182 How to guide effectively – The Monk’s Podcast with Radha Gopinath P and Shyamananda Prabhu

Podcast: Summary podcast: Video:

Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.

Hare Krishna, Radhagopinathru, Shamanthru, welcome, such an honor to have both of you here. Radhagopinathru, our podcasts have been very widely watched and appreciated since we have been doing it. We didn't do it too many times, twice or thrice only we have done till now.

So I'm grateful that you are here today. I try to cash in on your popularity. Shamanthru is actually one of the primary, you could say, founders of the Monks Podcast.

And I'm forever grateful that he gives so much association of his on the Monks Podcast as well as off. Both of you being together reminds me of my early days when I would come from Pune to Radhagopinath temple and you are two of the legends that I would like to look forward to meeting. So having both of you together is the ultimate treat today.

And I welcome both of you and Radhagopinathru for your suggestion that we could have this clear discussion. It was such a wonderful suggestion. Thank you very much for joining.

So I see this as primarily Gopinathru's domain because for the last two decades at least he is specializing in this caring, guiding. So maybe I will ask you to set the roadmap and then he can kind of take off on whichever point he has prioritized and then we see how it goes. Okay, thank you.

So I will start with my experience, broadly speaking, because most of the topics I find that which we discussed in the podcast, there's some connection with personal experiences also. So I was introduced to Krishna Consciousness in Pune, I was there for almost 10-12 years. Then I was in Belgaum and Mumbai and then I started traveling abroad and I started noticing that there are very different ways of giving guidance.

Now, of course, to some extent it depends on individual. Every individual will have their own nature and they will guide differently. But broadly speaking, especially when I started going abroad, I found that the whole system of guidance over there is much more horizontal than vertical.

So what that means is, broadly speaking, that it's in India when we meet the senior devotee also, we are up there and we are seeking guidance from them. But in the West, I saw that even senior Prabhupada disciples, sannyasis, gurus, they would almost talk, I mean, there's always a basic respect, but they would talk in a very horizontal kind of way, not an equal way. And just to give some scriptural context to say this, that when my early days, I had read the Dhruva Maharaj pastime and I had also heard classes on it.

So the idea was that when Dhruva Maharaj told Dhruva that he was just a boy, he said that I can't, you know, I can't do what you're telling me to do. Just tolerate, tolerate the dishonor and go back. So this was explained to me as that it is Narad Muni so kind that although Dhruva is defiant, Narad Muni doesn't reject him.

Narad Muni still engages and accommodates him. But when I talk with some other devotees, they said actually, this is the model of guidance that it is not just instruction, but it is negotiation, where it is both the gurus and the disciples responsibility to find out what is a path that actually works for the disciple, for the student. So that while one was seen as a model of a guru's compassion in spite of disciple's defiance, other was seen as a model of how ideally guru and disciple should interact.

So these are two very different models, broadly speaking, and I see both of them operational and I won't say only in India and the West, but in different parts of our movement also. So what are your thoughts broadly? So just to conclude this point, it's a long question, but like some devotees say that, oh, because people are not rebellious now, people are not submissive, that is why we need the horizontal model more. Ideally, it should just be vertical.

And others say, no, Prabhupada wanted us to be independently thoughtful. So only initially, sometimes for some people, the vertical will be required. Ideally, it should be more horizontal, because that's what will encourage individual thoughtfulness.

So as a broad introduction, so Radha Gupta, over to you. Hare Krishna. So I was reading this book, Unveiling His Lotus Feet by Gurujan Prabhu, and in that he mentions the characteristics of Kali Yuga.

Kali means quarrel and hypocrisy. Now quarrel is ego manifest in a group situation. And hypocrisy is ego manifest in an individual situation.

So basically Kali blows up our ego. And the highest point of ego is you are God. The ultimate independence.

So that ego basically makes people question authority, because ultimately, God is the highest authority. And anything coming in that line, so descending line, when you accept God as authority, all the descending line. He says there are different authorities.

Authority meaning maintainer and the maintained. So God is the maintainer and we are the maintained. So the representative of God who maintain are as you know, Guru na sasyat, Svajanur na sasyat, Pitha na sasyat.

So in that verse, all these are representatives of God. Guru is a representative of God. Parents are representative of God.

You know, Prameva Mata cha Pita tune. Ultimately Krishna is the Guru. Krishna is the ultimate father.

Krishna is the ultimate mother. He is the Paramdaiva. He is the powerful Devata.

So anyone who represents them, they are supposed to be respected and one has to take shelter and surrender. So Kali begins with an immature puffed up Brahmana boy who has the power but doesn't have the maturity and now he curses. So similarly Kali begins when Parikshit Maharaj did a mistake.

It was a very tiny mistake. So now there is justification. So when we find even little mistakes in these authorities, the administrative head, king is one authority.

Father and mother are another authority, parents. The third authority is the spiritual head and the fourth authority is the husband for a wife as per the Vedic culture. And now when faults are seen in any of this and there are Kalav Doshanidhe Rajan.

There are ample faults in all of these. In the world we see so many cases of exploitation. So naturally there is question raised and Kali whispers in the ears, look this is what it is.

All this tradition. So become independent of authority. That's the modern thought.

Not modern thought, the Kali thought. The thoughts of Kali Yuga. Whether it is manifest, whether it is seen in a very cultured package or in an open package.

The point is it's questioning the authorities and thanks to the whole Darwinian philosophy of evolution, we think that more technological advancement etc. we are evolving. And a part of evolution means anything traditional, anything ancient, anything Vedic so to say under inverted commas, they are all old stuff.

So we need to evolve, we need to break those chains, become independent. And when we become independent, he says three things happen. Number one there is anxiety because you have to fend for yourself.

When citizens become independent of the government authorities, when children become independent of the parents, when the followers become independent of the spiritual authority or a wife becomes independent of the husband, even to speak this itself is a big controversial statement today. But they have seen, there is a lot of exploitation. Read in the newspaper, nothing but exploitation.

So they have risen now, they are protesting. So when they become independent of an authority, look at a child sleeping on the lap of the mother. It is completely at ease and peaceful because they feel sheltered.

But when there isn't, that is the nature. The nature of the soul is to take shelter of a maintainer and find peace, happiness and bliss in the shelter. But when there is no shelter and you go off independent, next first thing that comes is anxiety because you have to fend for yourself.

And next another thing that comes is loneliness. You become loneliness. And third, dissatisfaction.

When the relationship is broken, so there is dissatisfaction. And therefore to relieve anxiety, all kinds of intoxication, to relieve loneliness, all kinds of gadgets and to relieve dissatisfaction, illicit relationships. I want relationship, the happiness of relationship without responsibility.

This is the situation. So whether it is east or west, to the extent we are influenced by this thought process and it is undeniable, it is fully justified because you see, spiritual heads are corrupted, newspapers, you see all these things every day. Government leaders, so many scams are coming up.

So many cases of parents abusing children and husband abusing a wife. So naturally this kind of a thing comes. And when that percolates into a spiritual circle, so this questioning authority seems very logical and very reasonable.

So this is how I see. It's not the west or east, but sometimes it's like quite open or very nice cultured. I know some families, in the family they are like a cow.

But heart of heart they are totally independent. So this is how I see. Okay.

That's amazing. I mean, the first part was, I think you laid the foundations quite well. In principle we are parts of Krishna and we connect with Krishna through a system, through a structure.

So in principle authorities are important. Now we could say Kaliyuga has two symptoms that those are subordinates want to question authority and the authorities tend to do questionable things. So that's how you balanced it.

Because the first part was raising so many questions in my mind, but last second part you said that. So it's a difficult challenge. So we can't just blame the subordinates for being rebellious because in one sense they have reasons for that.

Now is rejecting authority the solution? That is not a solution. We have to explore what the solution will be. But that's a very good, I would say, a very balanced summary of the issue till now.

Thank you, Brojee. Samanthu, you would like to? I would like to pose a question. These things were like sutras.

Actually I am going to revisit this podcast once again and get those to avoid. What are the three things once again? Loneliness, anxiety and dissatisfaction. Loneliness, anxiety and dissatisfaction.

Lad. L A D. Okay. And you also put one sutra that subordinates have this feeling of question authority and authorities engage in questionable acts.

How does in Kali Yuga one make a beginning? Like they say, the perfect pizza, the perfect pakora is you wait till you get the perfect recipe and then the perfect pakora and then you start eating that. So somebody will say, I will wait till I get the perfect person to guide me. Then I take the first step.

Or just you got somebody. Now this is something which I'm not subscribing to. But if somebody says, well, I surrendered to that authority and I got cheated.

Well, you got cheated because you deserve to. So how you see the two extremes that I will wait till I get the perfect one and the other extreme is that I did something, I made a mistake and now I'm being blamed for that. So how do you find the golden means, so to say? Beautiful.

I mean, I love the extreme, the polarity that you put up. That in principle, if we accept that we all need guidance, we all need authority and we cannot live without authority. So but then there could be two extremes that I find faults in authorities and therefore, I will not take any, I'll not surrender at all till I find a perfect authority.

And the other extreme is that, that okay, I was cheated. I trusted some authority and I was cheated by the authority. And if I have some reservations because of that, that the subsequent authorities or the other authorities put the blame on you.

You are foolish or it was your bad karma or whatever. You simply got the reactions. You got what you deserve.

So this is, yeah, this is a very, if you could envision this as a pendulum, I think this is a very real situation. It's like, say, I will not take treatment till I find the perfect doctor and I'm getting sicker and sicker, but I won't take a perfect treatment. And the other is, I went to some doctor, I got some medicine and the doctor turned out to be a quack and it made me worse.

And I go to some, maybe the other doctors or medical council or whatever, and they say, you are foolish to trust the doctor. Now, it's your, it's to your stupidity. So then here, the question comes up that to some extent, we need to even, you could say, trust our own intelligence to discern which authorities trust work, isn't it? So this is just a quick reflection.

Did I articulate or rephrase what you wanted to say, Shamanthru? Yes. So I'll just wait for the response from Gupinathru. So I have two people who are interrogating me.

Okay. I was, as you were discussing, I was thinking. If two lost people ask for direction, they're not interrogating, they're seeking answers.

I'll spray at your lotus feet for inspiration to say something useful. So as you were saying this, I was just thinking, Prabhupada says, if you're looking for gold, first find out what gold looks like and how to test gold. So I feel before taking shelter of a guide, a guru, you have to understand who a guru is, first of all.

Otherwise, you don't have to predict. It doesn't take an astronomist to tell what is going to be the consequence. So I feel this is where anything, you want to buy anything in the market, so that you don't be cheated, you have to acquaint yourself, you have to acquire some basic knowledge of what I want and what to expect from the person or from a product, from a situation to satisfy that need.

And that's where study of scriptures, a definition of who's a guru, are very interesting in Chaitanya Charita Amrit. You know, you have this Diksha Guru, Shiksha Guru and Vartama Pradarsha Guru. But this definition of Shiksha Guru, Prabhupada translates as two things.

When they are speaking about Shiksha Gurus here in Chaitanya Charita Amrit, he says that Shiksha Gurus are of two types. One is a liberated soul. Another one is doing something practical for you.

So somebody who taught you the Bhagavad Gita course is also a Guru. Somebody who taught you Tilak and Kanti is also a Guru. And Shrila Prabhupada is our pre-eminent Shiksha Guru.

All our previous Acharyas are our pre-eminent Shiksha Gurus. So that is a Shiksha Guru that one has to understand. And then there are other Shiksha Gurus who come in our lives and who are teaching us at two different extents, in different degrees, at different times of the spiritual journey.

So when we talk about Shiksha Guru, these personalities and whosoever to some extent guides us at a particular time, to a particular extent, to that extent we have to keep our intelligence also alert. We can't be foolish. Yes, faith hundred percent.

It's a question of you take a step and then you see something being told over a period of time it is re-established. I remember the time he had told me two years back and now I see that it has proved true. What an amazing analysis.

The way he had…therefore my trust increases. Trust is a very dynamic thing and every interaction either betrays it or enhances it. Yeah, that's so true.

We have to keep our intelligence alert as Krishna says in the 11th Canto. You know all the 24 Gurus that doesn't mean he surrendered to those Gurus, but he learned something and he was grateful for what he learned from those things. So even keep our intelligence, that's also one of the Gurus, you know.

Okay, yes. That's how I see it. That's beautiful.

So if I understood your answer is that when I said that we need to trust our intelligence to be able to find out who is trustworthy, that is also there in our tradition and the way we train our intelligence to be trustworthy is we study scripture, we also understand the previous Acharyas and we learn from various sources. So Guru is not just, of course, we have one Diksha Guru, but we have many, many teachers and we learn from them. So that is a very important point.

Now here just Shamanthu, we would like to talk about this a little bit more about say trusting our intelligence or broadly speaking. No, I got that true, that gold example which so many times Prabhupada uses that. So when it comes to the essence of getting guidance, obviously one has to understand what that guidance is.

Otherwise, we might easily go for imitation of gold. So I don't have any new points now, rather you continue. Okay, so let's try to frame the discussion broadly.

So are we discussing about the mood in which a student should be approaching a teacher? I was thinking we are discussing more of how we, when we are in a position where we are to guide others, how we can guide effectively. So of course, a part of that is also to model how a student should be approaching. Because I was thinking more in terms of say, this point that we live in a world where, so it's one thing to have faith in the previous Acharyas, have faith in Prabhupada, accept the principle of authority.

That is all very important. And I don't think in terms of philosophical principles, anybody is going to debate that. And so we are not talking so much, at least in today's discussion about say a new person needing to develop faith in the Acharyas.

This is not like a journey of self-discovery course about need for a Guru. So it is more in terms of say, we are already following a spiritual path. Most of us, we are practicing devotees and we live in a moment where, as you said, it's a complex community.

There are many communities and there are various factors where, for example, the Guru, the primary Guru may not be immediately accessible to us. We may be giving guidance and we may not feel that we are so advanced. So the kind of submission that Prabhupada can ask, can we ask from others? So I was talking more from that perspective, the discussion that how to guide effectively, not so much as how to seek guidance effectively.

So is that okay if we shift to that perspective? Yeah. Okay. For me, since you have brought this topic of how to guide effectively, the book for this, for me is the Bhagavad Gita.

Oh, beautiful. You know. Okay.

Interesting, Krishna doesn't straight away begin the Bhagavad Gita by guiding Arjuna. He is just hearing, there is a friendly talk going on. Only when Arjuna, in the second chapter, seventh verse, very interesting, three things he says.

He realizes, hey look, we are having friendly talks, we are leading nowhere. But I know that you know. And therefore he says, and he realizes his shortcomings.

See, I am very miserly, I am very selfish, I am just looking from my perspective. I realize that. I realize that my perspective is very, very self-centered and I am confused.

So I am self-centered, I am confused. And I don't want just goody-goody stuff, what pleases me, what actually benefits me. And tell me no ifs and buts, clearly this is it.

And three things he does. Shishya stheham shadhimam tvam prapannam. So disciple, meaning I am ready to be disciplined.

When you go to a doctor, you know, you don't say what do you feel like, you know, I feel like this. You give me this prescription. So only when Krishna sees that this person is ready, disciplined, shadhimam, instruct me and tvam prapannam, I am surrendering to you.

Only when he hears these three things, then he very lovingly chastises. Na panditaha. This is what you are speaking is.

Immediately Prabhupada says, now friend has become a guide. So to guide, first of all, is the person who has come, is he receptive? Has he the right? Otherwise don't guide. Otherwise be a good friend.

Be there with him till he asks. Otherwise just share. You tell only when he asks.

But when he's sharing, you also just share. I feel this is the first guideline for a person who wants to guide. I can't simply say I am your counselor.

I am your guide. You better tell me everything. Why should I tell you? It's a very sacred relation.

It's a very sacred space. Nobody can barge into it by manipulation, by trickery, by force. So it's a very sacred thing.

It has to be evoked and only when it is evoked, in case he gives you that space, he gives you that authority, only then are we fit to even guide. Otherwise it won't be effective and it won't be beneficial because he may or may not take it also. And amazing, even though he has done this, Krishna at the end says, 18.63, vimrishetad aseshena yathe chasi tathakur.

Can you imagine? He's still not expecting him to follow everything. He says, yathe chasi, you follow what I have told you. Whatever you have told you, but you do whatever you think is best.

However, out of love and compassion, he says, my feeling is this will be good for you. It's not that he is completely letting him take his own, he also gives his part, but not imposing. So a guide shouldn't be imposing, it should be inspiring and enlightening and then leave it.

Let that person take the responsibility. Otherwise he says, you asked and therefore I did it. Tomorrow if something goes wrong, he'll come back.

No, I will tell you, but you have to take responsibility for your decision. Otherwise you start blaming the guide invariably. It's beautiful.

Thank you. It's beautiful. The Gita is a model for this.

So yes, Krishna, we could say that Krishna and Arjuna have a very close relationship beforehand also. And Arjuna voluntarily surrenders. So that's an important principle that we sometimes may, when we are to guide effectively, you could say one of the ways, one of the keys to guiding effectively is to know when not to guide at all.

So we guide when we're not yet asked to, at that time it could well lead to the guidance naturally being ineffective and even counterproductive at times. The person may get, person may feel that we are imposing, like you said, we should not do. And it's nice that I always say that Krishna is respecting Arjuna's free will in 1863, but you're putting in another way is that in fact when Krishna is telling Arjuna you do as you, as you desire, he's actually in one sense, getting Arjuna to take responsibility for his decision.

I'll tell you what I think, but ultimately it's you have to do. And Arjuna does take responsibility when he says, Karishche Vachanam Tava in 1873. So that's interesting.

Shyamankar, what are your thoughts about this? No, please contribute. Please don't ask questions. You are a fount of wisdom.

You are guiding thousands of people also. My mood is to gather some nuggets and not to peddle some wares. Well, you are being very selfish then.

He wants some nuggets from you also. Okay. So the first thing is I always admire this point of Krishna gently putting himself in the role.

At the same time, he also doesn't shy away from, like a Pandita is like a gentle rebuke for a reprieved man or something, but a cleaver is a heavy duty hammer. Calling a hot blooded Kshatriya, a eunuch is like, and at least two, three Brahmacharis here, they are still fond of you, Chaitanya Chaitanya Prabhu, stating somewhere that, are you remembering your days as Brihan Nala now? So you remember this point you made in some class that this is Kurukshetra, this is not Virata's palace that you could be dancing. So good that this thing came up.

Is it something from a commentary or is it just like a deduction? Yeah, I would say that it's when you read the Bhagavad Gita in the light of the Mahabharata, many things keep coming in. So that's how I have not read that anywhere as such, but I thought it's not an unreasonable inference. It's not a disjoint point, especially just a few months ago, he must be Brihan Nala.

What is the time lag between staying in the Virata kingdom and the war? A few weeks, months? No, no, it's definitely a few months. Two reasons. First is that they have the marriage of Uttara and Abhimanyu and for that they have everybody coming there.

And then after that, there are actually three rounds of these negotiations from what I know. Yeah, it's at least a few months. What do you think, Radhakantu? Yeah, but definitely it's not a short time, right? Yeah, a few months.

Okay, some small observation that many of the pitfalls of… Sorry, you're making a particular point. So you're saying that a Pandita is actually softer than Klaibya and Shudra. So what was the point you're trying to make to this? It is not like the guide will be always gentle.

No, but it's like even the friend may not be gentle also, but it's more like a friendly exhortation rather than a guide's chastisement, you could say. The point I had in mind was like always people who come for guidance, they may expect, it's a very bad word, but molly-cuddling by their guide, counselor or whatever. That Prabhu, I'm already being hit by destiny, karma, material energy, whatever.

Now, at least you don't do that to me. You know, well, if it is necessary, I may do that also. What is necessary, what is important is the wisdom and the intent.

I'm giving you a simple example. If somebody has a thorn in the foot and the thorn has broken, so just by caressing the area around that affected part won't make the thorn come out. So you need to have another needle or another thorn, so to say.

So sometimes, I'm not giving this as a license for counseling, that it has to be like you have to hurt the person, but sometimes that may be necessary. So I'm balancing both. Krishna is saying in a very gentle way, apandita, and kleba is more like a straight injection given to make Arjuna's blood boil.

So sometimes, the first installment of good guidance could be a gentle nudge. Of course, we know that there has to be proper listening skill, you know, that all of that is there and a gentle nudge. Or sometimes, it could be an emetic.

I just meant to make you vomit out everything, the good food along with what is causing food poisoning. That's the thought I thought I would share. Okay.

Thank you. Nice expansion of the Gita's context. Sometimes, it's required to be hard.

Now, if we consider the point that when we are giving guidance, there are two, three, let's consider the situation that we live in today, in our moment, and we have devotees in for a few years, sometimes many years. So I would say two things. One is that I talked about the vertical and horizontal models in the beginning for giving guidance.

So is it that initially, the vertical is necessary to some extent, and then eventually, the horizontal becomes a greater standard? Because I was talking with Rajiv Bihari Prabhu from America. So he was saying that there were a few things, which the Prabhupada was not long enough with us to demonstrate. So he says that, how do you guide devotees who have been there for many years in the moment? If somebody has been somebody in the 40s, 50s, how would Prabhupada have guided them in the 50s, if somebody has been 20, 30 years in the moment? So he said that there are, he quoted a couple of letters.

One is that, now all of you are senior people. Now you are a senior person. I cannot instruct you.

I can only suggest to you. So that is, he said that maybe Prabhupada himself would have guided differently as devotees grow older and can say wiser or just the dynamic changes as they grow older. So that's one aspect.

As a person grows further, should the way they are given guidance also change? Any thoughts on this? I feel it begins horizontally, goes vertically and then comes back to horizontal with a very, very sweet, natural situation of a guide. I would like to share these three things that a guide must invoke in the person being guided. Faith, confidence and trust.

How are you differentiating faith and trust? Of course, they are different words, essentially mean the same, but three aspects. Trust in terms of the knowledge being delivered of trustworthy sources, Guru, Sadhu, Shastra, you know. So I trust the body of knowledge, the source of knowledge that is coming.

Trust, you know, in terms of the information that is being provided. Confidence in the maturity of giving a very balanced view, not just quoting, anyone can quote. You know, I may memorize the whole thing and quote, but according to time, place and circumstance, I have confidence that the guidance that is being given to me is very, very balanced, not extremist view and genuinely according to my situation, according to my level, according to my disposition of mind, Narada Muni gave different things to different people and he saw Dhruva and immediately adjusted it, you know.

So that is the confidence in terms of the expertise and the balance timely according to time, place and circumstance. And faith in the intent, there is an agenda. He is protective but not possessive of the person, you know.

He is detached. He is attached to guiding but detached from whether the guidance is taken or not. He is genuinely concerned.

He is a genuine well-wisher. That faith. So when I understood this, the three aspects, information, the skill and the values, knowledge, skills and values, trust in the knowledge being given, confidence in the skill of giving and faith in the value of absolutely pure intention, no other hidden agenda or motive.

When I understood this, the word of a counsellor that we use in our temple, friend, philosopher, guide, it took a new dimension for me. Friend means the intent, genuine well-wisher. As Prabhupada says, you are ever well-wisher.

Philosopher means trustworthy source of knowledge. And guide means expertise in terms of giving a very, very mature, very balanced, very rounded, very appropriate according to that individual s need. You know, so if these three things are kind of covered, so we have to see, can we invoke the trust, the faith and the confidence of the person? So we have to be like that.

Otherwise, we don't fit that role. This should be the qualification of a guide. So this is now a very important point that before somebody can demand submission, what is the mode of the relationship that we have developed? So when you talk about going from horizontal to a vertical, what will ensure that it goes from the horizontal to the vertical? And then when it comes back to somewhat the horizontal, still that vertical element is there.

But you could say it is more nuanced or flavoured with sweetness. So neither person really imposes the vertical aspect, but it is there. I mean, the authority doesn't impose the vertical aspect.

So this has to be done by the, in one sense, this has to be inspired by the person giving guidance, by the guide. There is Sakya and still there is awe and reverence. That's beautiful.

So I was thinking what you said, vertical, horizontal, vertical, horizontal is Chanakya Pandit says, you know, that, what is that? So it's exactly like that. Lalayat is horizontal, just be kind and as you said, be a friend. Then 10 years is Tadayat, it's more like a vertical and then eventually it's horizontal again, Mitravata Acharit.

Beautiful. Thank you. Interesting in this part, that Tadayat, Tadayat doesn't mean too much of disciplining alone.

That discipline is required for the person who is guiding rather than the person who is being guided. Just like the example is given of a potter. The Lalayat is, you give lot of affection, you take clay and you nicely, you know, stamp on it and press it and which is basically profuse affection and you make it very, very malleable.

You know the clay, put water and you make it very, very, you know, very malleable. That is Lalayat and then put it on the wheel and the potter has to give a shape. So he has to regulate how he disciplines.

So discipline is needed more for the person who is guiding than a person who is being guided. And when it comes to a particular shape, then, you know, the automatically the relationship becomes more intimate, sweet, yet there is respect. You know.

Beautiful. Thank you. Spotter example is very vivid.

Sometimes it's more of like a demanding discipline, demanding obedience. But in one sense, even seeking obedience, a person has to be very disciplined. What they ask, how they ask, how they instruct.

That's wonderful. Thank you, Guru. Chamantru, over to you.

I would like to, what was the point which I liked? Horizontal, vertical, horizontal. Yeah, yeah. That is one thing.

Also the Tade thing that it is more like the person giving guidance. It is for him. In our recent ACM, this point came up.

Maybe only one devotee volunteered that a good counselor is detached. And I think, Gopinath Prabhu, you took it upside down. Oh, we have not put that in our list.

So you asked, I don't know, some Mataji or someone. What do you mean detached? That I am not attached to somebody following my guidance. I am attached to my integrity and the process in which I am trying to help this person.

But whether he or she takes it up or not is not my, I should not say concern, but my guiding process doesn't depend on that. Am I putting the point properly? Yeah, I thought of the same words. So in one sense, this point of detachment, you can elaborate this a little bit more.

What would this mean practically? Because at one level, it's that we do care. We cannot really be in a relationship of guiding unless there is some amount of care. So there is always this, in guidance, there is always this balancing between, we could say accepting and expecting.

So if you are only accepting, like if parents only accept the child as they are, I love you as you are. Yes, you do. But the parents also need to be expecting something from the child.

The child will never study, the child will never grow, child will never develop his or her potential. So there is expecting. So there has to be this.

If it's only detached, it's like, I'm only accepting you, whatever you do, I love you. That is good. But how will the child grow? In parenting, they say that the Eastern model, India and China is too much expecting.

There is a book called Tiger Mom, which talks about how the mothers expect so much for their kids. It's too much expecting because the Western model is too much accepting. Whatever you want to do, whichever career you want to choose, whatever you want to do, whether you want to go to school or college or not, doesn't matter.

So I would say detached does not mean only accepting. There is a balance of both accepting and expecting. Any thoughts on this? Chaman, you could speak, because you made that point and then you can come back.

Right now, with the world seeing kind of integration in one way, the Indian and Chinese born people are coming to the top of the corporate ladder. So generally, we've seen that this kind of parenting or this kind of guiding brings good results. At least in the last two months or so, Twitter has an Indian born CEO now.

Then one big fashion label has an Indian born lady who is at the top. And so this always brings up the point that has it something to do with the Indian way of parenting that, you know, you get these kind of genius kids or whatever. And of course, at the same time, we in India also are aware of the point that sometimes children just want to get out of that either overly protective atmosphere or they may say, oh, it was choking me completely, that kind of controlling thing.

So we had this discussion in our, or we were going to have some kind of a formal thing that do our kids, the new generation in the Hare Krishna movement, at least as far as your party is concerned, that are they too mild or after some time, given this independence, will they take up charge and see that preaching activities are again conducted properly? Because are we being too harsh on them? Are we being too lenient on them? Or if we are, how do we come to the balance? How do we see to it that kids get that healthy dose of freedom and we guide them into becoming productive individuals. And at the same time, at some point of time, they become the mantle of spreading the movement. So if you have kids who are totally choked and they say nothing to do with this preaching and nothing to do with this movement at all.

So to go to the other extreme, that okay, if you don't want to chant, don't chant, if you don't want to do this, don't come on the program, whatever. But then preaching gets lost. So have you ever, Gopinath Prabhakar, begin with you, have you ever encountered this kind of a dilemma? Generally, you know, the way I see those people who have been little effective in commanding the respect of their children are the people who have set boundaries, set boundaries and given them the freedom.

So it needs to be, you know, where do you draw a line? I always say that there are liberals and there are conservatives types. Too much expectation, too much expectation. The children either, you know, suffer out of guilt and then they burst out or too much liberal just allow them, they are tempered and lost.

So I think somewhere we need, ye yatha maam prapadyante, again, you know, giving according to what that person can actually take. There is a philosopher who said, I had six philosophies of how to raise children. Now, I have six children and no philosophy.

Because each one is unique, each one is totally different. So certain principles remain the same and I think Chanakya Pandit has captured that, Tadaiyath, you know, is and in the formative years, it is very interesting, coming back to that, the difference is between 5 and 15 are the formative years and in the formative years, even though discipline is very displeasing, later they look back and say they were grateful for that if it is done in a very loving way. If you, only a person who has given a lot of love in the first five years has the right to discipline from the next 10 years.

So if that has been done, if you have invested in the child, won the confidence and trust that this person is genuinely my well-wisher, then in the formative years, the discipline got done, at that time may not be appreciated, but looking back, they will be very happy that I would not be here had that not been done at that time. So that is why I was saying horizontal, then vertical and then back to horizontal. So invest first, then you can withdraw, otherwise you have no right to withdraw, otherwise it will be negative account.

Just like Prabhupada showed unconditional acceptance of all the hippies, everyone, only at a particular time he said, hey those who are initiated yesterday, from today onwards you should follow this. He put up those few things after the first initiation and only when they came up to a particular level and they on their own actually had that trust and surrendered to him and then he became so intimate with them. They are very happy for that guidance received for the chastisement also.

But it was not regular chastisement, it was very selectively and very judiciously and very lovingly, sensitively given. So, thank you Bhru. It is a nice example of Prabhupada demonstrating in one sense, again the horizontal, vertical and maybe horizontal to some extent again after that.

So, actually I think parenting itself is the whole universe. So we can talk more about the principles may apply when we are also in a position where we are giving guidance or say the that times. So going back to the, so one point which you seem to say that it will go from horizontal to vertical then horizontal again.

Now would it also depend on not just the longevity of person in the particular situation, in the particular moment or path, but also on the, you could say mentality or the attitude or the overall culture in which the person has grown. So, Shaman Bhru recently I was just reading that, I mean we have discussed this probably earlier, that in one sense during Prabhupada's times, although the hippies were rebellious, they at least, not just the hippies, the entire counterculture, because the hip is only a small part of the counterculture. So they at least grown up in a culture where they knew about discipline or parental discipline, but they have rejected their authorities.

But if we consider the people who grew up in the 1990s, 2000s, so who are in their teens and 20s and 30s now, they, many of them grew without a culture of discipline, much of a discipline. Many of them, especially in the West, I would say not so much in India, although it may start happening, but many of them didn't have an example of a lot of trustworthy authority at home. Many of them are from single parent families or whatever.

So if a person is coming from a background where they have no experience of authority or they have only experience of bad authorities, so then in that situation would we need to, say in a sense, give more space and the relationship may never really become too vertical. So one is of course the phases as the person is growing, but another is in terms of a person's upbringing and nature itself, can we just call it Kaliya conditioning or whatever we call it, they call it Western mentality or Kaliya conditioning or postmodern mentality. But the fact is a lot of people have that kind of samskaras for whatever reason.

So is the vertical a standard or we could say that maybe the progress will be gradual, but the horizontal is a gently tilting vertical, not a very strong vertical. Would that be a model also for some people to move forward? Yeah, I would see that because it's interesting how Krishna dealt with different people. Okay, Krishna in what sense? So he was friends with everyone, but then the way he dealt with Duryodhana, trying to get sense, but he was, or I would say that won't be an appropriate thing.

Being a well-wisher genuinely and doing the needful, I would say that. I was thinking of Vidura who was a well-wisher. He didn't speak harsh with everyone, but he continued to be.

Like Vidura for Dhritarashtra, he had the greatest regard. At the same time, he did speak also harshly. But the amazing part is Dhritarashtra knew that even though this is difficult for me to digest, but what he's saying is right.

But maybe I will not be able to accept right now. So really, of course, there's two aspects. One is investing before, because speaking like that is withdrawal.

So first of all, investing. And another thing is Satyam Bruhiyat, Priyam Bruhiyat. So balancing between that.

It will be appreciated maybe some other time, may not be right now, probably some other situation. But we continue to give as a guide what is best. Thank you.

That's a very good point about Vidura and Dhritarashtra. That is also example of guidance where in one sense, you could say the hierarchy is not directly present. Vidura is in one sense younger than Dhritarashtra.

Dhritarashtra is also the king. And so there is no vertical dimension in that. But still Vidura does try to give good guidance.

So thank you. That's a good model to contemplate of what he did. One of the things I noticed, what you said, that guidance is appreciated later.

So Vidura spoke, he spoke strongly, but he never spoke so strongly, like he never withdrew so much that there was no investment left. Always very kind afterwards also. And sometimes we use the example that Vidura's strong words, Dhritarashtra, they were cut.

And Sadhu's words cut attachments. But it was for, you could say decade, those words didn't cut. So it was only at a particular time in Dhritarashtra's own life when he was ready that those words cut.

So it's not just the sharpness of the word that cuts it. And it is the origin that Vidura became more pure by going on pilgrimage. I don't think our Acharyas have mentioned anything like that.

So it is just that the right time had to come in Dhritarashtra's own life. And the fact was that he didn't let the relationship get so bitter or sour because of harsh words, he balanced it. That's good.

Thank you. So that could be a good example for, Shahbaz, what do you think, for Western Outreach, Vidura-Dhritarashtra example is a good example. What are your experiences when you have been in the West and you have interacted with, not just I would say in the postmodern mind is also there in India, especially in, you could say, South Bombay or other places like that.

What are your thoughts? Well, this is my last point. I was just thinking that one thing which almost is like a record stuck in my mind. And when you talk of Western Outreach or even young people today, I have this mental model that, okay, here we have theology, here we have a 50 year old institution with 5,000 year old legacy.

So obviously things are not as simple as they look. There is no little pat comes a solution, nothing like that. So what I say, in fact, in the morning today itself, I use that, that Prabhu or Mataji or whatever, this is the whole spectrum of guidance or advice available.

Now you decide the pace and you decide the depth. So how fast do you want to take the, say the rituals? In rituals, I would put in a dress, Kanthi Mala and Tilak and coming to the temple program in a particular way or picking up the limbo. These are all the external things.

And Bhaktivedanta Maharaj said that in his opinion, the classes, they take the internals first, like somebody who's like in his experience, somebody could be a foreign minister, defense minister, and they will just start reading his books first and asking him for guidance. And he says for the masters, the externals really are seen first. For example, people might immediately pick up the dhoti kurta, shaven head, or whatever.

He said, this is just a simple guiding thing. It is not like you have in a school, but coming to the main point, that how fast do you want to take this in your life? Can I just interrupt you? This is such an amazing point about classes and masses. You could say, now, whatever way we define a class, in the instance of giving the example of ministers and other people, we could say that if somebody has become a Srishti in some field, what we mean by class, whether they're intellectual, political, arts, sports, whatever it is, in any area, they have a certain level of skills, expertise, competence, whatever it is, you want to use the word.

And then we could also say that that means they are self-motivated, they are thoughtful. So they will take their time, they will look at the essence, the internals. And in that sense, if they are presented an approach where the externals are foisted on them, that will actually alienate them.

On the other hand, for many people, now we don't want to minimize anyone by saying that they are the masters. It is just that these are different people, people are from different backgrounds. But the fact is that for some people, it is, they want to belong.

And how do I belong? Okay, I do this, I do this, I do this. So that would also mean that it is for us to notice who is from, who is from what kind of situation. And then accordingly connect, accordingly help them.

Yeah. For say Prabhupada, in essence, in India, he didn't really push Krishna consciousness onto the life members. He said that, okay, you contribute in whatever you can.

In some ways, most of the influential life members who helped in big ways, they were already established in society. So they appreciate Prabhupada for who he was, for what he had done for Vedic culture across the world. But Prabhupada didn't, I have not read any conversation where Prabhupada is asking his life members, how many rounds of Hare Krishna are you chanting or something like that.

So he was not really pushing the practices, he was just welcoming their contributions. It's a very profound point. In the lecture of instruction, he says that our life members encourage us by welcoming us to their homes, where we go and they give us Prasad.

He put that in the category of Dadadhi Bhumte Bhojate. So yeah, you're right. You're very gentle on that.

So any points or comments on this thing of how fast and how deep? Okay. I will just come back to this. What you introduced is like a side point for me has become a side dish has become the main dish.

We will come back to what is your main dish. So Radhakrishna, do you want to speak something about this classes and masses? About how do you know the more of a external internal? Any comments on this broadly? Yeah, I would say the, I would agree with that. In terms of the essence being given or the externals also being emphasized.

What is being emphasized and actually another thing I had personally experienced. For those who are in a very influential position, they have a lot of connections in that particular aspect of service that they are doing. So any little change is a very big thing for them, very costly, or very, very, you know, it can mean a lot.

It can affect them a lot also. So they may not change externals. But internally, they are actually inspired.

While somebody who is like a lay person, taking the externals does not make a big difference because he does not have a large following and you know, what will happen, commitments, big, huge, you know, whatever it does. That is not there. So next day, even changing back, it does not make a difference.

But not at a level on a higher level, even a small thing will make a large impact. And therefore, they are more into trying to take the essence, you know. So even a small change at that level should be celebrated.

You know, it's a big thing because to make even a small change in decision in their lifestyle, in their disposition, in their dealings is a big thing. Like, you know, imagine a high level social circle for him to give you, give up even one item of, you know, our principles, you know, normal drinking. That's a big thing.

So they may not do that. At the same time, genuinely appreciate, and probably over a period of time, you know, figure out how to do that. You know, there is a quote of Prabhupada, where he says that for the certain classes and masses, he says, he says that, I just tried to find that quote when we were discussing.

But basically, Prabhupada is saying that, that if we go to people who are a little more successful, a little more influential, they'll be a little puffed up. And he says they have a right to be puffed up. And we have to, we have to learn the art of approaching such people.

And also, he says, appreciated, appreciating different points of view. So it is actually, in one sense, very different from the conception of Prabhupada that we might get. That quote where he's talking about how to approach influential people.

So appreciate, generally we talk of Prabhupada is just giving his view, like the vertical, his Shastric view, but appreciating different points of view. We need to learn the art of teaching Krishna consciousness to them. So offering, so that is one thing.

Another thing I was thinking is that also with respect to Mahaprabhu, giving the Harinam to the masses and then talking about philosophy to the classes. We don't want to call Harinam as external, but at one level, it is, of course, the ultimate essence. But still, he didn't expect somebody like Sarovar Matacharya or Prakashan Sarath to immediately start dancing in kirtans.

He sat and discussed philosophy with them. So, so now this is, we could say that when people come from the West, I don't want to essentialize against everybody that has the classes, but it's also maybe people will be a little hesitant to take to the externals because it's a foreign culture for them. Whereas wisdom is a little more universal.

Okay, let me see if it makes sense. If it makes sense, I'll accept it. So any thoughts on this, Shyamangal, before we move to your main dish? No, maybe you can just.

Okay, so you were making some point about peace and peace and depth. So, yeah, that I feel that these two control buttons should be in the hand of the person seeking guidance so that not in a kind of a superficial way, but full fledged way. And then the process, once somebody says that, okay, this is how I want it.

And it's like the Kanishi Vachanam Tava moment. I would not say that at my level, I want somebody to say, I will do whatever you say. It will be too much overwhelming.

But when somebody says, this is what you're giving me and that is okay with me. So when the person giving guidance gets this kind of reciprocation that I am exactly going at the pace and the depth, which the person whom I'm guiding is comfortable with, then that deposit is made and then you can actually go on a healthy path, which is beneficial for both of you. Like this small joke, which Gopinath said that I had six philosophies and now I have six children and no philosophy.

So basically, it means that you just try to put everybody into one straight jacketed thing. And that kind of flies in the face of the whole process, doesn't it? Beautifully put. It flies in the face of the whole process.

True. So going back to the… We can finish in 10 minutes, so to say. If there are any spillover points, we can have a second session or something.

Oh, sure. So maybe we could just go back to the starting point, unless… Sorry, Raghavendra, you want to respond to some of the points? No, no, no. Go ahead, Gopinath.

Okay. So going back to the starting, when I said that Dhruv Maharaj, Narada Muni guiding Dhruv Maharaj. So rather than saying that it is a deviation from the norm and the norm is like a vertical kind of guidance, we could say Narada Muni himself demonstrates.

Rather than saying that there is one norm, you could say there can be many, there can be different norms for different people also. And that resourcefulness, Narada Muni demonstrates by guiding different people in different ways. Could we say that? This is where I would put the expertise and application according to time, place and circumstance.

And Prabhupada writes that. In the forest, he gave him, you do this, this, this. So this is the expertise part, skills part.

So you should have a skill in terms of judging the level of the person and the time, place and how it is presented suitable to that person's level of acceptance or creatively presenting the same thing in different ways. Not just repeating as it is, but creatively present. That's exactly what Narada Ji does every time.

He gave them a puzzle. There is Shabbala Swaja and Andrew Murgari. He just told them, just chant the name.

So it's different. Yeah, that's a beautiful thing. So rather than saying that any one method is a standard, it's ultimately, we can say the purpose of elevating, assisting the person we are guiding, that is the standard.

And how we go about doing it will vary. So maybe one last point I'll briefly mention and we can explore it next time also. But I thought that say when Prabhupada talks about that following the spiritual master's instruction is life and soul.

So in principle, every disciple aspires for that. At the same time, it is not that Prabhupada, we could say, Prabhupada demanded that from everyone. So Prabhupada is also very accommodating for different people, even when some of his, some of the disciples had severe difficulties in following what Prabhupada, even the basic standards of what Prabhupada gave, leave alone some higher instructions, Prabhupada never stopped accepting them.

So we could say even being faithful to Prabhupada's example as a teacher giving guidance doesn't necessarily mean that we have to be vertical, that the vertical model is being faithful to Prabhupada and a more horizontal model is like adjusting where you are not actually following Prabhupada. Because Prabhupada also demonstrated different things in different situations with different devotees. Any thoughts on this? Shamaantra first and then you can come back to Radhamandru.

No, let Gopinath first speak. Okay. So if I understand you right, your question is how, does being vertical in giving guidance, is that being faithful to Prabhupada and being horizontal in giving guidance is actually a deviation from Prabhupada, which remain necessary, but it is actually a deviation from Prabhupada or did Prabhupada, being faithful to Prabhupada means in both ways we are being faithful to Prabhupada.

That is the question broadly speaking. Here we begin with vertical and eventually go horizontal. Okay.

In the sense, we understand the essence, go deeper in terms of what is the essential point that he is making and see broader in terms of its application. Just like Prabhupada, I don't know who, one of the earliest disciples, I was hearing memories, he said they got a church and Prabhupada said they can wear shoes and come and sit there on that, you know, what is that, they have this. Cues.

Cues. They can sit there. No problem.

Actually LA church only, LA building only, LA temple, yeah. Yeah, he said that, which means, which means he was open to the fact that they understand the essence of this philosophy and applied. So, this is, I would call it the philosophy of unity in diversity.

Unity in terms of the motive, the intention of genuine seeking the absolute truth and diversity in terms of, even Bhaktivinoda Thakur mentioned in Chaitanya Shikshamrata, geographically, you know, certain things like, you know, they are doing pujari seva, just wearing one chandar, it's not possible. You know, you have to wear very, you know, or you have to either have strong, you know, air conditioning, which is practically impossible. So, so adjusting according to the, you know, geographical area, the culture, you know, their particular way of doing things.

So, only fixing on that, I always, I always say that you, you know, somehow I, that inspired me so much about the conservatives and the liberals, you know. The liberals are concerned about being liberal about the details and the conservatives are concerned about being conservative about the principles. But when the conservatives, in addition to preserving principles, also become too conservative about every detail, then they become fanatic and, you know, too much rigid.

And when the liberals, in the name of liberality, in addition to the details, also become liberal about the principles, then they become compromised, diluted and eventually deviated. So, it really takes an acharya who has very deep understanding of the essence and a broad acceptance of the variety. You know, only such a person who is deeply fixed in their own school of thought, but extremely broad in terms of acceptance of the varieties of the externals and very, very maturely, as per the time and situation, balance.

That's what makes the parampara really alive. Wherever the parampara has died, it is because of these things. So, to keep the parampara alive, with the changing times, you may change without changing in essence.

So, that's the real stuff. And if someone can catch those essential core principles and hold on, while it takes tremendous compassion to be making these adjustments, but chastity and loyalty to the objective. You know, without chastity, mere compassion, you will get diluted and compromised.

And mere chastity without, you know, this compassion will make us more fanatic, actually, in the name of being loyal, loyalists and, you know, being strict. So, in a balance of that. Yeah.

So, this liberal and conservative phrasing that in terms of principles and details is beautiful. Thank you. And the balance of chastity and compassion.

Nice words. Shantanu, do you want to respond to something on this? The topic we have discussed many times, actually. Maybe we can just summarize.

Yeah. Yes. Thank you.

So, thank you very much. So, we discussed today on the topic of how to guide effectively. So, started by how authority is important, that principle has to be understood.

And Krishna is ultimate authority. So, if somebody is rejecting authority, ultimately, they are rejecting Krishna. So, we discussed how Kali Yuga involves hypocrisy, which is more being the ego, ego in the individual domain and quarrel in the, quarrel is ego in the, could say, public domain.

These problems come up. So, the way, at one side, that students need to accept the principle of accepting authority, but the authorities also need to earn the authority. Otherwise, the Kali Yuga will be dosho nidhe means the students will always seek faults in the authority, seek, will, and actually the authorities will also have faults, but they may try to cover it up.

So, there could be hypocrisy on the part of the authority and there could be quarrels on the side of the disciple, student, that could also lead to problems. So, with respect to authority, and once we accept this principle, then we discuss about, is it vertical, horizontal, or how is it? So, in general, it begins with horizontally, how Krishna and Arjuna were friends before. And then, at a specific time, Arjuna chose to surrender.

So, guiding effectively means waiting for the right time to guide and not imposing one's guidance on others. And then, even then, at the end, he respected Arjuna's free will by which he basically got Arjuna to take responsibility for the decision. So, that is also important as a part that, otherwise, they will, those who have received guidance will start blaming.

And then, from that perspective, we discussed about how, from, initially start from horizontal towards vertical, and then we come back to horizontal again, like how Prabhupada modelled guiding different people, or rather, Prabhupada talked about Chanakya Pandit's example. And then, we went further to the discussion that, is it, according to the people's mindsets also, not just how old a person is in bhakti, that, then Shanturi mentioned about Bhagavad Gita, that sometimes classes may need to understand the essential wisdom, and they may be very slow in picking up the externals. And other people mentioned that sometimes they may not even pick up the externals because, at one side, because for them, there is such an influential position that small change may have a big effect on them externally.

So, we need to accommodate that part. And then also, in one side, while instructing the pace and the depth of following things, that button should be kept with the person receiving guidance, not the person giving guidance. Rather, the person giving guidance needs to be able to inspire faith, confidence, and trust.

So, trust in the knowledge that is being given, that's from reliable sources, and confidence in the maturity with the knowledge that is given, and faith that, in the intentions of the person. So, that's how we talk about, think, philosopher, guide, and friend, those three words you explained. And then, toward the end, we discussed about, when this, is it that a particular way is faithful, that the vertical is being faithful and the horizontal is more of a compromise? That is, basically, Narada Muni himself models different approaches.

So, it's not that Narada Muni's approach with Dhruv Maharaj is right, or his, Havyashwas is right, or Mughari is right, it just varies. So, the right is what is right for the person to be elevated, not so much for the guide to decide that this is the right way to guide. This is a formula, and I'm going to follow that.

And that's where conservatives and liberals, we talked about that. Conservatives need to conserve the principles, but not try to micromanage the details also, and they'll become fanatical. Relatives need to ensure that the details are adjusted, but they can't start adjusting the principles also, otherwise they'll end up being relativists.

So, that's why we need, it's an acharya who can keep the parampara alive, and if we are guiding, then we need the blessings of the acharyas by which we can also try to guide in some small way. So, any points, concluding points? Radhagopal, you want to add, Samanthu, you want to add? No, as usual, a wonderful job summarizing everything. Thank you, this was wonderful.

Radhagopal, any concluding words? I was feeling we should pray to be internally loyal and externally compassionate, rather than compassionate to oneself and expecting loyalty from everyone else. Beautiful. Nam anusmara yudhya cha.

Thank you very much. Look forward to having more satsangha.