Does Krishna consciousness while removing our conditionings create its own set of conditionings that obstruct wisdom?
Do Spiritual Practices Create Limiting Conditionings?
Question: We practice Krishna consciousness to overcome our conditionings, but I’ve observed that my very bhakti practices are creating a new set of conditionings that obstruct deeper wisdom and realization. While it’s sometimes said this is desirable, I find this new conditioning similarly narrows my vision and prevents proper spiritual insight.
Answer: This is a profound and important question. I will address it in three parts:
- Is it possible for spiritual practices to create new, limiting conditionings?
- Does gaining wisdom require us to be free from all identifications or limitations?
- How can we progress towards pure perception?
1. The Possibility of Limiting Spiritual Conditionings
Yes, it is definitely possible for our spiritual practices to create a fresh set of conditionings that inadvertently limit our wisdom. The intrinsic core practices of bhakti are spiritual, but they manifest in the material world through specific mediums. This means we might adopt particular clothing, learn a specific language, or engage in practices that identify us with a particular group.
For functional purposes, such identification can be essential. For example, Srila Prabhupada emphasized that Krishna consciousness is not Hinduism but a science of spiritual life. Yet, within global religious demographics, Krishna consciousness is often categorized more within Hinduism than, say, Islam or Christianity. Similarly, for practical purposes, we acquire certain identifications—as a devotee belonging to a specific institution, temple, or as a disciple of a particular guru.
Such identification, however, can indeed narrow our mentality. This danger is real. It can lead to “guru-groupism,” destructive competition between different temples or centers of the same institution, or conflict among different sects within the same religion, or even between different religions. Thus, if we identify too strongly with a particular religious aspect, to the extent that it limits our vision, it can lead to a new form of conditioning. This is why we regrettably observe conflicts among religions that are purportedly meant to bring peace to the world.
If our identification with a specific Krishna conscious culture, or its geographical and historical context, becomes excessively strong, it can foster sectarianism. This danger is absolutely possible, and we must be aware of it. Bhakti itself teaches us that if our strong identification with any particularity in this world obstructs our spiritual search, it becomes a problem.
2. The Nature of Wisdom and Identification
Having acknowledged this danger, let’s consider whether it’s possible or necessary to become free from all identification to attain enlightenment and higher levels of wisdom and realization. Not exactly.
Firstly, we are always limited beings; our perspective will always be finite. We can use the metaphor of mountain climbing: the bottom of the mountain represents material consciousness, and the peak signifies ultimate spiritual realization where we encounter the Supreme Spiritual Reality. Different spiritual traditions offer different paths up the mountain. Bhaktivinoda Thakura used this metaphor to illustrate the spiritual search.
Once we reach the top of the mountain, we will have a vast, unobstructed view in all directions. However, to get to the top, we must commit ourselves to one path. Any kind of commitment involves a narrowing of focus. When we enter a committed relationship, for instance, we narrow our vision in the sense that we prioritize that person over others. Our choices are significantly influenced by considerations for that person. We could call this a “narrowing of vision” or a “deepening of connection.” It is, in fact, both.
Similarly, when we commit to a spiritual path, it is a narrowing of our vision because we are now focused on the peak of the mountain from a specific pathway. We must follow that path to reach the top. The problem isn’t the commitment itself, but rather the tendency of some people to become obsessed with arguing that their path is supreme without actually climbing it. They remain at the bottom, endlessly proclaiming that other paths are wrong, or even actively trying to prevent others from climbing by their chosen routes. This becomes their life’s mission.
So, committing to a path doesn’t inherently narrow us. What narrows us is not progressing up that path, but staying stuck at a particular point on it. If we want to ascend, we must commit to a path. As we climb, our immediate vision will be shaped by our chosen route. We won’t see everything that someone on a different path sees. Nevertheless, as we ascend, our vision of the broader reality gradually expands, leading us to higher levels of consciousness.
The Bhagavad-gita’s wisdom tradition itself contains safeguards against narrow-mindedness, through its description of the modes of nature: ignorance, passion, and goodness. The Srimad Bhagavatam also states that even dharma and bhakti can be practiced within these modes. We can roughly correlate them thus:
- Ignorance: Correlates with close-mindedness (a sectarian mentality: “My path is the only path”).
- Passion: Can involve a degree of open-mindedness, as one seeks to learn in order to gain control, even if self-centered.
- Goodness: Leads to broad-mindedness, where one accepts the reality of one’s finiteness and the limits of one’s control, finding peace with that reality.
In the mode of ignorance, we fear our finiteness and attempt to reduce reality to fit our limited perspective. In the mode of passion, we are aware of our finiteness but strive to bring reality under our control, expanding our power and constructing a worldview that fits reality into it. In the mode of goodness, we transcend this struggle by acknowledging that we cannot fully comprehend all of reality, yet we can understand enough to direct our lives towards the ultimate reality.
3. Progressing Towards Pure Perception
In Bhagavad-gita 10.8, Krishna states that those who understand Him in truth become wholeheartedly devoted to Him. And 10.9 adds that they continue to enlighten each other about Him. This acknowledges that enlightenment is a process, not a static destination. The enlightened continuously enlighten themselves. This is a state where we don’t transcend our finiteness, but rather use it to wholeheartedly connect with the infinite. Our awareness of the infinite steadily increases because we are at peace with our own finiteness and the infinite’s infiniteness. We remain in a continuous state of learning and relishing, free from insecurity or the urge to artificially expand our finite self or diminish the infinite.
This brings us to the nature of consciousness itself. There’s an idea of “pure consciousness,” but it’s a high abstraction. When I look at my computer, I am the subject of consciousness, the computer is the object, and there’s a stream of consciousness in between. Some understandings of pure consciousness propose a state where there is no subject, no object—only the stream remains. While this might seem attractive as it appears to eliminate sectarianism and relativity of perception, it can lead to homogenization rather than harmonization, ultimately dissolving individual identity. If there’s nothing to be conscious of, and no one to be conscious, what does “consciousness” even mean? This concept, while intellectually seductive, is ontologically incoherent, incomprehensible, and ultimately denies or dissolves our individuality. There might be “enlightenment,” but no one to experience or relish it.
The broad Bhakti tradition of Vedic wisdom, however, teaches that there is always a subject, an object, and the stream of consciousness. There is a crucial distinction between polluted consciousness and limited consciousness. Polluted consciousness involves seeing things through a materialistic, possessive mentality, believing that happiness comes from acquiring external objects. We certainly want to avoid this.
The opposite of polluted consciousness isn’t necessarily unlimited consciousness. It’s pure consciousness, which means consciousness of the unlimited. We, as finite beings, never become infinite. This inherent finitude, paradoxically, makes enlightenment an eternal adventure, as we continuously learn more and more about the infinite. This continuous learning sustains our individuality.
So, returning to your concern: if you feel that your current Bhakti practices are creating new conceptions that obstruct your growth, rather than merely presuming they are obstructive, you need to observe what those conceptions are doing. Look at objective parameters:
- Am I becoming more judgmental or more compassionate?
- Am I becoming more humble, selfless, or self-controlled?
- Is my attraction and aspiration for transcendence increasing?
The defining criteria for spiritual growth are detachment from matter and attachment to spirit. If these qualities are increasing, then you needn’t worry excessively about acquiring new conceptions. These conceptions are likely helping you realize your consciousness more deeply.
However, if you find yourself becoming more materially attached to your group, feeling envious of other groups, or developing a destructive competitive mentality, then course correction is definitely needed. You would need to modify your conceptions to harmonize your understanding with the actual understanding of bhakti as given in the sacred texts, thereby ensuring your spiritual journey continues properly.