As you preach to influential people then why don’t you preach to BJP, SANGH-PARIVAR people and end communal politics and riots?

Question, you preach to influential people then why don’t you preach immediately some parivar people and end communal politics and riots? Answer, Krishna Consciousness. We are ready and happy to present Krishna’s message to everyone. So, that includes people who are in politics, people who are fanatics, people who are liberals, people who are atheists, everyone.
It depends on the people’s level of perceptiveness. So, within the Sangha Parivar there is historically we see this started with Mir Savarkar and then Golwalkar and they had the vision of a cultural rejuvenation of India centered on the what they understood as the nationalistic culture of India and over a period of time a political way evolved. So, and that focused primarily on politics which was focusing on changing the country through politics.
So, the original vision of the RSS was that there would be a broad cultural change in society and through that cultural change the climax of that would be political change. The BJP focused primarily on political change as a means to eventually cultural change. But either way the focus of both these visions right from the beginning was non-philosophical.
It was more cultural and that was also nationalistically cultural. So, when we define Hindu and who is a Hindu rather than taking the standard understanding that one who follows the Vedas is a Hindu, they came up with the idea that who would be included in the Hindutva fold. They came up with the idea that anyone who considers Hindustan to be their holy land will be included.
So, they downplayed the conclusion of the Vedic scriptures and the authority of the Vedic scriptures and focused on nationalistic identity primarily. So, that’s how they said we could include Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs also in our fold and we can exclude Christians and Muslims because their holy land is outside the country. So, they felt that if we go too much into the scriptures then there are so many schools of thought within the scriptures and that can lead to unnecessary conflict and confusion.
So, they just downplayed the philosophical part and that’s why despite their intentions of wanting to protect the culture of India due to their non-philosophical nature, often they want to defend the Bhagavad Gita without knowing the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita and they assume not only they do not know the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita, they also already assume that they know the teachings and because of their focus on culture rather than on philosophical truth and that too culture that is centered on nationalism, they are not receptive to rise to a higher level of philosophical understanding. Of course, they are sympathetic to the culture and as devotees we try to engage people according to whatever their inclinations are. So, these people of these groups do render some service and meet with devotees and offer help wherever it’s possible for them and wherever it is required for us.
But beyond that, because they are not primarily philosophically driven, the cultural sympathies are there but beyond that the relationship doesn’t go and it is important to recognize that ultimately Hinduism is also a designation and if one is attached to any designation, any material designation, that can create an obstacle on the spiritual path. So, we do appreciate the cultural efforts that they are doing but as far as the positive cultural efforts are concerned, say protecting the cows and protecting the temples and things like that. But because there is not much solid philosophical identity, philosophical understanding, so the cultural identity also becomes rooted in material distinctions of eye and mind.
So, because of this continuation of the bodily material conception, often, as I said, they’re not receptive to higher philosophical understanding and elevation. Now, as far as Indian communal politics is concerned, we can’t just expect or imagine that it is only one side that is causing communal politics. There has been a long time history of vote-back politics in India that started from the British times when the Britishers started pitting the Muslims against the Hindus, both ways rather, so that they could serve their own political purposes of divide and rule and eventually even after the division or fragmentation of India into Pakistan and later Bangladesh, still the strategy of vote-back politics continues.
And there is going to be inevitably, when there is hardline fanaticism on one side of the religious border, that will bring about a reaction of hardline religious fanaticism in the other border also. So, now if we look at the intrinsic teachings of the Vedic scriptures, there is a broad ethos of tolerance that there are different ways of approaching God and not all of them are equally fast, but still all of them, many of them are accepted. That means they can worship demigods, although that is not the conclusion of the Vedic scriptures.
One can practice karma, jnana, dhyana, although that is not the conclusion. Bhakti is the conclusion. But still, the Vedic tradition is an accommodating tradition, whereas the tradition of the Abrahamic religions in general is exclusivist.
This is the only way and other ways are false. So, it’s not that just because if the Sangha Parivar and those propagating Indrutva, even if they rise to spiritual consciousness by the association of devotees and by the understanding of the philosophy of the Vedic literature, that alone will not end vote-back politics, criminal politics and riots. Because intrinsically, the idea of our way being the only way is there in some religions, especially Islam and Christianity.
And because of that, it does create a lot of intolerant mentality. I’m not saying that all Muslims are intolerant, not at all. There are broad-minded and even spiritually advanced Muslims, as there are Christians.
At the same time, there are a large number who are influenced very strongly by the exclusivist doctrine that is intrinsic to their scriptural teachings. Of course, that exclusivism is contextual. This is the only way, like a doctor telling a patient who is confused about which treatment to take, just take this treatment and you get cured.
It doesn’t mean that all other treatments are false. It just means you take this treatment, focus on that and get cured. So that is how this kind of statements are there in some scriptures.
But when they are extrapolated and generalised, even universalised, that creates a cause of intolerance. So in general, it’s only when people go deep into their tradition and understand the essence and then see that similar essence in other traditions. That means go deep and rather than seeing the superficial externals.
So Islam today, in many ways, Prabhupada had the highest respect for Muhammad Prophet and he expressed it many times. But at the same time, Islam in many ways today is not so much a spiritual search for the truth as it is a political search for power. And because of this, there is the danger to Vedic culture.
And we see this in the Middle East countries, where they don’t allow any other religion and certainly not Hinduism to practice anything publicly. Although they will demand rights for practicing publicly in other countries. So there is a cause of intolerance based on the idea that our way is the only way, definitely poses a danger for Vedic culture.
And communal riots are not caused just by one side. Actually, there is in many ways, a history of intolerance and vandalism that is associated with Islamic history, the rule of India, where many, many temples were destroyed and many deities were desecrated. And Vrindavan was a victim of Aurangzeb’s fanaticism.
And even Bengal saw the atrocities under various kings, Muslim kings. So we may think that those dark ages are over, but it is not true. Even recently in Afghanistan, when the Taliban took over many ancient Buddha, statues of Buddha, which were like world heritage points were destroyed.
So there is definitely a danger to Vedic culture. And the communal riots are not just caused by political factors. Political factors are no doubt important.
And they often are the primary reasons why the religious and the social and political leaders of communities incite people against other religions. But along with that, the point is that the Vedic culture also needs Kshatriyas. And in some ways, the Sangha Parivar is doing that, but it is a well-intentioned, but ill-conceived attempt.
Well-intentioned because the idea of protecting Vedic culture is fine, but ill-conceived in the sense that downplaying the philosophical understanding that is foundational to the Vedic culture, and that philosophical understanding comes from the scriptures, downplaying the philosophy and the scripture reduces it to another material designation. Certainly, the material designation of Hinduism and wanting to protect Hinduism is much more receptive and favorable for the practice of Vedic culture, then, and of devoting ourselves to Krishna, then is the material designation of being a Muslim or a Christian who thinks that his way is the only way. And in fact, the success of his God is by destroying other Gods.
Actually, there are no other Gods. There’s only one supreme God, who is talked about in the various great religions of the world. So, the point of all this historical social religious analysis is that it is not that just by reaching to the Sangha Parivar, communal riots will end.
In general, thoughtful people from both previous traditions, if they go deep into their own tradition, understand the essence, see the essence in other traditions and then have a meaningful dialogue and then influence the respective communities based on that dialogue and understanding, then there is scope of calming down and minimizing and eventually eliminating communal riots. So, in the tradition, there were many places where Hindus and Muslims would live together harmoniously. So, that has happened and that can happen if people actually become God conscious and not religion conscious.
And that requires philosophical education and scriptural understanding and then purification. So, certainly those who are, there are some devotees who are working to network with these groups also and not all leaders are equally against philosophy. So, there are some people who are getting influenced, but ultimately, rather than, we shouldn’t think of Sphon as being one body doing one thing.
There are different leaders with different visions and different inspirations. They do different things. If we feel inspired about a particular way of sharing Krishna consciousness, then who knows Krishna can empower us also to do it.
So, if we study the philosophy, understand it systematically and then get the necessary training for sharing this with our audience that we feel inspired to share with them, Krishna can empower us and miracles can happen also. Thank you.

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

Question, you preach to influential people, then why don't you preach BJP Sangh Parivar people and end communal politics and riots? Answer, Krishna Consciousness, we are ready and happy to present Krishna's message to everyone. So, that includes people who are in politics, people who are fanatics, people who are liberals, people who are atheists, everyone. It depends on the people's level of perceptiveness.

So, within the Sangh Parivar, there is historically we see this started with Mir Savarkar and then Golwalkar and they had the vision of a cultural rejuvenation of India centered on what they understood as the nationalistic culture of India. And over a period of time, political will evolve. So, and that focus primarily on politics, which was focusing on changing the country through politics.

So, the original vision of the RSS was that there will be a broad cultural change in society and through that cultural change, the climax of that would be political change. The BJP focused primarily on political change as a means to eventually cultural change. But either way, the focus of both these visions right from the beginning was non-philosophical.

It was more cultural and that was also nationalistically cultured. So, when we find Hindu and who is a Hindu, rather than taking the standard understanding that one who follows the Vedas is a Hindu, they came up with the idea that who would be included in the Hindutva fold. They came up with the idea that anyone who considers Hindustan to be their holy land will be included.

So, they downplayed the conclusion of the Vedic scriptures and the authority of the Vedic scriptures and focused on nationalistic identity primaries. That's how they said we could include Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs also in our fold and we can exclude Christians and Muslims because their holy land is outside the country. So, they felt that if we go too much into the scriptures, then there are so many schools of thought within the scriptures and that can lead to unnecessary conflict and confusion.

So, they just downplayed the philosophical part. And that's why, despite their intentions of wanting to protect the culture of India, due to their non-philosophical nature, often they want to defend the Bhagavad Gita without knowing the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. And they assume, not only they do not know the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita, they also already assume that they know the teachings.

And because of their focus on culture, rather than on philosophical truth, and that too culture that is centered on nationalism, they are not receptive to rise to a higher level of philosophical understanding. Of course, they are sympathetic to the culture. And as devotees, we try to engage people according to whatever their inclinations are.

So, these people of these groups do render some service and meet with devotees and offer help wherever it's possible for them and wherever it is required for us. But beyond that, because they are not primarily philosophically driven, the cultural sympathies are there, but beyond that the relationship doesn't go. And it is important to recognize that ultimately Hinduism is also a designation.

And if one is attached to any designation, any material designation, that can create an obstacle on the spiritual path. So, we do appreciate the cultural efforts that they are doing, but as far as the positive cultural efforts are concerned, say protecting the cows and protecting the temples and things like that. But because there is not much solid philosophical identity, philosophical understanding, so the cultural identity also becomes rooted in material distinctions of iron mind.

So, because of this continuation of the bodily material conception, often, as I said, they are not receptive to higher philosophical understanding and elevation. Now, as far as Indian communal politics is concerned, we can't just expect or imagine that it is only one side that is causing communal politics. There has been a long time history of vote-back politics in India that started from the British times when the Britishers started pitting the Muslims against the Hindus, both ways rather, so that they could serve their own political purposes of divide and rule.

And eventually, even after the division or fragmentation of India into Pakistan and later Bangladesh, still the strategy of vote-back politics continues. And there is going to be inevitably, when there is hardline fanaticism on one side of the religious border, that will bring about a reaction of hardline religious fanaticism in the other border also. So now, if we look at the intrinsic teachings of the Vedic scriptures, there is a broad ethos of tolerance, that there are different ways of approaching God and not all of them are equally vast, but still all of them, many of them are accepted.

That means they can worship demigods, although that is not the conclusion of the Vedic scriptures. One can practice karma, jnana, dhyana, although that is not the conclusion, bhakti is the conclusion, but still the Vedic tradition is an accommodating tradition. Whereas the tradition of the Abrahamic religions in general is exclusivist.

This is the only way and other ways are false. So, it's not that just because if the Sangha Parivar and those propagating Indrutva, even if they rise to spiritual consciousness by the association of devotees and by the understanding of the philosophy of the Vedic literature, that alone will not end World Bank politics, criminal politics and riots, because intrinsically the idea of our way being the only way is there in some religions, especially Islam and Christianity. And because of that, it does create a lot of intolerant mentality.

I'm not saying that all Muslims are intolerant, not at all. There are broad minded and spiritually advanced Muslims as there are Christians. At the same time, there are a large number who are influenced very strongly by the exclusivist doctrine that is intrinsic to their scriptural teachings.

Of course, that exclusivism is contextual. This is the only way like a doctor telling a patient who is confused about which treatment to take, just take this treatment and you get cured. It doesn't mean that all other treatments are false.

It just means you take this treatment, focus on that and get cured. So that is how this kind of statements are there in some scriptures. But when they are extrapolated and generalized, even universalized, that creates a cause of intolerance.

So in general, it's only when people go deep into their tradition and understand the essence and then see that similar essence in other traditions, means go deep and rather than seeing the superficial externals. So Islam today, in many ways, Prabhupada had the highest respect for Muhammad Prophet and he expressed it many times. But at the same time, Islam in many ways today is not so much a spiritual search for the truth as it is a political search for power.

And because of this, there is the danger to Vedic culture. And we see this in the Middle East countries where they don't allow any other religion and certainly not Hinduism to practice anything publicly, although they will demand rights for practicing publicly in other countries. So this is a cause of intolerance based on the idea that our way is the only way definitely poses a danger for Vedic culture.

And communal riots are not caused just by one side. Actually, there is a there is in many ways a history of intolerance and vandalism that is associated with Islamic history, the rule of India, where many, many temples were destroyed and many deities were desecrated. And Vrindavan was a victim of Aurangzeb's fanaticism.

And Bengal saw the atrocities under various kings, Muslim kings. So you may think that those dark ages are over, but it is not true. Even recently in Afghanistan, when the Taliban took over many ancient Buddha, statues of Buddha, which were like world heritage points were destroyed.

So there is definitely a danger to Vedic culture. And the communal riots are not just caused by political factors. Political factors are no doubt important.

And they often are the primary reasons why the religious and the social and political leaders of communities incite people against other religions. But along with that, the point is that the Vedic culture also needs Kshatriyas. And in some ways, the Sangha Parivar is doing that.

But it is a it is a well-intentioned, but ill-conceived attempt. Well-intentioned because the idea of protecting Vedic culture is fine, but ill-conceived in the sense that downplaying the philosophical understanding that is foundational to the Vedic culture, and that philosophical understanding comes from the scriptures. Downplaying the philosophy and the scripture reduces it to another material designation.

Certainly the material designation of Hinduism and wanting to protect Hinduism is much more receptive and favorable for the practice of Vedic culture and of devotional service to Krishna. Then is the material designation of being a Muslim or a Christian who thinks that his way is the only way. And in fact, the success of his God is by destroying other gods.

Actually, there are no other gods. There is only one supreme God who is talked about in the various great religions of the world. So the point of all this historical, social, religious analysis is that it is not that just by lynching to the Sangha Parivar, communal riots will end.

In general, thoughtful people from both religious traditions, if they go deep into their own traditions, understand the essence, see the essence in other traditions and then have a meaningful dialogue and then influence the respective communities based on that dialogue and understanding, then there is hope of calming down and minimizing and eventually eliminating communal riots. So in the tradition, there were many, many places where Hindus and Muslims would live together harmoniously. So that has happened and that can happen if people actually become God conscious and not religion conscious.

And that requires philosophical education and scriptural understanding and then purification. So certainly there are some devotees who are working to network with these groups also. And not all leaders are equally against philosophy.

So there are some people who are getting influenced. But ultimately, we shouldn't think of Skone as being one body doing one thing. There are different leaders with different visions and different inspirations.

They do different things. If we feel inspired about a particular way of sharing Krishna consciousness, then Krishna can empower us also to do it. So if we study the philosophy, understand it systematically, and then get the necessary training for sharing this with our audience that we feel inspired to share with them, Krishna can empower us and miracles can happen also.

Thank you.