Spiritualizing our relationships – Alachua 2018

So, the last session which we will be talking about how much, how can we change our input in our relationship with others by which we can have them. So, we will move to the last part of our session now, we will talk about how we can or how much we can change our input in the relationship. So, we talked about the moles effect, how we perceive, process and pursue.

So, I talked about perceive and process, how we look at the other person and how we conceive our role in the relationship. And thereafter, how do we act, what can we do so that the relationship can move forward in a healthy way. So, I will skip a couple of slides right now.

So, as I mentioned here, our mind determines our language. That means that each one of us, for us certain things are important, certain things are not important. So, I may do something in which I am expressing my concern, care for somebody else.

But for that person, that is not very important. They need something else. So, love needs to be not just offered, but offered in a way that it is felt as love.

For all of us, our mind is a storyteller and it tells stories in different ways at different times. In my early years in Krishna Bhakti once, we all would hear classes of senior devotees and then prepare our own classes which would be just based on, mostly their classes repeated according to our understanding. So, one of my friends, he gave a very good festival class.

After the class, I asked him, it was a great class. Whose class was it? Or on whose class was it based? So, he felt very insulted. What do you mean? I can't prepare my own class? You are asking on whose class was it based? It was my own class.

So, I had no intention to offend him in that way. So, if say we tell somebody to give a class and we can use these notes to give the class. Now, some people, they may feel, they may feel very much helped.

You know, I have to prepare for a class, I don't know what I will speak. It's good you have given me some notes, I will speak based on this. They will feel helped, but somebody else may feel, don't you trust me to give a class? Don't you think I have enough ability? Why are you giving me notes? So, the same activity which we do for one person, giving notes to give a class is seen as assistance.

And for other person, giving notes for giving a class is seen as a questioning of ability. So, the person's intention may not be like that at all, but they come out like that. So, why? Because different people have different natures.

So, based on their particular mind, frame of the mind, they will see things differently. So, say there is a program and somebody offers, you know, I will cook something, I will, I will, I will cook and drink something. Most people will say, it's good, you know, I am cooking something, you have to cook something and get it.

But somebody else may say, you think I can't cook? What do you mean? I can arrange for it. So, different people's minds work in different ways. So, we can't assume that other people's minds work the same way that it does ours.

So, say as a writer, somebody tells me, could improve this writing skill like this, like this, like this. I sometimes feel very helpful. I am trying to learn how I can improve my writing and this helps.

But for somebody else, you think I can't write? That same correction is given. But for somebody, it will be seen as a help. Somebody, it may see that again, as it may even become discouraging.

You think I can't write? The person is a little in the mood of writing, I can't write only actually. This person is correcting me, that person is correcting me, better I stop writing. So, when we want to give an input in the relationship, what is important is not just that we do the right thing, but also that we do the right thing in the right way.

Krishna talks about interacting with others, even to help them grow in Krishna Bhakti, he says, na buddhi-bhedam janayet, ajnanam karma-sannam, joshyet sarva-karman, vidvani-uddhah samachar. In 3.26, he says, don't disturb the minds of ignorant people. But don't tell them in such a way that they can grow.

So, it's interesting that Prabhupada uses the word, don't disturb the minds. The Sanskrit is, na buddhi-bhedam janayet. Buddhi is intelligence.

So, bhedam means to create disruptions or dissensions or to make, so don't disrupt the intelligence of people. Now, what happens is, for most people, once their mind forms a particular conception, then they use their intelligence to justify that conception. So, then when somebody criticizes them or corrects them, they just find it very unbearable.

So, the purpose should be that people should be elevated. When we are interacting with someone, if somebody has done something wrong, and we may need to correct, but as much as possible, at the end of the interaction, the person should feel encouraged, not condemned, not rejected. So, when we are giving our input, sometimes we may offer a lot of positive support also.

But if that is not what the person needs or that is not what the person values, then it will not be seen as positive support. So, find the fault of fault finding. Sometimes you may think that, okay, this person is doing something wrong, I want this to be corrected.

So, earlier I talked about being in the, we are all a team together. And in a team, you know, once one ball or a metal, you can bowl like this, or you can bat like this. This is this kind of deliveries, you can face this way.

This is good. But if there is constant criticism, then two people are working together in a team, and one person wants the other person also to do better. But when there is constant criticism, the other person starts thinking, are we the same team together? Are we working for the same purpose? And then so in a team, people may always disagree.

And because we are all individuals, I have this way of doing this, I have that, you have that way of doing it. The disagreement is natural. But if the, if say one team player starts doubting the other player, is this player really playing for the team at all? Or sometimes there is match fixing, there is corruption in sports.

So then, if there is a suspicion about the basic character of a player itself, then they can never perform as a team. So when we may criticize or correct you with a good intention, but if that person starts feeling that we are not their well wishers, then that criticism or correction cannot have much constructive effect. So through the overall interaction, if we have created a positive impression, we care for them, we value them, and then within that context, some correction comes, that will work.

Otherwise, even if they are wrong, and even if we are right, the speaking of the right thing may not have the right effect. Krishna says in Austerity of Speech, Anudvega Karam Vakyam, Satyam Priyahitam Chaitam, Swadhyaya Vyasinam Chaiyava Vaanmayam Tapo Uchyate. He says that austerity of speech means to speak in a way that is not agitating to others.

Anudvega Karam Vakyam. Of course, Satyam, you have to speak the truth, but you have to speak in a hitam, speak the truth in a way that benefits others. So going further, if we want to correct someone, and they are doing something wrong, and it's important for us, that what they are doing wrong is troubling us a lot.

So we need to communicate that. Then it is helpful to separate the behavior from the person. Earlier I talked about the modes of passion and ignorance, where we just take one attribute of the person and make that as the whole person.

So that can be with respect to race or caste, but that can also be with respect to behavior. Somebody may be not punctual, somebody may be not keen, somebody may be forgetful, and yes, that's one feature of them, but that doesn't mean that whole person is worthless. Sometimes when we have a problem with a particular behavior of that person, our criticism comes off not as a criticism of that behavior, it comes off as a criticism of that person.

And if we don't separate the behavior from the person, as it is said, hate the sin, not the sinner. So we hate the wrong doing, not the wrong doer. So what will happen is, when we are trying to communicate, earlier I said in the modes of passion and ignorance, emotion is not balanced by reason.

So when we speak, for us this person has done something wrong and that has made us so angry, so we focus on giving vent to our anger without adequately communicating what is the wrong that has happened. So when we, it is important that we speak our feelings also, but it is important to separate the fact and the feelings. Earlier I said our mind tells stories, when I said the story, it is not necessarily wrong, it may be true also, but there is a fact and there is our feeling about that, our understanding of that, our interpretation of that.

When we mix the two, then people feel personally offended by that. Say somebody was supposed to do something and they forgot to do it. You are such an irresponsible fool.

That, that just becomes an attack on that person. What I said, when we separate it, when you don't do this, I feel exasperated, I feel irritated, I feel disappointed, I feel betrayed, because I can't do this, this, this. So the language that we use, in the modes of passion, it is just our emotion dominates a lot.

In the mode of goodness, we are able to see this is the situation and this is the emotion. Both need to be communicated, but both need to be separated and communicated. We all get angry sometimes, but the other person needs to understand why we got angry, what was the exact situation.

If we don't tell that and they just get scared and get assault. Sometimes it happens to us, we just meet someone and that person just starts getting angry with us. And for them, it will be obvious, you know, you did this thing wrong.

But I don't even know about it. So, we see in the Ramayana, there is a story of Vali and Sugriva. So, Vali and Sugriva were the best of friends.

They were brothers and best of friends. But then, once they had both gone to fight with a demon, and then Vali went into the cave in which the demon had disappeared. And he told Sugriva, wait outside.

And Sugriva waited for a long, long time, Vali didn't come back. And he heard the screaming of the demon, but he did not hear the sound of Vali. So, he thought that Vali had been killed and he covered the cave with a huge boulder and came back.

After some period of mourning, he arranged for, the courtier said and then his coronation was arranged for. And while it was raining, then Vali came back. And Vali was furious.

He thought that Sugriva, in order to usurp the throne from me, had put the boulder and blocked me. And now he is sitting on the throne. And he just attacked Sugriva.

Sugriva tried to clarify, explain, but Vali was not ready to listen. But Vali was not ready to listen. So, Sugriva had to flee for his life.

And eventually, what happened was that Sugriva just was threatened, dispossessed and eventually Ram had to intervene and Vali had to die for his wrongdoing. So, their best of friends, they became mortal enemies. It all happened because, now if you see from the perspective of Vali and from the perspective of Sugriva, we all are finite beings.

So, we can never have complete information about everything. So, we have certain information and based on that we arrive at certain inference. So, for Sugriva, he was outside the cave and he heard the screaming of the demon, but he didn't hear Vali's sound.

So, from that he inferred that Vali had been killed. And he thought that if this demon could have killed Vali, he will kill me also, he will destroy our kingdom also. So, better let me curb his menace by blocking him in a stone, blocking him in a cave.

So, Sugriva's inference from the information was wrong. Similarly, Vali's inference, the stone is blocked, the stone is blocking the cave, Sugriva is sitting on the throne. That means Sugriva must have done all this to grab power.

So, in a sense, both of their inferences were logical, but both their inferences were wrong. However, the difference was that in the case of the inference that Sugriva made, he had no opportunity to seek any clarification, whereas Vali had the opportunity at that time. And Sugriva was trying to explain things to him, he just did not hear, just jumped to his conclusion and stayed stuck over there.

It is, people do high jumping, sometimes people jump from parachutes, from airplanes, they jump from mountain tops, this is considered dangerous jumping. The most dangerous jumping is jumping to conclusions. We see some situation and we observe something and just jump to a conclusion.

So, what happened over here was, there was a behavior which was objectionable. From Vali's side, from Sugriva's side, why was the stone blocked, why was the cave blocked? But what Vali did was, he conflated the behavior with the person. Now that you did like this, that means you are a traitor, you acted against me.

So, he did not, his feeling was natural. He had gone for the sake of the state, for the sake of virtue, to fight against a big demon. And his brother was supposed to be guarding, he was not there and he said, blocked.

So, his anger, his suspicion, his resentment, his irritation was natural. But he just let the feelings blind him to the facts. So, the facts were there, but from the facts he had got an inference.

And that inference was driven by his feelings. So, if we, we cannot wish away our feelings, but those feelings may not necessarily be the reliable guides to take us from the facts to the inferences. So, based on our situation, certain feelings will come.

But if we can separate, I am feeling like this because of this. Not that you are like this. So, when we do that, then we just block the other person.

Because the other people, you have already judged and labeled me, what is the use of my trying to communicate? So, then alienation happens. So, our input has to, we have to give our input, but you could separate the behavior from the person. So, this was the action and this is what has made me feel like this.

So, then that other person doesn't feel threatened or condemned or labeled, but we give them an opportunity to understand where we are coming from and then we see whether they have some reasonable explanation or not. So, that same point in the mode of goodness, in the mode of passion and ignorance, we let ourselves be carried away by our feelings. So, fight or flight, you did this wrong, I will show you this.

Bang, bang, bang, bang, I just hit out at the other person. Or you did this, you are a cheater, you are a betrayer, I am leaving, I have nothing to do with you. So, fight or flight, the emotions carry us away.

Now, our emotions are for us as real, we can't wish them away. But then if we channel the emotion properly, then that can help us to come to some more clear conclusion that is in the mode of goodness. Now, this is going to be the last part, this is a little elaborate.

I have spoken some of these things earlier in the last seminar. If we are in a difficult relationship with someone, that person is repeatedly troubling us, then we have broadly three options. That is tolerate, mitigate or emigrate.

Say, somebody is living in Canada and it's very cold for them. Now, there are three options. Okay, it's cold, this is where my work is, my family, so I learn to tolerate it.

If I can't tolerate it, then I have to make sure that I have lots of warm clothes, I have proper heating in my room, in my car, in my, wherever I go, I try to mitigate it. But if I can't do that, then I have to emigrate. I have to go somewhere else.

So, broadly speaking, in any difficult situation we are in, we have these three options, tolerate, mitigate or emigrate. And with respect to relationships also, if we are having some difficulties, then what do we do? Some things, we just can't change them and we can't change them, but it's livable. We can live with it, that's we tolerate it.

Some things, they just, we can't live with them, they can't not be changed, so we have to mitigate them. And some things, changing them requires so much effort that it's not worth it. Just end this now, emigrate.

So, I'll give examples of this and then we'll further discuss this. So, generally speaking, if we talk about the material worldview versus the spiritual worldview. In the material worldview, the focus is on changing of the externals.

If something doesn't work, just quit it, just give it up. So, that's why we see the relationships don't work, then just abandon them. So, the material approach is change the externals.

The spiritual approach, in the spiritual worldview, change the internals, become more tolerant, become more patient, become more thick-skinned so that you can endure it. So, changing internals is the stress of the spiritual approach. Changing externals is the stress of the material approach.

Now, it's not necessary that one is right and the other is wrong. It's just that these are the approaches. Easier approach, if taken to the extreme, can become a problem.

If we focus only on changing the externals, then we end up with decreased commitment to any relationship. Because people just keep changing, changing. There cannot be any sustained relationship.

There's lack of fulfillment in relationships. And there's the Harvard Medical School which did a survey of these people who were the youths who were the product of the free love generation or the free sex generation. And when they were interviewed, they said that they all felt very lonely and guilty.

They didn't view that we are using others and others are using us. So, although their bodies were in contact with many other bodies, their hearts were not touched. So, essentially, when we keep changing externals, then there is no opportunity for committed relationships.

Without commitment, there cannot be any fulfillment. The heart just stays untouched by the relationships. So, therefore, changing externals too much leads to a lack of fulfillment.

On the other hand, if one focuses only on internal change, then one may give in to atrocities, one may become too apathetic to things that are going wrong, one may just let oneself be subject to abuses. So, just taking this to an extreme, just tolerate, tolerate, tolerate. That is also not right.

We see in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells Arjuna, tam sthiti subharudha, tolerate. But the same Bhagavad Gita is also calling Arjuna to fight. Fight against the Kauravas.

Krishna doesn't tell Arjuna, oh, you know, the Kauravas are performing austerities, tolerate it. No. So, the tolerance also is important, but it is not to be taken as a supreme virtue.

It can become, it can lead to fatalism, where we think, oh, everything is destined, nothing is in my hands, this is my fate and I have to live with it. So, how much can we tolerate? Tolerance has to be seen in the light of our purpose. Say, we are going in a metro, in India we call locals.

So, in India, because the population is so much, the local coach, its capacity may be 100, but 400 people are squeezed in it. And then people just squeeze, touching each other. Now, suppose there, somebody, we are standing near somebody and that person is constantly pushing us.

Push, push, push. And then we get annoyed and we push back. And that person pushes.

And we push back. And we get so caught in pushing each other that our destination comes and we are caught in pushing. You know, what is the use of that? If that person is too pushy, we just say, okay, you have your space, I will move somewhere else.

And we tolerate that. Because our purpose is not that we want a permanent space on that train. Our purpose is that we want to get to our destination.

But suppose that person starts pushing us so much that they want to push us out of the train itself. Then we can't tolerate that. We have to take a stand at that time.

We have to push back, defend ourselves. So, how much do we tolerate? The tolerance has to be seen in the light of our purpose. My purpose is to get to the destination.

And if resisting this is taking so much of my energy that I don't get to the destination or I get distracted from the destination, then resistance is not worth it. But if in tolerating, I just get so pushed around that I can't get to my destination. Again, that's not worth it.

So, our purpose is to grow towards Krishna. Our purpose is to practice bhakti and grow in bhakti. And for that, we have to tolerate things.

So, tolerance basically means to keep small things small so that we can focus on big things. So, to keep small things small so that we can focus on big things. So, this person is pushing me in the train.

It's a small thing. Let me move aside. My big thing is I want to get to my destination.

So, in our life, we will all have difficult people in our vicinity somewhere. Now, we have to see how much is the difficulty that is being caused by that person. If overall I want to practice my bhakti and I'm going forwards, then I'll tolerate it.

But that person is causing me so much difficulty that I can't practice my bhakti only. Then, in tolerating that, I will not be pursuing my spiritual life. I'll actually be blocking my spiritual life or my spiritual growth.

So, tolerance is an important virtue in the light of our purpose of practicing bhakti. So, some scriptural examples of these three alternatives. Tolerate, mitigate and immigrate.

So, the Pandavas, when they were subjected to the various schemes of the Kauravas, initially they tolerated. When Bhima was poisoned, when they were sent in a house which was set on fire, Yudhishthira said, this is just a family matter. Don't aggravate it.

Just let's keep quiet and we will become more cautious. But when Draupadi was dishonored, when the Pandavas were exiled and even after coming back, they were not given back their rightful kingdom. When Krishna came to seek peace, Duryodhana was so frazzled that in the same assembly where Draupadi had been dishonored earlier, he tried to dishonor Krishna by arresting him.

So, at that time, the Pandavas recognized that this, this person is not going to reform. There is no sign of reformation, there is no sign of repentance also. Then they, they cannot tolerate this and they mitigated.

So, they mitigated means they fought a war to ensure that this, that Duryodhana was removed from power and the virtues Pandavas were established in power. So, mitigation is required at certain times and eventually when Krishna departed from the world, the Pandavas said, our role was there in this world. Krishna has gone, our responsibility is over.

They enthroned Krishna as the king and they left. So, in different situations, different approaches may work. In all situations, the Pandavas were devoted to Krishna, were practitioners of dharma.

But how that dharma is to be practiced will vary according to situation. Similarly, we consider Ishwara Prabhupada's life also. Ishwara Prabhupada came to America, he was staying at Stalin Gopala Garhwal's and in their house, they used to take meat and Prabhupada would keep his bhoga in the same fridge in which their meat was there.

Prabhupada tolerated that. Prabhupada, he was in America and the hippies would just eat the food and go away and Prabhupada had to wash their plates. He tolerated that.

That was what was the situation where he could live and he could share Krishnamukti. But as I mentioned earlier, when somebody, when Mr. N was trying to cheat the devotees and take away the Juhu land, Prabhupada did not tolerate that. Prabhupada fought against it vigorously.

So, he mitigated. Similarly, when Prabhupada was in India trying to preach in various ways, but people were not being very interested, then Prabhupada decided that, ok, let me go to America. So, Prabhupada could have said, ok, people are not coming, but I am doing my duty, I am speaking, that's good enough.

He could have said that, but he also wanted to transform people. He wanted the message to reach receptive ears. So, he emigrated.

So, through whether tolerating, mitigating or emigrating, his purpose was always to serve Krishna and for the service of Krishna, which particular course of action would work best, that will vary according to time and place. Now, all these three approaches can be done with a service attitude and all these three strategies or approaches can be done with a negative attitude. If I tolerate because I have something more important to do, then my focus is on that important thing and this tolerance is ok.

But if I do it with a negative attitude, that means it's a grudging tolerance. This person is like this, you know, I just don't have the power to do anything. If I get the power, I will show you what I can do.

If it is grudging tolerance, then that will not help us grow much spiritually. Because what is happening, the whole point is we don't want our consciousness to get entangled in other things. We want our consciousness to be available for Krishna.

If we get caught in too many small, small battles, our mind gets consumed and we can't focus on Krishna. So, ok, this is not worth fighting. Let me focus on Krishna.

But if our tolerance is grudging, then we are tolerating, but our consciousness is consumed by that thing. We can't focus on Krishna. Even if we are mitigating, the Pandavas fought the war, they did not fight it for revenge.

They fought for establishing dharma, for removing those who are adharmic. If revenge had been their purpose, if they were seeking vendetta, then they would never even have proposed, gone with the peace proposal at all. So, their purpose was not seeking vendetta.

Similarly, sometimes if somebody has done something wrong, and it's a serious wrong which cannot be tolerated, it has to be corrected, our purpose is not just to get back at that person. Our purpose is, ok, this is the right thing, this is dharma, and this is my dharmic duty, so I will do it. So, if we do it with that attitude, then we won't get mentally consumed by it.

If it works, well and good. If it doesn't work, I did my part, I'll move on. Even when we emigrate, we decide, this issue is too complex, I don't want to get involved in it.

It's not worth it. Just move away from there. Then also, if we do it with a positive attitude, that means, I have better things to do in my life, that's why I'll not get involved in it.

But if we do it with a negative attitude, then the whole point is that we are running away from that situation, but our mind is still in that situation. Oh, this person did like this, this person is so terrible, this person is like this. Then our mind will not be available for growing.

So, emigrate, all these three, if we do them with a service attitude, Krishna, I am your servant, how best can I serve you? Then we can do them in a way that will help us grow towards Krishna. So, there was earlier a question about forgiving. If somebody has done something wrong, can we forgive them or how much should we forgive them? Broadly speaking, forgiveness can be in our intention and forgiveness can be in our action.

As devotees, internally, we don't hold grudges or seek revenge against anyone. If we hold those grudges, then that will hurt us more than the other person. So, okay, this happened, this person did this, it's over.

So, in terms of not holding a grudge, forgiving should always be done. But there is a difference between forgiving and trusting. Forgiveness is for the past.

Trust is for the future. Forgiveness can be given, but trust has to be earned. If say we had given some money to someone and they lost the money.

Now, we may forgive them, but it will be foolish for us to again give money to them. They have to be responsible. If somebody has hurt us, then we may forgive them for that, but again if we put them in a position where they can hurt us, then that is being foolish.

So, we should forgive others, but trusting is not something which we can do undiscerningly. They have to exhibit trustworthy behavior, only then we can offer them our trust. So, sometimes those people change and they really become trustworthy.

At that time, we offer them our trust also. Sometimes those people just remain the way they are and they take our forgiveness as a license for continuing the wrong way. Then in that case, we have to understand that here by such forgiving they are hurting us, they will hurt others also and ultimately they are hurting themselves because the karma that they are doing, they are going to get the reactions for that.

So, then we may have to seek some corrective action over there, some disciplinary action over there. So, forgiveness is a very important virtue for a Brahmana. At the same time, in society, there are not just Brahmanas, there are Kshatriyas also.

So, generally Brahmanas are not the ones who maintain law and order in society. So, at an individual level, the Brahmana will forgive. Oh, you did this, I forgive it.

Of course, scriptures also have examples of Brahmanas who get angry and curse. But that is un-Brahmanical behavior of a Brahmana. But Kshatriyas cannot just forgive.

Kshatriyas have to maintain law. And maintaining law means there is the principle of mercy and there is the principle of justice. So, sometimes justice is what is required.

Krishna himself decided that when the Kauravas were unrepentant, Krishna decided to seek justice. He told the Pandavas, we have to fight a war now. Sometimes some people, if they take the forgiveness as a license for continuing their wrongdoing, then at that time some strong action also has to be taken.

So, in intention, we don't hold resentment against anyone. In that sense, we forgive always. But in action, we have to see what will have the best result.

So, we forgive, we don't trust. And we observe that person becomes trustworthy, good. The person doesn't become trustworthy, then we can't just keep forgiving forever.

We have to take some disciplinary action. Then we have to decide whether it is our position to take that action or it is somebody else's position. Or we just move on and leave it.

So, again tolerate, mitigate or immigrate. These three options which we have broadly speaking, we have to choose which one works best in that situation. So, broadly if we have this attitude of service, then Krishna will guide us forward.

So, when we have some difficulties in relationships, you know, we have to look beyond the problematic person, the problematic relationship to Krishna. And if our sense of self-identity and self-worth comes from our relationship with Krishna, then we will have inner stability. We all define ourselves in terms of our relationships.

I am the mother of someone. I am the father of someone. I am the husband of someone.

I am the wife of someone. I am the brother of someone. I am the sister of someone.

And each of these relationships define us. So, if there is a problem in that relationship and if that relationship is our defining identity, then that problem will become unbearable for us. If I define myself, say, as the son of someone and if my father is upset with me, I feel, what is my life meant for? What am I living for? Nowadays, we have a sexual marketplace where people in their teenage and youth, they define themselves in terms of their capacity to attract a partner.

And if the partner abandons them and breaks up and goes away, people feel devastated. So, one of the top ten fears of people in the 21st century is, it's a new fear which was not there in the previous century, it's a fear of rejection. That I form a relationship with someone and I get rejected in that relationship.

So, now what has happened? They are defining themselves in terms of this relationship. If I can attract a partner, then that means I am attractive enough, I am worthy enough. And if a partner rejects me, then I am unworthy.

So, if our defining relationship or if our defining identity is based on a relationship with somebody in this world, we will always be prone to be insecure. So, if our fundamental identity is that I am a servant of Krishna, and Krishna is my lord eternally, then we will have some security. Whenever we face any problem in a relationship, somebody rebuffs us, rejects us, hurts us, we feel unloved and that is distressing.

But our mind, as I said, it tells stories. So, if one relationship we have problem, second relationship we have problem, some other place we have problem, and the mind starts telling us, you are not only unloved, you are unlovable. And when that happens, then that is not just distressing, that can be devastating.

That's why when people sometimes break up through relationships, people commit suicide. Because they feel, what is my life worth now? So, if our defining identity is that I am a servant of Krishna, and all my relationships are services to Krishna, these are my roles which I am meant to play. So, I will try to do the best.

I am a mother, I am a father, I am a husband, I am a wife. I will try to do this service as responsibly as I can. But my primary sense of identity is, I am a servant of Krishna.

As a servant of Krishna, I am someone's mother, I am someone's father, and all these relationships. Then, we can do these without being inordinately disturbed by ups and downs in those relationships. So, Punti Bhanani says that Ganga always flows towards the ocean.

Let my consciousness flow towards you, O Lord. So, all the different relationships that are there, they are like channels through which our consciousness is meant to flow towards Krishna. When we act irresponsibly in our relationships, then through that service attitude, we are moving closer to Krishna.

But sometimes the channel may get blocked. So, if that channel gets blocked, then what do we see? That, okay, what channel is moving forwards? And we keep moving towards Krishna, and eventually this channel may also unblock. So, sometimes if we ask the question, why is this person doing like this? Why is this happening to me? The why question is frequently the express way to frustration.

Because we just can't figure out, why is this person doing like this? Why is this person doing like that? There is a joke that one man went to God, and he prayed to God, and God came in front of him. And he asked, God, give me one of two benedictions. He said, what? He said, I want to understand.

This is a mundane joke. You either help me understand the nature of women, or I want an express way across the Atlantic Ocean. So, God said, how many lanes do you want on the express way? So, it's not a matter of man or woman.

The point is, understanding people is very difficult. Especially if we think we are expert at figuring out people. Men may find it difficult to figure out women, women may find it difficult to figure out men.

And especially when we think we are good at figuring out people, and then we can't figure out someone. That becomes unbearable for us. So, sometimes people just behave in irrational ways.

So, if you keep asking, why is this person doing this, why is this person doing this? The why question just doesn't have any answer. So, we just have to change our question to how. Krishna, how can I serve you now? How can I move forward in this situation? So, if we have that, then we can prevent our mind from catastrophizing the situations.

So, whatever karma may get us to, Krishna will get us through. Our life, there will be problems, and problems ultimately come because of our own past karma. But, Krishna is there with us, and he will help us get through those problems.

So, if we focus on only that particular relationship, we let ourselves be defined in that relationship, then any problem in that relationship will be catastrophic. My life is over now, what can I do? But, if we see that this relationship is one channel through which I am serving Krishna, and there are many different channels, we contextualize it. Because of some problems in my, because of some past karma, because of certain situations, this problem has come, this will come, this will be there for some time, I can go.

And Krishna will help me go through it. And sometimes, the problems that we face in our horizontal relationships, in our relationship with each other, they are what help us to go closer to Krishna. When we get problems in relationships, especially if the problems come from devotees, other devotees, devotees should be understanding, devotees should be kind.

So many nice qualities of devotees we hear in scripture, where are all those qualities? We feel like that. But, rather than blaming the devotees, we can have a more philosophical attitude. Basically, in this world, there are these three circles in which the soul is situated.

The body-mind, the society, and the nature. So, Adhyatmik, Adhibhautik, and Adhidaivik. So, for all of us, certain amount of our karmic reactions come through this circle.

We have Adhyatmik klesh, Adhibhautik klesh, and Adhidaivik klesh. So, if we are living mostly, by some past karma, some reaction has to come. We have to get some Adhyatmik klesh, we have to get some Adhibhautik klesh, some Adhidaivik klesh.

Now, if we live in the association of devotees primarily, then the Adhibhautik klesh has to come from devotees only. Because we are living primarily with devotees. So, it is not so much, this devotee is a problem, that devotee is a problem.

It is just that our karma has to come through someone or the other. So, rather than blaming that devotee or blaming devotee association, you see that some karma is getting exhausted. Again, that doesn't mean that I have to be passive.

I talked about how to tolerate, mitigate, or emigrate, what we have to do. But, if we see this from this philosophical perspective, that Krishna will help us get through this situation. This is some karmic reaction coming.

So, last point, if you see with the eyes of faith, we see the present and plan the future. Krishna sees the future and plans the present. So, sometimes we may feel, this problem, why is it coming? But, if the child has some pain in the stomach, the child goes to the doctor, please free me from the pain.

And the doctor says, we have to do surgery to remove your appendix. What? Surgery means more pain. But, the doctor is seeing that actually there is bigger problem in future.

So, for that, we have to do this right now. Doctor can see the future prognosis and do the preventive measure right now. So, similarly, if we understand that whatever problems we are facing, Krishna knows the future, he is preparing us.

So, he is preparing our present based on his understanding of future. And sometimes, we may understand some things soon, sometimes it may take some longer time. Last year, when I had come to America, I was in Fort Lauderdale, in Florida itself.

So, I was giving this class, speaking the same point. After that, one devotee, Mataji from Ukraine, she came and told me that she had the experience of exactly this thing. She was in New Vrindavan and she was working on a ship.

So, she had gone there for a retreat and suddenly she got a phone call from her boss that our ship is moving, you have to come immediately. New Vrindavan is a little remote place, not so easy to have transportation. She started inquiring, is there anybody going who can give her a ride to the airport.

She came to know that there was one devotee, one Prabhu, who was going the next morning at 10 o'clock. So, she met him and said, can you drop me to the airport? He said, yes, I'll come here by 10 o'clock. So, she was there at 9.45 and it became 10, 10.15, 10.30. Because New Vrindavan is a little remote, her phone was not getting the range.

She was trying to call, call, her phone was not getting the range, she was not connecting. It became 10.45, 11, 11.15, 11.30 and finally her phone got through. And then that devotee said, oh, I am sorry, I forgot.

I also had to catch my flight, I have come too far, I can't come back now. She was furious. How can you forget like this? You are told you will come.

And somehow she just, she was very angry, she came back and went to her room. That evening when she came to the temple, another Mataji told her, you know that devotee who had gone to the airport today morning? She said, yes, she was still very angry. She said, her car met with a terrible accident.

It was a drunk driver who came and hit the car. And the drunk driver actually hit on the passenger side. This devotee was injured, but not very seriously.

But they showed the pictures of the car, and the passenger side was completely destroyed. So, if she had been sitting in that car, she would have been tied. So, in this case, you know, why that devotee forgot? What happened? At that time, it was a bad thing that happened.

But why it happened, she understood after six hours. Sometimes, why somebody does something, what was its purpose? It was not that boy deliberately forgot to protect her from that accident, but Krishna arranged it. So, what was the purpose, why someone acted in some way, sometimes you may understand it after six hours, sometimes you may understand after six years, sometimes it may take sixty years.

But if we have this understanding that ultimately Krishna is our Lord and Krishna is our well-wisher, then even if people are doing bad things to us, we focus on Krishna, how can I serve you? How can I move towards you? Then we will be able to find our way purposefully through that relationship. So, spiritualizing our relationships ultimately means that we ensure that our spiritual growth goes on irrespective of whatever happens in that relationship. So, if we can go along with that relationship, if that other person somehow is hurting us, troubling us, we do what we can and we move onwards.

So, if our vision is fixed on Krishna, and we have that attitude of service to Krishna, then whether to tolerate, mitigate, immigrate, that guidance will come from within. Krishna will guide us how to move forwards. So, I'll summarize.

I spoke about how we can spiritualize our input in the relationship. So, in that connection I first talked about how in our relationships, when we talk about love, we may be doing something out of loving intent towards others, but the other person's mind is having its own language. And they may not see it as love.

We offer somebody some help, but that person may say, we offer some notes for a lecture, you think I can't prepare? They may see it in a different way. So, love has to be expressed in a way that is also felt as love. And so we need to understand the other person to see how they are seeing our actions to be.

And if we find faults in the other person, then that person may just get alienated from us. So, we are working as a team, but if there is constant fault finding, then that person starts suspecting whether we are on the same team or not. And then we can't work function together.

And even if we have to give some corrections, then it is best to separate the behavior from the person. First tell the facts and then tell the feelings. We take the facts and the feelings, combine them together and make a value judgment.

And then that person feels insulted or condemned. That's what happened in the way Vali dealt with Sugriva. There was an objectionable behavior, but Vali made it into a character judgment.

And that's how they became alienated. So, if we have a difficult situation, a difficult relationship, broadly we have three options, tolerate, mitigate or immigrate. If that problem is not very big, if it's manageable, just like somebody is pushing us in a train car, let's move somewhere else, then we can tolerate.

Tolerate means to keep small things small so that we can focus on the big things. But if that person is not allowing us to do the big thing, the person is pushing us out of the train, then we have to mitigate, to take action to correct the situation. Some problems, we just tolerate them.

Some problems we have to change them. Some problems we may decide it's not worth trying to change this. Let me just leave the situation.

Let me immigrate. So, we discussed Pandavas and Prabhupada example of tolerate, mitigate and immigrate. And then lastly, I talked about how our defining identity is that I am a servant of Krishna and all my relationships are services to Krishna.

Then, if there are ups and downs in relationships, we won't get inordinately disturbed. But we will focus on Krishna and find out how to ensure our consciousness moves forwards even if one particular channel is blocked. So, the problems in our relationships may come because of our past karma because some adhibhautic clash has to come upon us by our past karma.

But whatever karma may get us through, Krishna will get us through. And Krishna sees the future and plans the present. And what his purpose is, we may not know now.

But in due course, his benevolent purpose will be revealed for us. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

As you all know, he is one of the most admired speaker, most sought-after speaker all over the world. He gives lectures in all the prominent universities, in every place. I remember recently in Tampa, I have been waiting for his message for two years.

And he just made it this year. So, we are so fortunate. And we also considered his North American tour, started from Malacca.

So, probably I have considered it as our birth right. It should come every year. And please enlighten us.

And your question answers are for many. You are like our transcendental psychiatrist. You solve all our problems.

Thank you so much, Guruji. We are so grateful to you. We will move on with couple of questions.

And if you still have more questions, probably we will be going to this room. We will be there for few more minutes when we are setting up this room. Thank you all so much.

Prabhupada, be there. So, by our Bhakti practice, isn't our karma wiped out? Sorry? By the time of initiation, our karma is wiped out? Yeah. Yes.

In general, a devotee is not in the purview of karma the same way as a non-devotee is. So, Krishna takes charge of the devotee. And that means not necessarily that Krishna takes away all the karma.

Sometimes Krishna may use that karma for the growth of that devotee. So, it's just like say a person has committed some crime or done something wrong. That person is taken to the police and the police is beating that person.

And that person is at home and the child has done something wrong, say a child or young person and the mother is chastising the person. The father is correcting the person. In both situations, the person is being corrected.

But one is under the purview of the rule of law. The other is at home under the purview of love. So, similarly, a devotee is in Krishna's circle.

And when a devotee is going through some difficulties, there are different ways in which we all can see. So, if it's for ourselves, we will say, actually, I'm not yet surrendered to Krishna. So, it's my karma coming to me.

That will keep us humble. So, we want to have a disposition that is favorable to Krishna. So, it's my own karma coming.

And if I absorb myself in Krishna Bhakti, then that absorption will protect me from the impact of the karma. But if we see some other devotee going through this, then we shouldn't think, I thought you are a great devotee, but now, I understand, you have a lot of sinful karma remaining. So, we shouldn't think like that.

We should see that. What is going on between this devotee and Krishna, I don't know. But I see this as an opportunity to serve the devotee.

So, basically, Krishna can use our karma to create situations in our life so that we become orchestrated to come towards Him. So, sometimes Krishna may use the karma which we have. It's not a karmic reaction, but it is Krishna's arrangement, utilizing our karma to help us come closer to Him.

So, devotees do get distress. And if the devotees can be helped to maintain a devotional disposition, through that distress, they come further closer to Krishna. Okay? Yes.

Last question. Master Guru. We were talking about tolerate, or mitigate, or emigrate.

In the history of our movement, a lot of times, devotees have felt improperly dealt with by persons that are in, by devotees that are in positions of leadership. And so, even though there should be mitigation, there's not so much facility for that. But yet, there's a real need to do that, from the standpoint of a devotee who doesn't want to really leave the service, doesn't want to leave the situation.

So, I remember one time, I attended a youth event across the street from my house, and you were there. And you had everybody say first what they liked the most about this guy, and then what they found the most challenging. And your point was that you really like to study.

Study Shastra, I think, if I remember correctly. And I think the thing you said that was the most challenging was the judgments that were placed without a real attempt to understand what was going on. And I actually said the same thing.

Because I found that to be the case. And I think it's a fairly widespread phenomenon. Sometimes, we have a real strong sense that we've been judged maybe unfairly.

But there isn't so much we can do about it, because it's coming down from a higher authority. I don't exactly know where I'm going with this, but I guess is there some solution that we can have? I know that there are specific situations in which people are judged in all different ways. Sometimes, in the devotee community, if somebody is wronged, there is a need for mitigating.

But there is no proper system or structure for the mitigation. Yes, let's say that our movement is not very old. It's just 40-50 years.

And in many ways, we are trying to figure out still how to how to have a spiritual movement in the material world with a structure of hierarchy that is largely material. So, how it all is going to fit together, it's quite challenging. So, in the material world, if there is an accusation of wrongdoing, then there is a process.

There is a there is a system of justice, system of arbitration or whatever. Now, I'll just give one example. Now, for example, with respect to philosophy.

So, if somebody may say you are deviating from siddhant. Now, what is the basis for deciding that you are deviating? So, we need to have some some well-defined statement of what exactly is a siddhant. And then, okay, this is contradictory to siddhant.

Therefore, it is deviation. But this is not contradictory to any of these points. So, it is not deviation.

So, right now, what has happened is any devotee who feels you are speaking this and this is contradictory to siddhant and then they get criticized. They get condemned. So, we need to have a proper statement of what exactly is a siddhant.

Without that, anybody can criticize anyone else and label them that way. So, this is just one example where the lack of structure can cause labeling and condemning. And I would say this is just a part of the growth pains.

If we see in general, the history of religious movements, the formative years are often quite chaotic. There is explosive growth but there are also explosions of other kinds. So, it's not just scorn.

If you look at the beginning of Christianity, if you look at even the beginning of Gaudiya Vaishnavism itself after Chaitanya Mahaprabhu departed, it's just a feature of history. basically, there is the transcendental and there is the practical. So, at a practical level, we need to have systems for resolving things.

But, when they are not there, we have to see from the transcendental perspective that there is some plan of Krishna here and let me see what practically I can do, how I can move forwards in my service to Krishna. So, Prabhupada often adopted this approach. If two devotees had some conflicts, this devotee is doing like that, this devotee is doing like that, Prabhupada would usually not get two individual integrities, who is right, who is wrong.

Prabhupada would not approach a, would not approach the issue in a very legalistic way. You spoke this, you did this, you did this. If the two had conflicts, you go and serve here, you go and serve here.

So, give them both their domains and let them continue their service. Now, that's not necessarily the way, only way things have to be done all the time. But, basically, we have to find our kshetra, our sphere for serving Krishna.

And, if somehow somebody is, somebody's way of acting is creating some trouble for us, then, if we can't mitigate, if we can't tolerate, then, we might as well immigrate. And, sometimes, that is the way, quite often, that is the way in which many of the initiatives for expanding Krishna conscious outreach have happened. So, we see that there may be an adversity, but within that also, there is an opportunity.

So, yeah, we do need systems for mitigating, but, I would say, we are evolving towards that. So, till that happens, we have to find out what works best for us to move towards Krishna. And, the world is a very big place.

And, sometimes, we just get caught, this person did like this, this person did like that, this person did like that. And, it's true that people may have done it wrong, but the world is a very big place and we can find our sphere where we can serve Krishna and we can attract people towards Krishna and we can continue on our bhakti. Thank you very much.