Should People Be Forgiven Because of the Family They Belong To, As Was Ashwatthama? Chaitanya Charan

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

So, how can Draupadi think of others at that particular time? Yeah, it's difficult. I would say, for her, she, at that particular time, you can say she is very saintly, very compassionate. That's true.

But beyond that, it is that the Pandavas had come to a place where they just wanted it all to end. Just, you know, just get it over with. They just want closure now.

Now, her sons are not going to come back. They are already lost. So, why increase the pain? So, basically, how the mind of a person responds to Draupadi is very difficult to predict.

But broadly the Pandavas' mood at that time became, it's over. So, it was definitely a concern for Krupi. So, I have tried to read the Mahabharata carefully to see whether there were any special interactions between Draupadi and Krupi.

So, well, yes and no. In the sense that, if you see, when Draupadi came to the Pandavas' palace, there were like three mother figures for her. One was directly her mother-in-law, Kunti.

The other was Gandhari. And the third was Krupi. So, now what happened with Kunti, there was, they were both great devotees, but there was a bit of a coldness in their relationship.

The reason was that it was Arjuna who had won her hand. And she expected that she will marry to Arjuna. But when the Pandavas, Kunti just made a casual statement that share whatever you got with everyone.

So, when she saw how much the Pandavas took Kunti's casual statement seriously, so, that made her feel that, you know, would she really be able to connect with them? Or will they always remain so subservient to their mother that they would never really be a part of the husband-wife relationship. So, she accepted because at that time, Yasodhi also said and her father also agreed. And you know, I am happy that she had five husbands.

But from that point onwards, they were great devotees and they were in one sense close to each other, but there was some distance among them. So, now Gandhari of course, you know, Gandhari tried at one time to make amends. But the fact that she was the mother of the person who had tried to disrobe her, she was far away.

So, the only like a mother figure who was there for her was Krupi. And she was close to her to some extent. And now again, I am not saying that her relationship with Kunti was not good.

It was good, very good. But that particular starting point, like the first impression through lust, the first impression was a bit provocative. And sometimes we talk about great devotees, but still they may have some distance among them.

So, she had some warmth in her relationship with Krupi. That was also one factor. So, what I am trying to say is, people coming from a great lineage do not act according to that lineage.

They do all the wrong things. And it sets the wrong precedence. Today if you see in this world, there are lot of politicians and their children who go and do all the wrong things, do all the rights and everything.

And they have everything with them. And they get away with it. The system is with them.

A single epitome of that descent. And somewhere my question is, one is the laws of man-made laws and one is nature's law. Where does it take effect from? Is it the man-made laws constrain to some extent or is the nature's law constrain to some extent? Okay.

It's a very thoughtful question. And sometimes if you see that somebody belongs to a great lineage, that's why their wrongs are overlooked. But that can lead to a lot of, in today's politics the word is nepotism, where somebody is a politician's child or something, they get special favours and their wrongs are also overlooked.

So should this be done? And how does nature's law or human law work in this context? Well, it is important to understand that the scripture occurs in a particular culture. Like nowadays there is lot of revived interest in the Indian epics. So one big debate recently was going on in social media is that, should Kunti have abandoned Karna? Now it's a valid question.

But in today's culture it's possible for an unwed woman to have a child. Still there is some stigma, but it's possible. You know, the social stigma is not that much.

But in that culture it would have been impossible for her. And it would not have been just for her. See, Kunti, if you know, was adopted.

Kunti was adopted by, what is it, Madra? No. Kunti Bhojji. So that's how her name was Prutha and it became Kunti.

So the thing was that she was adopted, but you know, sometimes the adopted child, still there is some distance. So now, if it had come to do, that you know, she had, she could have said, I did not do anything, it was just a mantra and everything, but still it would have reflected badly on her father. And whether she, the family that had adopted her, whether he would accept her.

So you know, our actions are to a large extent the product of our society and our culture. We can say you should not be affected by that, but it doesn't, it's not that simple. And that is not always a bad thing.

See, the culture in general restrains and even shames certain things. And that is also necessary. Because the law cannot enforce everything.

The law cannot punish everything. To some extent in today's world, say about 20-30 years ago, smoking in public was very cool, it was very fashionable, very common. But now, it has decreased substantially.

And while there are laws, there are very few people who are actually fined or punished for smoking in public. It is largely the power of cultural shame. You know, when somebody starts smoking in public, everybody disapproves.

And people stop because of that. So, my point is that when a culture shames something, that is not necessarily a bad thing. That can also complement the law and ensure that the law's work decreases and still people are kept in line.

Now, of course, the cultural shaming can go in an unwanted direction also. Where somebody is not guilty, they may be shamed. And that is not healthy.

For example, if a woman is violated, in the past, the woman would be blamed. And that's why normally the woman would feel so ashamed. Now, the pendulum of the culture is shifting where the woman is seen not as to be blamed but as a victim, to be sympathized, to be empathized.

So, sometimes the culture of shaming works positively, sometimes it does not. Now, in that particular culture, it is almost universal. So, in one sense, Karna got the bad deal out of it, Ashwathama got the good deal out of it.

Karna, because he was considered as belonging to the Suta community, so he did not get the honor notion. Ashwathama, because he was belonging to the Brahmana community, he got the advantage of that. So, in general, when a person is belonging to some larger whole, the idea is two-fold over here.

That when the belonging to a larger whole brings a certain set of expectations, those expectations themselves act as restraint. And that's why, see, Krishna tells Arjuna, you are not the body or the soul in 2.30. But immediately after that, in the next verse, he refers to Arjuna with two bodily designations. Matras-Parshastu-Kaunteya and Tamas-Pikshaswa-Bharata.

And Prabhupada explains the purport that, that belonging to a great lineage, that brings great responsibility. So, acting at the level of the soul is difficult for Arjuna. But because you belong to a great dynasty, you can act accordingly.

You can act at the spiritual level. So, Krishna is not reinforcing the material conception by using those names. He is actually motivating him to act spiritually by using those names.

So, in that culture, it was like that. Now, should it be like that? Sometimes it should not be. So, generally speaking, if somebody belongs to a relatively, what is the word, to a relatively respectable family or something like that, then what happens is that they may be let off once or twice.

But if they keep repeatedly doing something wrong, then they cannot be let off. So, the idea is, this was horrendous wrong by Ashwathama, but it was one-off thing. Ashwathama had not anything like this before.

So, he did, now that one thing was so terrible, it's horrendous, it's heinous, but it was one incident. The Pandavas felt, he will benefit from that. So, was it the right thing? It depends.

So, he says, you know, I have a devotee friend in America. He is a traffic cop. And he tells me when teenagers break the speed limit and he has to pull them over.

So, he says, when people, when he pulls them over, you know, sometimes they will go to their record and make a permanent mark for them especially or they are fine. So, he says, well, I rarely have to pull Indian youth over. And if I pull your Indian youth over, just tell them, give me your parents' number.

And they will come really scared. So, he says, that doesn't work with American kids. So, what happens is, that sense that we are a part of a family and therefore we need to behave responsibly, that is to some extent that cultural expectation is there, that's a good thing.

But it's not that if the same kid keeps breaking the law two, three, four times, they are going to let them go. So, it is a first offence and that's why that point was considered. So, should it become a, should this justify nepotism? Certainly not.

That politicians, so, I would say, there are two different things. When politicians' children are able to get away, it is not because the police or the law enforcement think that, oh, this person belongs to the great dynasty, so I should let him go. It is more that, that politician will abuse their power and get back to me, get back on me if I don't let him go.

So, that is the reason over there. So, in that sense, it is not because so much of, it is because of cultural respect, it is because of political retribution. So, that's why they get special favors.

So, I think the context is different. So, in India, this whole caste consciousness, it would have diminished substantially. It has survived mainly for two reasons.

At an individual level, because of marriages, people still prefer to marry, but that is also decreasing. The second is because of politics. Politicians get vote banks because of that.

So, the caste consciousness from what I have seen, it is substantially lesser among Indians who are outside India. Because there are no politicians seeking vote banks over here. For them, all of us are Indians.

If they want our votes also, if a western politician wants our votes. So, then what happens is that caste consciousness will go on down substantially. So, it's a lot depends on the social, cultural context for such decisions.

But one-off offence will be forgiven, but not repeated offences. Yes, last question. My question is, is it our expectation that we have an understanding that Ram means all, Naik and Rosy and Gandhi and it's fantasy world has been happy ever after.

So, it's like goody-goody feeling. Is that what we are after? Is that the reason? When we say we are all anarchists, we have no control over anything. We have absolutely no control over anything.

Our whole body can go and have it. So, with such less control, but in totality when we do, eventually the dharma prevails. So, that's why we hear so many stories about Ramayana.

So, the question is, is it our expectation that we want everything to go right? And we have a definition of what is right. Correct. That's a good point.

So, when we say a divinely guided decision goes wrong, is it that we are expecting everything should go smoothly? And that expectation is a problem? Yes, that's definitely one factor. At the same time, you know, when things go wrong also, to what degree? Like if somebody has material obstacles, if we try to share Krishna's message and they are difficult. To some extent we expect that, we are in the material world.

But if we start having spiritual difficulties, like this devotee, what happened was, his spiritual life went down because of the situation he found himself. So, it was not simply the expectation of a comfortable, easy life. So, it could be that we have unrealistic expectations.

But then we also hear that with the instruction comes empowerment. Empowerment means that, yes, obstacles will come, but we will find a way through the obstacles and move ahead. So, if we have the expectation that just because I am following instructions, everything will be easy, that's not true.

Empowerment is not the absence of obstacles. It is the perseverance through obstacles. Prabhupada was following the spiritual master's instruction and he was empowered.

But still if we read about his life, when he was in America, he faced immense obstacles. So, that's why it's important that we have a clear understanding of what it means. And also that's one reason why even those who are giving instructions should not be absolutist in giving instructions.

I have one spiritual master, he was telling me about how you have to be very careful. So, one young couple came to him and he said, Maharaj, we have decided never to have any children. Please bless us.

So, Maharaj told him, he said, I replied to them, whenever you decide to have children, you have my blessings. Now, sometimes in a moment of some kind of religious righteousness, somebody will say, I know this. But, you know, that may be very unrealistic.

So, at that time, I have had many discussions, sometimes devotees get very inspired. So, one devotee, one spiritual master told me that one devotee came and said to him, he was very inspired by class, he said, Maharaj, you start a center over here, I will give my home to you as a temple. I asked him, have you asked your wife? He said, no need to ask.

You know, I tell you there is a need to ask. No need to do that. Sometimes people become overzealous in the heat of the moment.

So, that's why it is a responsibility from the person who is giving the instruction and the responsibility from the person who is receiving the instruction. Both have to use a sense of responsibility and intelligence and act accordingly. And yes, ultimately, like I said, if we are patient enough, through all the difficulties, we will come to a better place eventually.

But sometimes we have to also re-evaluate and make decisions. How do we move forward? See, Prabhupada went to the West and he preached in the West. And he was successful.

But around 1970, there is a lecture where Prabhupada said, he is saying to his disciple that, it was my Guru Maharaj's desire to preach in the West and I have done that. But now it is my desire to preach in India. And just as I assisted my Guru Maharaj in fulfilling his desire, I want you to assist me in fulfilling my desire.

Now, was Prabhupada's desire independent of or different from his spiritual master's desire? No. What Prabhupada wanted was that, that he saw that in the West, he could make people into devotees. But they would need an environment that sustains and rejuvenates devotion.

And the Western culture was such that, that would not rejuvenate. That's why he felt that in India, in the traditional holy places especially, we should have temples which would become like pilgrimage places. And that's why he wanted to preach in India.

So, Prabhupada was following the instruction of his spiritual master. But Prabhupada was also seeing how can I fulfill the purpose, not just the letter of the instruction. So, that's why I think the whole picture beyond the specific interaction in terms of the instruction.

The big picture has to be seen by the disciple and the big picture has to be seen also by the Guru or the giver of instruction. Thank you.