.

It's like say there is a radar or some, there are some rays that go outwards and the rays hit something and they are reflected back. So our consciousness also refers, if I see something, there is a reflection backward and then it enters back into us. Isn't it? So if I see a gulab jamun, the consciousness is looking around everywhere.

I say, oh, that's nice. So it locks in on it and then you process it more. So you could say there is perception.

Let's forget about the consciousness flowing inward right now. There is no need to complicate that. But there is perceive and there is process.

So at the level of processing, we experience emotions. I like it. I don't like it.

That's terrible. That's interesting. That's delicious.

And then based on the emotion that we are experiencing, a certain desire arises. So desire is where the consciousness is impelling us to do some action. So in that sense, when the information about the stimuli flows inward into our consciousness and the result of that inward flow is emotion, whereas when the consciousness flows outward after we experience some emotion, that outward flow is the expression of a desire.

That is a desire. So I see a gulab jamun. Hey, that's nice.

That's the experience of emotion. I want to eat it. That's a desire.

So any other, any comment? And I'm open to comments also when I say it's not just questions. If something spoke to you, something didn't make sense to you, you can please speak. I'm trying to articulate this.

Sometimes people are traumatised by a life experience. And then a person who hasn't been traumatised can't understand why they are stuck in this way of responding to a situation. And they say, just get over it.

That happened in the past. Just get over it. So sometimes I think about the just get over it means strengthen your will.

And through your will, you can succeed in putting aside the impressions that have been formed. And that seems to be saying that you're more of a spiritual agent than a mechanism that is shaped by experience. But sometimes it seems like something's lacking.

Maybe the will can't overcome the mechanistic disturbance of the trauma. I don't know if I'm being clear. In my process of thinking about this, I thought if you look at the trauma and say it's determining how I behave, that's being in the body and sexual life.

But if you realise I'm a spiritual agent, so if I apply my agency, or I call for help, and the outcomes are to transcend mechanistic response. Beautiful. Yeah.

So some people that traumatised, they just don't seem to be able to get over it. It seems that their willpower doesn't move beyond the mechanical impact of the trauma. But if they see themselves as spiritual agents, then they will be able to move forward.

Yeah. One basic principle I'd say is that our past explains our emotions. But it doesn't excuse our actions.

Our past explains our emotions. And we need that explanation. Why do I feel so angry whenever I see this person? Maybe that person did nothing wrong to me, but that person reminded me of someone else who has wronged me terribly.

But if I get angry with this person, and I yell at them, or I become physically abusive, aggressive, then that is not excusable. So here again, that difference between our emotions. Can we change how we feel? That's difficult.

It may take a lot of time. But can we change how we act? Yes, we can. We don't necessarily, say for example, with respect to public speaking.

Some people may have a lot of stage fright. Now that feeling of fear, that feeling of insecurity, that feeling of panic, it may be impossible to get rid of it. But in spite of that feeling, some people can go and they can speak.

Maybe they will tend to forget, so they may have to have proper notes. Maybe they have to have an encouraging face in the audience when they start stammering or they start losing their cool. They may need some supports particularly.

So if we get too caught in our emotions, and think that my emotion has to be right for my action to be right, it will not work. And that is where what you see once you are a spiritual agent, that many times in today's world, people equate the mind and the soul. That means whenever people say, that was such a spiritual gathering or that was such a spiritual thing, it just made me feel so good.

So they often equate the mental with the spiritual. But if you understand the inner world, there is a difference between the mind and the soul, and the emotions are experienced by the mind, but beyond that is the soul. And the soul is different.

Because the soul is different, so I may have this emotion being experienced, but still I can decide and I can act differently. So we all in some way or the other are victimised by our past. Everybody has some terrible thing that happened to them.

But we don't have to become victims, we don't have to be victims. So that differentiation between the emotion that we are experiencing and the action that we choose, if that can be understood, and that can be done, then it's helpful to get beyond the past. And that's why one of the key things, I have a whole talk on how to get past our past.

So I talk about four things basically. Purpose, it's acronym P A S T. So purpose, association, spirituality and time. So basically to put something behind us, we have to put something ahead of us.

I need something worthwhile in my life. And that's why one of the best ways to overcome this whole complex of trauma and victimisation is take up some responsibility. I'm so wounded, I can't take up any responsibility.

No, that is the only way you will heal the wound. As soon as we have some purpose, and when they take up their purpose, then what happens is that starts helping them to put what is behind behind. And then they need also association of people who will reinforce their looking ahead, not looking behind.

That's why sometimes what happens is we say birds of a feather flock together. But then what happens, birds of a feather flock together and lock everyone outside. That way they just come together and they just say, Oh, this is bad, that is bad, that is bad.

And people come together and they have a pity party. Life is so terrible, people are so terrible that that is not helpful. So association helps us look forward.

And spirituality is where that helps us to understand that I am beyond my mind. My emotions are wounded, but I am a soul different from this. And also time is required.

If there is a wound, it will take time to heal. We generally say, don't lament. And for example, if somebody dies, don't lament.

That's what we say. But in the Mahabharata itself, of which the Bhagavad Gita is a part, and Prabhupada also says that in the Bhagavatam, after the whole war got over, there is a grieving period. And all the Pandavas and the Trasanthas grieved the loss of their loved ones.

So grieving is essential for healing. So time is also required to pass. But gradually it's possible to go beyond our past.

Purpose. And that purpose usually has to be, it has to be a voluntarily accepted responsibility. So I may feel, oh, my world has collapsed.

I don't want to do anything in my life. No. So if we have that purpose, then we can move on.

So the purpose has to be an objective that you… Yeah, definitely. The purpose is something… How would you describe that purpose? So what kind of purpose will help us? Yeah. That's why definitely either we value that purpose more than the wound from the past.

Or it could also be that sometimes the fear of the negative can also help us. That means… So I'm feeling first, I just feel wounded, I grieve. But after I grieve, what happens? After I lament, then I start becoming resentful.

Now if I am so miserable, what right does anyone else have to be happy? I become resentful of everyone who is happy. And this is often a major problem with communism. Maybe I'll talk about liberal and conservative in another question and answer.

But the point is that in communism, they professed their concern for the poor. All these capitalists, wealthy people, they are exploiting the poor. But what activated them more was not concern for the poor, but hatred for the wealthy.

So what happens is that sometimes when we keep festering in the negative, or we keep staying in the negative, then that negative becomes our defining identity. So we become resentful of people who are happy. And then not only resentful, we can become destructive.

Either I can destroy my own existence, what is the use of my life? Or I can destroy other people's existence. What right do they have to live? Sometimes envisioning that, we need to be terrified of how terrible we can become, if we stay on this course. And that can also join.

I can't continue this way. So I might be at this level and it's okay, I'm just lamenting. But if I meet somebody else, chronic complaining, hateful, I don't want to become like this.

And from here to there, I'll never become like this, but it's a journey. It's a slippery slope. So yes, if we can find something which we value, in a positive purpose, that's good.

But if we feel this is so terrible, that I just can't, I don't feel anything is worthwhile. But at least we can say that, no matter how bad things are, we never lose the power to make them worse. So they are bad over here, but if I stay on this path, they'll not only stay bad, they'll become worse.

So then that can also give us the hope. Okay, if I have the power to make them worse, then I also have the power to make them better. I'm not as powerless as I think.

So that's why we can say that, for coming towards God, there is fear of God and there is love for God. Love for God is a very good positive motive, but fear of God is also a useful motive for many people. So similarly, fear of what we may become, if we continue on that track, on the track of self-pity or negativity, that can be also a motive for change.

And also, the love for what we can become, what we can contribute, that's also a positive motive. Thank you. Yes.

You talked about the love gems. Will there be any? There can be many in our imagination. I have a second one.

This may be because I was with my relatives this past weekend, but it seems like this idea of emotion and dedication is similar to the classic Christian battle of faith and works to some extent. Okay. Can you see that? Yes.

Faith without works is of no use, they say. Some people say that, yes. I don't think it's in the Bible, but not everybody feels that way.

And I'm just wondering, because I have a lot of born-again Christians in my family, and sometimes devotees say, I've never tried to talk to a born-again Christian. But not in terms of trying to get them to understand Krishna consciousness, but to try to help them to see the value of dedication within their own faith. I was curious as to how you might approach that.

Okay. Yeah. So, somebody is a born-again Christian, often the dynamic of emotion, dedication, which I talked about, is similar to faith and works.

So how do we help them to appreciate the idea of dedication in their faith? Yes. See, broadly, any relationship has two parts to it. That what the other person is doing for us and what we are doing for the other person.

Christianity has historically focused on what Jesus has done for us. Jesus died to save you. So often the stress in Christianity is on how much God loves us.

But because they use, because in their own way of interpreting things, they say that you are washed off of all your sins by Jesus saving grace, Jesus' crucifixion. So many Christians feel that there is nothing that we need to do, we are already saved. Or at least there is, of course, an understanding we have to live morally, but that emphasis on how we are to love God or what we need to do to express our love to God, that is inadequately stressed.

I would say in our tradition, we often go towards the other extreme. We don't talk much about how much Krishna loves us. We focus more on how we are to love Krishna and how we are to follow the process of sadhana for that.

Now they often consider that sadhana is like man trying to approach God. And they say that is impossible. It's only when God approaches us then we can connect with Him.

So they consider any effortful endeavour to try to connect with God that as almost arrogant, presumptuous and antithetical to the principle of grace. So that's why the idea that just as Jesus carried a cross, we all are meant to carry a cross. We all also have our crosses to carry and we need to carry them as gracefully as He carried them.

That has been significantly de-emphasised. Now there are some Christians also and of course there are some critics of Christianity who say that within Jesus' own teachings, His stress has always been on living a moral, responsible, devoted life. But when He was killed, that was like a shattering event which could have ended their faith.

And then the apostles based on various events, they reinterpreted that to mean that Jesus died for us. And in this reinterpretation, Paul was one of the primary persons. Paul was blinded on the way to Damascus and then he got his eyes back.

So he shifted, or at least that's one way of looking at it, that Paul shifted the focus of Christianity from living like Jesus to accepting Jesus as a saviour who died for us. And because of that, the emphasis on living like Jesus has been significantly lost. But we can say that, this is from our perspective to understand where they are.

So if you look at the Bible itself, what Bible in terms of Gospels, the Bible is a big book and most of it is, a large part of the Bible as it is compiled today is the epistles of Paul to various people. But if you look at the Gospels themselves, which describe how Jesus lived, what He taught, so He's not talking anything about, I have come to save you. Not talking in that mode at all.

And you have faith in me. You also have to live morally. After Mary Magdalene is saved, she says that you have to sin no more.

So there's definitely the emphasis on living a moral God-centred life. And we could say that is significantly similar to the principles of Sadhana Bhakti. It's not exactly, it may not have exactly prescribed a Sadhana.

But at least Sattva-Guni living based on some moral principles, that's definitely there. And Jesus would also fast and He would pray and for 40 days, that whole period when He was tempted by Satan in various ways. Now you could very well say that's Sadhana.

That's Sadhana. He's fasting, He's praying, He's meditating, He's resisting temptation. So that's disciplined spiritual practise.

So it's not just works in the mundane sense of works. It is actually a striving to go closer to God. So that is also compatible with their teachings.

Provided we don't make that Jesus having died for us as the sole point of Christianity. Which unfortunately has become for many people. And maybe Calvinism was the most extreme example of that.

There was one version of Protestantism which said that who is going to be saved is already destined. And predestination was made a central theme. And it was afterwards used very conveniently that all those who accept Calvinism, they are destined to be saved.

And those who don't accept it, they are lost. So really, Calvinism is wonderful. So I think these are few thoughts.

Thank you. How do I keep the answers going if I am eating? I'll take later. The biggest plate for me.

Oh really? Hey, that's beautiful. And this is a smile? That's cute. I wanted to ask.

The presentation looked like a technical presentation of Ananta Navratri kind of presentation. So we see some kind of devotees just with their faith and dedication to what they have received from their spiritual master. They are kind of not caring much.

They are just super focused and they kind of keep going. But on the other hand, personally I see, okay, if you are not that sincere or that dedicated, then you have to take so much support of introspection and speaking to people and taking help. And somehow or other, kind of push through the phase.

So how much introspection is like kind of alternate for lacking some dedication? Because with introspection I can understand and try to become dedicated. But how much it is like sustainable or right? Okay, good question. Some people just by their faith in Guru and Krishna just move on and they deal with whatever issues life sends their way.

But some of us may need to do a lot of introspection and to somehow come to a workable understanding and move on. So how much introspection is valid and how much to do? Yeah, it's a tough question. I know one senior, she is a Prabhupada disciple, very devoted, very dedicated.

He said, I have three cupboards filled with journals that I have written. And I have written in my will that when I die, along with my body, all these journals should also be burned. So I asked why? So he says, there is a lot of anger in the journals.

So I process that anger by writing about it. But the people I have written about, I don't want them to read it. So then, so he spends a lot of time, I mean a good amount of time journaling.

And he says, I have been doing it for many many years. So then I asked him, is there any Shastric precedent of our Acharyas doing any journaling? So I said, there is Prabhupada's journal in the sense that what he wrote on Jaladutta when he was travelling. But that's more like a, it's more like a report or a record rather than a journal.

It's not his emotion so much. It's more a report of events. So his point was that we live in an age which is much more disturbed than in the past.

One of the characteristics of Kalyuga is upadrutaha. Upadrutaha. Disturbed.

In fact, we say the word ayah comes over that. Ayah is certain. So even if the other things are mandabhagya, what is the verse? Prayan alpayusamya kalavasmin yugejana mandasumandamatyo mandabhagyaya upadrutaha.

So even if the other things are not there, even if somebody is not unfortunate, even if somebody is not less intelligent, somebody is not misdirected, they are certainly disturbed. That is the idea. So being disturbed, being mentally agitated, that is largely a very strong characteristic of Kalyuga.

And to some extent in the last maybe 50 years or last 20-30 years also, see many of the structures that give stability to people's lives have become disrupted. Religion was one structure. Family was one structure.

Maybe a predicted life chart in terms of job or career. Most people would live in their small villages or their towns. They would live there and they would die there.

So you could say, oh, there is no excitement in their lives. Okay, maybe that is one way of looking, but there is much more structure, there is peace. Now, many of the structures that bring stability to our lives, they have been disrupted.

And therefore, we are much more agitated. So whatever we need to do, we need to do. And is it that those devotees who have simple faith in Krishna and Guru, they are necessarily more advanced or their life is simpler? Yeah, we can say that life is simpler.

And they can be also inspiration for us about the simplicity and the potency of bhakti. But I think those who do introspection, they are also often able to present bhakti in a more relatable way to others. So this can also become an approach to connect with people.

So for most people who are having some trouble, just chant Hare Krishna and be happy. That is not going to help them. And those who say this will simply annihilate others.

So again, I would say that with our mind or without our mind. So some people, these things don't matter for them. And if that's the way they can best practise, that's wonderful.

If that's not the way they can practise, then they need to be also provided a way. So basically you could say the general principle is, we all need to find a way of practising bhakti that works for our mind and our heart. Anarthas and Svabhava, as you said, there seems to be in a practical thing, there seems to be a lot of grey.

When we start following Svabhava, sometimes the Anarthas can comfortably come in also. So sincerity is required to know the difference, how much to engage with Svabhava. What is the best way to judge that? So if we are going to Svabhava also, Anarthas can come in.

Yeah, that's easily possible. But I wouldn't put it that simply. Like some people say that, if I can sing nicely, I can speak nicely.

But if I do that, I'll become proud. But that is an oversimplified understanding of thinking, of the situation. Because to say that I will become proud, it presumes that I am not proud right now.

Isn't it? And to say that I will become proud can also be a proud statement. Because I am saying I am not proud right now. So what is quite likely is that, it's not that I don't have pride, but I don't have anything to be proud about right now.

Isn't it? So, but that doesn't mean, it's like, if I am fasting because it's Ekadashi, I am renounced. But if I am fasting because I have no food to eat, that's not renunciation. Isn't it? So, just because I have nothing to be proud of, and so I am not proud.

That doesn't necessarily mean I am humble. That doesn't mean I have to have something to be proud of and not be proud. It's not like that.

The point is that, it's not necessary that acting according to our Swabhava alone will create the Anartha. We could say that acting according to our Swabhava may create a situation which makes the Anartha's manifesting easier. But then that's the time when I select.

Okay, we might go in that direction, but is it that Anartha, is it that acting according to Swabhava caused it? No, it is already there. Acting according to Swabhava manifested it. And then how do I deal with it? So, it's often that after we express, after we do what we are meant to do, that's only actually we get to choose something higher.

So, I asked once Radhanath Maharaj's question that, the child in the womb, he prays very sincerely to the Lord. He says, my dear Lord, this world is such an illusory place. I don't want to go there.

Of course, I will forget you. And then he goes out and he forgets. So, is the Lord not answering the prayer? What's happening? So, Maharaj said, no, the Lord always answers our prayers.

But the point is, devotion practised under duress, under distress, that is not fully matured devotion. Because you are practising the devotion because of the distress. So, then the Lord gives us the opportunity that when there is no distress, are you ready to practise devotion? So, if, okay, let's give another example.

So, if a boy wants to marry a girl, he says, please marry me. Why? Because nobody else wants to marry me. And now, that's not a very attractive proposal for the girl, for the girl's perspective.

So, that means that, okay, you are my last option, nothing else is working. So, at least you become my last option. So, God is ready to become our last option also.

But that doesn't really show our devotion so much. It's, it's when we have other options, but we choose God. That is when our serious devotion is shown.

So, then we act according to our Swabhava and we become something in the world. And then we reject the world for Krishna. That is when our seriousness is shown.

Now, sometimes somebody might not become someone in the world also after doing the Swabhava, that's fine. But I don't think it's the acting according to Swabhava that causes the Anartha. It might cause the opportunity for the Anartha to manifest.

Okay? Yes, go on. Yeah. Yeah.

So, isn't our, isn't our purpose to actually become emotional also, not just dedicated, filled with emotions for Krishna? Yes. But at the same time, even if somebody is the uttama, the uttama also comes down to the level of madhyama for functioning in the world. If somebody is filled with ecstasy for Krishna, then they cannot really see how this person is not Krishna conscious.

They will see everybody as devotees only. So, they have to come down to the level of madhyama. So, even those who are, like Prabhupada was, we saw those emotions like that at times.

Sometimes he went into trances. But not, most of the time he was with us, very deeply Krishna conscious. But he was not always lost in emotions.

So, if you are to function in the world, then some amount of regulation of the emotions is required. And that is a, my understanding at least is that the activation of the emotions of the soul, it's different from the activation of emotions at the level of the mind. So, like even if you see some devotees, some disciples of Prabhupada was sannyasis, gurus, he is very dedicated now.

But you see they have their own natures. Some of them are really very analytical, sharp, and they are dedicated, but they don't show so much emotions. And some others show a lot of emotions.

Now, is it that one is more advanced than the other? Advanced, I don't know. So, how much the soul's emotions will be activated while we are in this body? I think that is variable. For some people, it might become very much activated.

For some people, it might not become that much activated. Or it could be that that is activated, but they chose not to express that. We don't know.

Yes, we want to become emotional also in our relationship with Krishna. We want to have emotions, not become emotional. Have emotions in our relationship with Krishna.

But that is not the only parameter of spiritual advancement. In the Bhakthar Samhita, Sindhu, there is the Ashtasatmika vikara described. Hair standing on end, tears coming out.

But after that, Rupa Goswami describes a list of symptoms of pure devotees, which are, these are non-imitable. Avyartha Kaalathon. Just don't waste any time at all.

Nama Gane Sadaaruchi. That constantly wanting to glorify the holy names of Krishna. Samutkanta, eagerness to hear about Krishna.

So, Virakti, detachment from the world. So those, the tears, I think I heard this is attributed to Bhakthar Samhita, I have not seen the quote. Bhakthar Samhita says, what is the price of tears? He said, it is Charana.

Why 25 paise? That is the price of getting some onions. Put some onions near your eyes, tears will come. Very advanced in deceiving, in pretending.

Yeah. Yes, Lu. I was very intrigued when you spoke about sometimes we hide something, we care about it so much, we hide it so carefully, then we can't find it.

Yeah. And it made me happy because I have been experiencing sometimes where is my love for Krishna? You know, I have been practising so many years, but I can't connect with that. Of course, we love, you know.

But it is a very confusing example. Because I have done that. Many times I say, okay, I really don't want to lose this.

I am going to put it, I am going to hide it really well. And then when I want to get it, where did I put that? And I am lost. I can really relate to that.

Yeah. Yeah, it is true. Yeah, it is not lost because it is, because it is not there, but it is deep inside.

Yeah, it is true. We also need sometimes when, we also need sometimes when we are actually expressing it directly or connecting with Krishna. So, while hearing about other things like Janmashtami, other festival times, we need to hear about Krishna directly also.

That part is also nourished. Yeah. Thank you.

Yes. Thank you. That is a good reflection.

Yeah. Coming over the traumatic situation in the past. So, first one is the purpose.

And so, someone close to me is going through that process. It is up to him or her to find their purpose. So, is there something like as a friend or someone who really cares about them, we can do for them an association or something practical we can do for them, be able to find that purpose or that association that we can do or just the prayers.

Yeah. If somebody is going through trauma and is stuck over there, can we help them? How can we help them find a purpose? Yeah. Generally, one of the best ways I have found is small simple steps.

I call it SSS. Just do something small. To find out a purpose in life can be very difficult.

What do I want to do with my life? But okay, I am in this situation. See, any situation in our life, if we are just a little reflective, we can think about three things that I am doing which are making things worse. And they are stoppable if I try.

Some things are making things worse. Some habits are very difficult to give up. Okay.

Maybe three things which I can do which can make things better. And again, very simple things. So, like some people fall sick and then they become so rude and disagreeable and irritated and irritating that their caregiver, they are sick and their caregivers become sick of them.

Isn't it? So, I can just say, I will be polite with people. And I can't be always polite. I get irritated.

And okay, for the next one hour, I will not snap at anyone. Can I do that? Yeah, I think for one hour I can do that. And then you don't see a frown on the people around you.

You see them smiling. You feel a little better. Then take one more step.

So, often, it is, everybody has a conscience. Their conscience is not always right. But they have to begin with their conscience.

That means, okay, what is a good thing which I can do in this situation? Sometimes you have to just let them speak, let them, you know, you just throw. What is that principle? Okay, sometimes not helping people is the best way of helping them. That means, say, a child is trying to learn to walk.

And a child is falling. The mother immediately comes and catches, okay, I will hold you and walk always. Sometimes the mother has to let the child fall and the child rises again.

So, similarly, when somebody comes up with a problem. Instead of, oh, my life is so terrible, this is so bad, this is so bad, okay. Then turn the question around and ask them only.

What do you think you can do about this? I can't do anything. Oh, but if someone else were in the situation, what would you tell them to do? Basically, get them to think. And sometimes people say, I can't do anything.

But if you ask them at the right time, instead of telling them, oh, stop doing this, what can you do about this? And see, the super soul ultimately is a giver of wisdom. But somehow, we trust the super soul who is in our hearts more than the super soul in someone else's heart. That means, if the same idea comes from someone else, hey, it's your idea, maybe I can't do it.

Same idea comes from within me. Hey, it's my idea, I'll do it. So, sometimes turning it around and just asking them, what do you think you could do? I said, further down the question around.

And if somebody else were in the situation, what would you tell them? What would you suggest to them? So, get them thinking. Just small steps. Sometimes we need to push people also.

We have to push them. You know, come on. Somebody just wants to stay stuck at their homes.

Lost in loneliness, lost in self-pity. Come on, let's go out. No, no, no, come on.

So, we might see what we can do. But the principle is small, simple steps. Which either they want to take or we get them to take.

And gradually, things will improve. One way it can help is also if we can get them to do something for someone else. That means, say, somebody is starving and you just go and give them some food.

And they smile and they thank. Sometimes what happens when terrible things happen in our life, we start feeling, is anything worthwhile? There are many losses we can have in our life. But the most disempowering loss is the loss of meaning and value.

We start feeling life itself has no meaning. Life has no value. Nothing will make any difference.

Then, if they can see that things can, yeah, this person was starving, I give them some food. Do something for someone. And that reaffirms that my existence has some value.

I can do something of value. And that can trigger that positive reaction. Positive transformation for them.

Okay. You can answer, yeah. Can I just ask you a question? As a mother, sometimes I have to let the child fall and then get up.

So, personally, while dealing with ourselves, sometimes we see or we commit some mistakes. And we kind of then realise, oh, this is a mistake. And we rectify it.

So, should we see this as un-affirmability or should we see this as lack of sincerity? Or we should see, oh, Krishna has somehow helped me, kind of see this as a mistake and is helping me to overcome. It looks like, is it a combination of all? How do we process this? Because there is guilt also. If it is not processed properly, then either it is guilt or it is like, it is okay.

It is not a problem. I can keep doing something. Yeah.

Yeah, it is a tough question. So, basically, if we have committed some mistake, then is it just a part of the learning curve? Or is it that we made a mistake and we should feel guilty and should overcome it? Or is it that Krishna intervened and we would have done worse but Krishna has helped us to recover? So, how do we see our own lapses? At least my understanding of this is, the most important thing in Bhakti is to stay encouraged. Whether we do, no matter how many mistakes we have committed, if we are encouraged, then there is some chance of improving.

If we are feeling so discouraged, that we just lose hope, then there is no chance of changing. So, then, if I committed a mistake and I overcame it, then, which is the most encouraging interpretation of that? We can interpret in different way. Actually, I didn't have done it last time also.

I was stupid. So, instead of feeling satisfied that I did the right thing now, I feel dissatisfied that why did I do the wrong at previous time. Well, if that inspires us to become more cautious, that's good.

But if that makes us feel, start loathing ourselves for whatever, then that's unhealthy. So, basically, look at the result of any choice. And if thinking that, oh, Krishna has helped me, encourages me, then that's good.

Sometimes it also happens that I am not able to change something. Then, what do I do? Then, some anarthas for some people, we just take a very long time to change. We need to work on it.

But whenever we are working on anything also, we need some sense of progress and success. But some anarthas are like immobile mountains. That thing seems to be moving.

What did you say? Can you tell I am laughing a little too hard? Can you tell her? I am laughing a little too hard. Yeah. I think we all are.

So, some anarthas seem like an immovable mountain. Then, maybe we have to stop using that anartha as the parameter for our spiritual advancement. And this… Attractive statement.

That sounds attractive statement, yeah. So, now for example, anger. Now, we may say that as we practise bhakti, our anarthas go down, so anger also goes down.

But some people, their anger just stays as it is. Now, if they rate their spiritual advancement based on their capacity to control anger, now, they may just feel I am stagnating. But if they are growing in other aspects of their life, they are becoming more and more committed, they are doing more and more services, and that means, okay, this particular part, it may take a lot of time for me to get over this.

So, I want to get over this, but if I measure my spiritual advancement solely based on that, then I will be discouraged. So, we need to be encouraged enough, okay, this battle I am not able to win. I am fighting other battles, I can win those battles, let me win those battles.

So, maybe as we grow in our spiritual life, then that anartha would be more winnable for us. We would be in a more winnable situation. So, we have to basically adopt an attitude toward a situation that is encouraging.

Not encouraging in the sense of pampering that everything is alright, nothing is wrong, but encouraging in the sense that it gives us enough impetus to try to make a change. So, guilt in that sense is again phalena parichayate, where the guilt works. So, I have a whole class on this, but basically you could say that the soul is here, the wrongdoing is here, Krishna is here.

So, now the guilt should come here, stop us from doing the wrongdoing. But sometimes guilt comes here. That means, I am so fallen, how can I practise bhakti? Or even after practising bhakti, I am staying so fallen, so what is the use of practising bhakti? Both ways.

So, if the guilt is coming over here between me and Krishna, then we can say even that guilt is actually pseudo guilt. It is maya coming in the form of a guilt. So, that is unhealthy.

Let me put it aside and move on. So, the class I have, any other questions are there? Or I will just elaborate with this and we will end it. Any other questions or comments? Okay, so I will just elaborate this.

I have the classes, the four categories of people. Those people who have weak conscience and weak will power. They are terrible and they don't even notice they are terrible.

They are terrible and they are comfort happily terrible. Ignorance is bliss. Ignorance is bliss, but not for those who are not ignorant.

Second is, we have weak conscience, weak will power. Strong conscience, weak will power. These are the people who are tormented.

They are tormented. Why did I do that? Then you can have strong will power and weak conscience. They are the people who are dangerous.

Dangerous. Because they have strong will power, they can do a lot. But because their conscience is weak, if they get misled, then they can do horrible things and they will not feel bad also about it.

So, people who are like dictators, tyrants, say somebody like Hitler, he had strong will power to raise, to galvanise the whole country and to envision the whole world. But completely heartless, weak conscience, that's dangerous. And then there is strong conscience and strong will power.

That is the stage of purified state. So, when we are in this stage, when we are in the stage of strong conscience and weak will power, there are two ways to get out of it. To get out of the torment.

One is by strengthening our will power and the other is by weakening our conscience. So, now… See, it's always easier to make people stupider than smarter. Same applies to us also.

So, weakening our conscience is usually easier. And that is not recommended. That's why now we have moral relativism, which is quite prominent.

Many people say, I don't need to change myself. This is the way I am and I want to stay the way I am. And if you think this is wrong, that's your problem, not my problem.

So, we don't want moral relativism. But the point is, when we are in that torment, we want to strengthen our will power, but that will take time. So, if we have a strong conscience, then sometimes we don't want to weaken the conscience, but we need to, to some extent, numb the conscience.

Numb means, say, if I have a disease and I have pain, the solution is that I take the curative medicine, cure the disease and then I will come free from the pain and become free from the disease, both. So, that's like moving to the healthy state. So, I strengthen my will power and then I overcome that.

But when this pain is very strong, sorry, when the disease is very long, very deep rooted, then sometimes the curative medicine may not work immediately. Then a painkiller is required. So, that means, we need to be taking the medicine, we need to be transforming ourselves, working to transform ourselves.

But while we are working to transform ourselves, we also need to accept ourselves. So, accepting ourselves is like a painkiller. Accepting ourselves should not close the door to self-transformation.

So, self-acceptance is, if somebody is only self-accepting, oh, the way you are, you are perfect. Well, that is, if somebody says that, that's a very narcissistic statement. Nobody is perfect.

Who can say they are perfect? But, so that is like taking only a painkiller and not even thinking I need a medicine. So, that is like completely weakening our conscience so that we will stay comfortable where we are. But while we are there and we are working to strengthen our willpower, we need to live at that time.

So, how do we live? So, we need to, to some extent, numb our conscience or numb the pain or make the pain of coming from the conscience tolerable. That is where the self-acceptance comes into picture. So, self-acceptance is more like a painkiller, you could say.

Self-acceptance is a painkiller. Self-transformation is the curative medicine. So, you want both.

Make sense? I struggle forever about making the distinction between self-acceptance and complacency. I feel like it could tend to be a slip in the slope. Okay.

What is the… It's a constant connection to that. In the archaryas or in the traditional texts, we don't get these kind of details. But I think, but I feel like the more Kalivas are progressing and devotees are trying to, but even in Prabhupada's disciple generation, their discussion, their classes, it's all like seems to be like things are very simple.

But as we start practising, it seems like there are so many details. So, I don't know if in that generation, on a personal basis, they dealt with all these details. But when I see the generation where I'm hearing from, there seems to be a lot of details in that practise, while going through anathema.

It is because the movement is maturing and we are seeing more and more things. Our Kaliva is posing more and more challenges. The people are becoming like weak in their willpower.

And that's what is… So, how do we see this? They are not same question, they are very different. But I appreciate what you are saying. Let me answer the question first.

So, how do we differentiate between self-acceptance and complacency? Self-acceptance can easily become a slippery slope toward complacency. So, how do we avoid that? While we are accepting ourselves, we don't become complacent. Is that the question? Yes.

Okay. So, basically, there should always be something we are working on to change ourselves. So, I'm talking about self-acceptance.

It's not that everything about me is alright. There are things which need to be fixed. What is that? There is a famous book called I am okay, you are okay.

So, Prabhupada said that's not right. No, no, Prabhupada said what is it? I am okay, you are not okay. Because we are practising bhakti or not.

But we could put it another way. We are all sadhakas. I am not okay, you are not okay.

I am not okay, you are not okay. And that's okay. So, now okay in the sense that we all can only fight, we can't fight infinite battles.

We have to choose our battles. So, if we have chosen a particular battle and we are fighting it diligently, then it's not complacency. But if we just don't need to fight any battle at all.

Say for example, some Christians say that okay, Jesus has saved me. I don't need to do any moral striving at all. Then that is definitely a problem.

So, it will become complacency if we are not fighting any battle. But we may choose our battles. In fact, I write this Gita Devi articles everyday.

So, one article I am just writing in the next few days is when we limit our challenges, we can challenge our limits. When we limit our challenges. I cannot fight these 10 battles, I can't fight.

But I have to fight one battle. In this, I am limited this much. I can push this limit.

So, when we limit our challenges, we can challenge our limits. But if we are limiting our challenges and not challenging any limit, that's when we are becoming complacent. But if we are not limiting our challenges also, then it's basically, we are overestimating our capacities.

And then soon we will come down with a rude shock. And then we become so discouraged that we will go to the other extreme of not again challenging any limits at all. Just pass it.

Somebody gave me a really, he reminded me of an analogy that he gave me. Somebody's whole mouth is bad, all his teeth are bad. You go to the dentist and you have him extract, punk out every one, all in one visit.

Oh God. All the time. No, you extract a few at a time.

Not every, a few visits. You spread it out. Yeah, it's a very good example.

Some devotee preachers are like that. I want to cure you of all your dental problems in one visit. And I'll do it without anaesthesia.

One punch. Okay. Okay.

So is it that Kalyuga is getting more degraded or is it that we are becoming more introspective and all this is coming up? One thing is that our Acharya's writings, we have only a very limited corpus available to us. And in the past, most transmission of spiritual knowledge for the purpose of practise was done through the oral tradition. The written tradition, books were not easy to write, not to replicate, before the printing press came up.

So there, books were written by scholars for scholars. So, if you see Vishwanath Chakratapur's commentary, for example, there is very little practical instruction. Like Prabhupada says, give up sense gratification, very little of that you'll find in his books.

Because he's not writing for general people. There are local sadhus, who would in each village or each town, they would just speak those practical instructions. The written tradition was primarily for scholars.

For scholars by scholars. So that's why the practical application, that is not there. That is not there in the books.

Now Prabhupada integrated some amount of practical application in his books. But we cannot say that that alone is exhaustive. So a lot of practical things, if you pass in the oral tradition, they are not available to us now.

But we can see that in our lives. The same point, you could put it another way, we do emphasise a lot on reading books. But if you look at our own spiritual lives, we learn a lot more by hearing than by reading.

Some devotees may be very scholarly and they read and they relish. But most of us learn a lot more by hearing than by reading. And this is not to de-emphasise the importance of reading books, but it's just to express a lived reality for us.

That's because you cannot change the tradition. Oral tradition is what is, you could say more of a living tradition. And it's important that we discuss and we learn and we share.

And every age has its characteristics. So if you see in the later part of Chetan Charita Amrit, there are lot of verses which say about how a devotee is a Kavi, a devotee is a poet. And it's praised how Rupa Goswami has composed such beautiful poetry.

So now, was Prabhupada a poet? You could say, yeah, he was. He wrote Gitargaan, he wrote Bhagwat. What is that? He wrote his other, Markane Bhagwat and few others like that.

But Prabhupada is not a poet as extensive as say, Narottam Das Thakur or Bhaktivinod Thakur. We don't see many bhajans written by Bhaktivinod Thakur. So the point here is that, at that time in Bengal, Kavya and Natya were very prominent.

And that's why our Acharyas used those existing cultural forms to present Bhakti. And they demonstrated how devotees are also expert in this. Natya is drama or play.

Drama, yeah. Drama, yeah. And Kavya is Bhakti.

Bhakti wisdom. They write our poetry or how many. Do devotees have to write poetry? Yes, they can write for self-expression.

But is poetry going to be a major means for outreach in today's world? Not necessarily. So, the adaptation of Bhakti to, of Bhakti outreach or Bhakti application to existing cultural forms that is integral to our tradition. Like if you see, now all these are more positive examples, not negative examples.

But I wouldn't call it negative. Introspection, is it negative? Not necessarily. You see, have you heard of the Chitra Kavitvani? Chitra Kavitvani is, Chitra is pictures, Kavita is poetry, Vani is sound.

These are artistic forms of poetry, which Rupa Goswami has composed. For example, there is one verse, which is just filled with two letters, instead of Govardhan Nila. Two syllables.

Now, two syllables for a whole verse, that's one verse, two syllables. Neenum Nanonam, Noonam Nanun, Nonanununi, Nanum Nananano, Noonum Nenun, Nananonane. It's just Na and its variants.

So, I'm describing how Brahma with tear filled eyes is offering prayers to Krishna, after he has been exposed. Sorry? Sounds like a different language. It's a different language.

It's Chinese. Baby. I was at one devotee's house, and we memorised this verse.

Then that Mataji told me, now whenever I don't want to talk with my husband, I'll recite this verse. So now, the point I'm making is, for him to write that kind of verse, it must have required hours and hours, days and weeks. It's not that it just came spontaneously.

But that kind of Chitra Kavita Vani was prevalent over there. It's a method of cultural expression to connect with the and reward. At that time there was a book, forget the name of the book, it's not a very book like 25 pages or something, you read it front to back, it is Ramayan.

If you read it back to front, it is Mahabharata. So it's a palindrome, but it's not one word, it's a book length palindrome. So, now, it requires effort to write.

Sanskrit was so refined, and Sanskrit artistry was so evolved, our Acharya was also participating in that. But it's not that we have to do that. We can adapt, right? In principle we can adapt.

That whatever are the existing cultural forms of thinking, of expressing, of analysing, for Acharya, we are just constructing those cultural forms. So, thank you very much.