Aversion to commitment is not detachment
Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.
Hare Krishna. So today morning I'll discuss on the topic of aversion to commitment is not detachment. We'll discuss what detachment is and what it is not.
The Bhakti philosophy uses the system of Sankhya for analyzing the material world. Sankhya is one of the six systems of philosophy that was developed in India and the Bhakti philosophy is primarily derived from Vedanta but it draws on other schools of thought also. So Sankhya basically analyzes the material world.
So Sankhya is written in the word sankhya, to count. Sankhya means that which counts. So in studying the subject there are basically two aspects to it, there is analysis and there is synthesis.
In analysis we break down a thing into its components. In synthesis we bring together the components to understand the whole. So for analysis the Sankhya uses various frames.
For example, it analyzes the world into elements, the 24 elements. It also uses the frame of the three modes of material nature. And the concept of the modes is used for analyzing not just objects but also subtle things such as qualities.
Normally on the spiritual path, vairagya is considered to be a virtue. Similarly, jnana is also considered to be a virtue. But the Bhagavad Gita explains how both this jnana and vairagya can also be in the three modes.
It talks about knowledge in the modes of goodness, passion, ignorance from 18.20 to 22 and 18.678 it talks about renunciation or tyaga in the 789 actually. It talks about tyaga in the modes of goodness, passion and ignorance. And the idea is that things have their value based on two things.
One is the intrinsic content and second is their purpose. So that's like money. The money is itself valuable.
But depending on what it is used for, sometimes the money which a person has, that person may just squander the money in gambling and even gamble more and lose all the money. So the money has its value. First of all intrinsically it has some value.
But along with that what it is used for, that will also determine its value. So like that renunciation or tyaga, that has value. But for what purpose it is used, that also determines its value.
So I will focus on the, here I won't go into analyzing all the three modes and renunciation. I will focus on the Rajoguna where Krishna says that dukkham ity evayat karma, kaya kleśa bhayā tejet, sakrutva rājasam tyāgam, naiva tyāga phalaṁ labhēt. So he says in 18.8 that dukkham ity evayat karma, all this work, it is very troublesome.
Dukkham ity evayat karma, kaya kleśa bhayā tejet, that this is going to cause me a lot of pain to my body. And therefore one gives it up. Sakrutva rājasam tyāgam, that kind of tyāga is in the mode of passion.
And then Krishna says naiva tyāga phalaṁ labhēt. Such tyāga will not do the phala of tyāga. Now what is that phala? Actually tyāga, renunciation or detachment, it is meant to lead us towards liberation, towards ultimately Krishna.
So when the renunciation is done out of the fear of trouble, that will not lead to elevation, that will not lead to liberation. Why is that? Actually renunciation is meant ultimately to raise our consciousness from the material level to the spiritual level. But if I am thinking only in terms of material profit loss calculations, this is giving material pleasure, this is giving material pain, and this seems to give me more material pain than material pleasure, therefore I will give it up.
Then, yes I am giving up something but I have not given up the material conception of life. I am still evaluating from the material conception of life and I am thinking from the material perspective, keeping, sticking to this is not very profitable. It is loss-inducing.
So therefore I will give it up. Now if somebody, say, has a company that is making loss and it is making loss in such a way that there is no chance of it recovering. And then that person says, I am going to renounce this company.
Well, that is not really renunciation. It is just anyway it was making a loss, so what is the point in that? So in calling that renunciation. So yes, one may get attached to something even if it is distressing.
And that means holding on to something even when it is distressing and even when there is no point in that. That is Tamasic. That is even worse.
But giving up something only because of the problem with it, not whether that is giving it up as serving some higher purpose or not. That is Rajasic. So, now today's culture is a culture of aversion to commitment.
Now, aversion to commitment, this is, say, seen most graphically in the way, you know, couples often want to live together without marriage. They feel that, you know, once we marry and then if it doesn't work out, then we have to go through all the legal complications of divorce and all that. I just want to get involved in that.
We are living in a very unfortunately degraded situation. The Vedic scriptures talk about how, you know, a man and a woman, even after marriage, they should unite for procreation. That's the primary purpose.
And then if there is even bodily union without taking up the responsibility of procreation, that is considered, that is not considered proper. But we have here, not only do people want bodily union and don't want children, they don't want even the entanglement of marriage. So, what is happening is, it's very much averse to commitment.
And the reason for this is that people feel that any kind of commitment creates a lot of trouble. So, Prabhupada, when he went to America, he said that, he said, even the hippies had done the materialistic conception of life. And that's why they had given up their careers, they had given up their job, they had given up their families, they had given up even their responsibility to the nation, they didn't want to go and fight in the Vietnam War, and they had given up practically everything.
So, they were doing nothing. But they, that renunciation was largely tamasic. So, just giving up things is not enough.
You know, we give up something to take something higher. And when we start practicing bhakti, at that time, our surrounding culture, it affects us, irrespective of whether we see its effect consciously on us or not, that sort of attitude percolates inside us. And it percolates inside us, then quite often, we start, because of the surrounding culture, we also have an aversion to commitment.
And when we have that aversion to commitment, and we come to spiritual life and we hear, oh, detachment is, detachment is so good. If you become detached, you become renounced, then we can advance very nicely. Then we start increasing, we start mistaking our aversion to commitment as detachment.
And I think, yeah, I'm already detached, or I'll become more detached. But actually, what is happening is that is not necessarily detachment. Now, how do we understand the difference between aversion to commitment and detachment? The primary difference is based on our definition of happiness.
Now, when there is aversion to commitment, at that time, the people have various options for enjoyment for them. The mind is offering, okay, you can do like this and enjoy, you know, going back to say, relationships, you can maybe have this person as a partner, you can have this person as a partner, so the mind is offering many options for enjoyment. And when people are averse to commitment, basically, they want to keep all the doors for enjoyment open.
They want to keep all the doors open. If this doesn't work out, I'll try this, it doesn't work out, I'll try this, it doesn't work out, I'll try this. So aversion to commitment doesn't mean that people have become detached from their conception of happiness that has been given by the mind.
They think the mind schemes will make me happy. But which of these schemes is the best, I don't know. So I'll keep myself open to everyone.
If I commit myself to one, then what will happen, the other option will get closed. I don't want to do that. So aversion to commitment comes from actually a total faith in the mind.
Now that okay, all the options, they're all good, which is the best, I just want to explore it. Whereas detachment means we accepted the mind scheme for happiness do not lead to happiness. When the mind says you do this and enjoy, you do this and enjoy, you do this and enjoy, we understand that it is not going to lead to happiness.
That means detachment comes when we close the doors to the mind scheme for happiness. So that means, actually speaking, aversion to commitment and detachment are almost opposite. In aversion to commitment, we want to keep all the doors for enjoyment the mind is offering, we want to keep all of them open.
Whereas in detachment, we close those doors entirely. Yes, this is not the way to happiness. So this means that aversion to commitment, in one sense is tamasic, whereas detachment is sattvic.
Actually, externally speaking, sattvaguna and tamoguna can look very similar. There's one devotee, once I used to give a class, there's one devotee who always come on way before time and always be there on time for the class. Then I thought a very sincere devotee and he was nice.
But then one day I asked him, you know, everybody comes late, how do you always manage to come on time? He said, Prabhupada, you know, I like to sit behind this wall and I can sit comfortably and relax. And you know, when you give class, you get lost in the class also. So I go to sleep also and you don't mind it.
So we were friends, so he told me that. But the point is, externally it may appear, you know, somebody is sitting very peacefully. But sitting very peacefully, sattvaguna means internally the brain is working.
Tamoguna means the brain has gone to sleep. So sattvaguna and tamoguna can look similar externally. Among the three modes if we see, that in sattvaguna, there is relatively less activity.
There is less action, there is lot of contemplation. Contemplation not in the sense of contemplation of sense gratification. Contemplation in the sense of thoughtfulness.
And in trajoguna, there is lot of action and very little contemplation. And in tamoguna, Krishna says that there is no action and no contemplation. So because there is no action, and you know, we can't know whether there is contemplation going on inside or not, anyone.
So from the external perspective, sattvaguna and tamoguna can sometimes look similar. So like that, aversion to commitment, which is tamasic and detachment, which is sattvic, they can look similar. But they are radically dissimilar.
And that dissimilarity stems primarily from the conception of happiness. In tamoguna, people think that, people are caught in the material conception of pleasure. But they sometimes feel, oh, to get this pleasure will require so much trouble.
That's why I will not bother about it. It's not that they become detached from it. It's just that they just don't feel that I have to work so much for it.
So, you know, the scriptures talk about eating, sleeping, mating, defending as animalistic activities. But if we see, when people watch movies, when people enjoy the movies, you know, in the movies, they enjoy the scenes about where the hero and heroine are embracing and kissing. And what is happening over there? Actually, it is second-hand mating.
Is it? Somebody else is mating and people imagine if I was there, it would be so nice. So it is second-hand mating. Actually, to even mate in this world requires some energy.
You know, you have to court a person, you have to please that person, you have to develop a relationship with that person. We don't want to do that also. Just turn on some television, turn on some internet channels and just watch and think I am enjoying over there.
So, in Tamoguna, externally, you know, somebody may be sitting in front of a computer and studying some books and somebody else may just be playing video games. Externally, both of them may appear to be just sitting in front of a computer. But you know, one may be acting in Satvaguna, another may be acting in Tamoguna.
It can be very different. So, when there is the conception of happiness, that is material, but one doesn't want to work too much for that material happiness, then that is the time when one becomes averse to commitment. And that's why Krishna says over here, one is giving it up not because one thinks, okay, that this is, there is another kind of which is the fear of material existence itself.
You know, there is, that I'll get entangled over here, I'll suffer. That is not the Bhaya that is prompting detachment. This Bhaya is, there will be trouble for my body.
And the problem with this attitude, from the material perspective and the spiritual perspective, both, I'll talk about that. See, if you see, India is very much a disorganized country. When in the 17th, 18th centuries, say the Upanishadic wisdom went to the West through some thinkers.
Now, there are many thinkers who came from the West to India. They thought, oh, Indians have got this Upanishad, they have got this Bhagavad Gita, they have got such profound wisdom. Then they came to India, and they found such poverty, such disorganization, such chaos.
So, there are notes written by some of these people who were actually India lovers. They loved Sanskrit, they studied Sanskrit. They said, we just can't understand, you know, how a civilization that was, that is so lofty in its thinking is also so filthy in its living.
Such lofty thoughts are coming up, you know, actually the Upanishads and the whole wisdom of the spirituality that is there, it's very lofty. But how these people are so pathetic, so disorganized, so chaotic in their living. Now, there are many causes to this.
And this is a whole complex geopolitical historical issue. But one factor is that there is a general apathy to the state of affairs everywhere. As long as things are okay with me, everything else, it doesn't matter.
Now, this is Tamil Sikh. This is, that means, even Indians actually, the same Indians who may just throw garbage on the streets, if they go to America, they become very hygiene conscious. They always put the garbage in a dustbin only.
They take care of things. So, what is happening is that, you know, the surrounding ethos influences people. So, here what has happened, the idea that we are ultimately meant to transcend the world, that is fine.
We are ultimately transcend the world. But while we are in this world, we are meant to act responsibly here. That idea has been lost.
That okay, if this world is illusion, why bother about it? And don't care about it. So, that is, so again, there is a difference between apathy and detachment. Apathy means I don't care for things.
Detachment means that I don't care for something because I care for something higher. So, if you see, in the West people don't, people are not that spiritual. But they are materially very organized.
And the reason they are organized is because this ethos of apathy is not there. I am not saying that is better because there is so much infatuation with sense gratification. But just the point is that we have to recognize the modes as they act.
Sometimes there is this nationalistic chauvinism where we start thinking everything Indian is good and everything Western is bad. It's not necessary like that. The three modes are there everywhere.
And the influence of the three modes acts everywhere. So, just like there is Satva Guna, Rajoguna, Tamoguna in India, there is Satva Guna, Rajoguna, Tamoguna in the Western world also. So, the sometimes, the cleanliness, sometimes we see in the Western world there is so much cleanliness.
In India there is so much dirtiness. So, now we must, cleanliness is a sattvic quality? Yes, it is a sattvic quality. But it is not necessarily a sattvic quality alone.
There is both things. A cleanliness quality is intrinsic and its value is determined by its intrinsic nature and its purpose. So, often cleanliness is maintained so that there can be a culture of material enjoyment.
So, that purpose is sense gratification. But for that also cleanliness is maintained. So, the point is that Tamogu, Tamasic influences are there in mainstream Indian society and they are there even in the devotee community also.
How they come in is that there is this dialectic of attachment and detachment. So, attachment is the, the path of attachment is the path of karmakanda. It is also a path of elevation but gradual elevation.
People have attachments and then they follow the principles of dharma which as in karmakanda, there is quite a lot of relaxation. People can have abundant material enjoyment also. There is gradual elevation.
That is largely talked about in the Vedas. Then there is the path of detachment. That is given in the Upanishads.
That's the Jnana Marga. Now, sometimes we associate bhakti with detachment. We are attached become detached.
But actually bhakti goes beyond this dialectic of attachment and detachment. Bhakti is the path of not attachment or detachment but commitment. Bhakti is the path of commitment.
We have to become committed to the service of Krishna and to the extent we become committed to the service of Krishna, to that extent we advance, to the extent we grow in spiritual life. So, Prabhupada was so eminently practical. One time one devotee asked Prabhupada, what is Krishna consciousness? Prabhupada could have said that always think of Krishna, chant Krishna's name constantly.
And Prabhupada has written this in his books. But Prabhupada said that if you come to the If you bow down to the deities and if you feel that Krishna is asking you, what are you doing for me? If you feel that Krishna is asking you, what are you doing for me? Then you are Krishna conscious. So, Prabhupada defined Krishna consciousness in terms of active relationship with Krishna, a relationship that is centered on active contribution.
So, we will grow in our spiritual life to the extent we take up commitment in bhakti. There are various kinds of commitment. There is commitment to our sadhana, there is a commitment to the regulative principles, there is commitment to different services that we may take up.
And it is by taking up commitments that we grow in spiritual life. Now, sometimes if we do not clearly differentiate between this tamasic aversion to commitment and sattvic detachment, we come to spiritual life and when in spiritual life we become, if we have that commitment averse nature, then in spiritual life also we try to always find a shortcut. Try to always find the easy way out.
So, even when we have to study scripture, you know, we will try to find the easiest to study scripture. You know, I like Ramayana, Mahabharata, nice stories, but Bhagavatam, there is so much philosophy, Bhagavad Gita, even more philosophy. I will not get involved in that.
So, we always try to see the easy way out in everything. And then, yes, we may think I am comfortable, I am not putting myself through much trouble, but we do not grow much in spiritual life. So, we see that quite often, there is not a necessary condition, it is not necessarily true, but it is quite often that devotees who were achievers in their material life, if they come to bhakti, they also become leaders in spirituality.
It is not necessary. It is not that material achievement transforms into spiritual achievement. But the thing is, if somebody had that culture of commitment in material life, that comes into spiritual life also.
If somebody used to study as a student very diligently, if somebody used to work very hard and achieve things in material life, then when they come to spiritual life, they continue their culture of hard work and dedication and they do substantial things for Krishna also. Now, but if somebody is primarily coming to spiritual life because they are frustrated with material life. Now, frustration with material life can be a valid starting point in spiritual life.
But it is only a starting point. You know, it is frustration will not be a sustainable force for taking us forward. Because the nature of material world is whether we are in a non-devotee community or in a devotee community, there will be frustration, there will be problems.
So, then if because of frustration we give up material life, and come to spiritual life and in spiritual life we experience frustration. Then what do we do? Then actually, we just sink into ourselves. I am talking about strategies for self-destruction.
All this is many ways in which we feel that the material world is temporary and why do I work so hard? Why do I achieve so many things in material life? So, we become averse to material growth. But somehow because that culture of commitment is not there, so we don't grow in spiritual life and then we just get caught in many mental complexes. This is like this, I am like that, this is like that.
And that way we don't move forward materially, we don't move forward spiritually also. So, in bhakti, it is not possible for us to become committed to everything. We of course have our basic sadhana, but we need to find out something in bhakti that we like, and then we become committed to that.
We become committed to that. So, when Rupa Goswami says that how should we practice bhakti? How should we remember Krishna? He says, ye na ke na prakaare na mana krishna nivisa. Somehow or the other.
That means we find out any one thing in bhakti to which we can become committed. Okay, there are so many things. I like to hear classes.
I like to make garlands. I like to distribute books. Now, I like is not necessarily a bad thing because ultimately we are meant to like Krishna.
Then only we love Krishna. So, within the realm of bhakti, if we like something, we can do it nicely. We can do it and by having that one committed connection with Krishna, we start experiencing Krishna.
And as we start experiencing Krishna, our Krishna consciousness increases. And then we start experiencing Krishna in other things also. So, if I like to study, I don't like to chant so much.
I don't like kirtan so much. You know, I don't like yatra so much. Whatever.
I'm just giving an example. But if I just study nicely, by studying I will experience Krishna. And then if I read about the glories of the holy name, if I read about the glories of going for pilgrimages, then through that connection, my appreciation of other manifestations of Krishna will also increase.
And then I will become Krishna conscious in other things also. So, bhakti is primarily a culture of commitment. So, now we want detachment so that it can assist commitment.
We don't want to make detachment itself into a virtue. We want detachment so that it can be an aid to commitment. And what enables us to grow in our life, in our spiritual life, is this commitment to serving Krishna.
And all of us can have different kinds of commitment. It's not that something has to be a very big thing. Everyday I will read Bhagavatam, maybe 10 minutes, 15 minutes, half an hour.
Everyday I'll read it. And the nature of the mind is that sometimes the commitments, the mind just starts protesting too much against certain things. So, when we make commitments also, we don't have to necessarily make it like a line on stone, which will never be.
At our stage, you know, we may hear Raghunath as Goswami, for him his resolution was like a line in stone, nothing could remove. For us, it is difficult to make that kind of commitment. But what we could do is, we shouldn't think that that means that I don't need to make any commitment.
I can't make any commitment. No, we can have finite commitments. So, that means that, okay, for the next one month, I am going to study Bhagavatam everyday.
And then after I do that, it's not that if I feel inspired, I may do that for one more month. Sometimes we also go through different phases in our spiritual life, where we feel the importance of different things more. After one month, I may feel that, no, actually I want to improve my chanting.
Then I may decide, you know, for the next one month, I'll make sure that I complete my rounds in the morning or whatever we want to commit ourselves. And like that, if we keep changing, then the mind doesn't get dulled by monotony and the mind doesn't protest too much. But what shouldn't happen is, for 2-3 days, okay, now I'll study Bhagavatam, now I'm bored.
So, then I do something else. So, we may change our resolutions also or change our focus. But that change of focus should also be with the plan of the intelligence.
It is not just the impulse of the mind. And that way, as we make, what happens is, if one month I decide to study Bhagavatam nicely, another month I decide to chant nicely, another month I decide that, okay, I'll do some services practically or whatever, then gradually this, whatever we have done, that effect carries over. And over a period of months and years, we start improving in all the things gradually.
And thus, our Krishna connection increases. satatam kirtayanto mam yatan tasya dhrudhavrataha So, the dhrudhavrataha, Krishna is talking about the devotees, what they say, satatam kirtayanto, this is not just always doing chanting, satatam kirtayanto, the Bhagavad Gita uses the word kirtan in a very inclusive sense. That means, it is always glorifying Krishna.
That means, always living a life meant for the glorification of Krishna. Now, this is not easy. And therefore, yatan tasya dhrudhavrataha, the determination is required.
And with that determination, we can move forward positively in bhakti. And one last point I'll conclude, that actually, when, why do we need this commitment? Bhakti is joyful. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu says, shikshashtakam anandam budhivardhanam pratipadam poornamrutasvadam.
It is complete nectar. However, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is speaking from the level of transcendence. See, when we are in transcendental consciousness, at that time, we feel that bhakti is constant nectar.
At our stage, our experience is yaktad agre visham eva pariname amrutopamam. Tatsukham saatvikam poptam atma viddhi prasadam. In 18.37, Krishna says that, that which tastes like poison in the beginning, will taste like nectar in the end.
Krishna is talking this about sattvic happiness. But this applies to our experience of spiritual happiness also. Rupa Goswami used a different example of, now how for a jaundiced person, sugarcane juice doesn't taste sweet initially.
But by taking it, start tasting it as sweet. So similarly, what this means is, say if I consider, say this is the experience of bhakti, there's an initial layer of poison that is there. There's an initial layer of poison, say here, and I have to penetrate through that layer of poison.
Then I will come to the nectar. So if I don't have commitment, then what happens, I find this as poison over here. I don't get any taste.
So I give it up. I have to go somewhere else. And then I find, initially what happens is, see the mind will always find some reason to make us believe that the present situation is the worst situation.
The situation that I am in is the worst. The service I am doing is the worst service. The authority that I have is the worst authority.
Whatever it is, you know. And it will always make us feel like, go to something else. Now there are some situations when changes may be required.
But they have to be done not just based on the feelings of the mind. They have to be done based on the analysis, deliberation of the intelligence. So when we don't commit ourselves, we just go from here to there to there.
And everywhere what happens, there is that initial layer of poison. And we don't get to the nectar anywhere. And that's how we stay without experiencing any higher things.
So the commitment, what it does is, I'm going to do it no matter what happens. Then that commitment enables us to penetrate through the initial poison. And then eventually we get to the nectar.
And once we start experiencing Krishna, then that gives us, yes, there is higher happiness here. There is higher fulfillment here. Then other activities of bhakti also we do.
There also we get the confidence, we get the determination to penetrate through the poison and to reach the nectar. That's how commitment actually transforms or commitment actually engenders real enjoyment. When there is commitment, then we go through the initial poison.
And we often use the word enjoyment in a negative context of enjoying mentality. But enjoyment is just happiness. We are all Satchitananda blissful, so we need happiness.
But it is commitment that will give us lasting happiness. And the more we take up commitment, the more we'll find that we will have to go through that poison. But after the poison, there will be nectar.
If we don't have commitment, we may feel, yeah, I'm just comfortable. But actually, what is that comfort? That comfort is simply the satisfaction of having avoided some difficulty. I have not achieved anything in life.
This comfort is simply the comfort of having avoided some difficulty. And we don't get any higher taste. We don't get any purification.
We don't tangible spiritual advancement. But if we commit ourselves, we go beyond the poison to the nectar, and we get higher taste and we become purified, we move closer and closer to Krishna. So I'll summarize, then you can have question answers.
I started by talking about how the bhakti philosophy uses Sankhya framework to analyze material existence. And the three modes, which are primary tool of analysis in Sankhya, they analyze not just things but also qualities. And qualities are analyzed not just according to their intrinsic nature, but also according to their purpose.
What are they being used for? So that's why renunciation or detachment need not always be good. It can be sattvic, rajasic, tamasic. I discussed that we live in a culture of aversion to commitment, where people want relationships, but they don't want the commitment that comes from relationships.
They want to live together without marriage. And this we can see in various other fields also. So in such a situation, the culture's influence comes on us also.
We also become averse to commitment. And then when we come to bhakti and we hear about detachment, we think that my aversion to commitment is detachment. In that connection, I discuss the difference between sattva guna and raja guna.
Externally both look similar because both involve inaction. But there is contemplation, thoughtfulness internal in sattva guna. There is no thoughtfulness in tamo guna.
And aversion to commitment is tamasic and detachment is sattvic. And the difference is that in aversion to commitment, we want to keep all the doors for material enjoyment open. Whereas in detachment, we want to close all the doors to material enjoyment.
So the definition of happiness that we have, that's what largely determines whether what we are having is detachment or whether it is simply aversion to commitment. And in bhakti, we need to go beyond this dialectic of attachment and detachment to commitment. And Prabhupada said, if you feel Krishna is asking you, what are you doing for me? Then that means you are Krishna conscious.
So Krishna consciousness is an understanding of an active relationship of contribution with Krishna. And in connection with commitment, we discuss that we can commit ourselves to one thing in bhakti. And through that commitment, our connection with Krishna will increase, our consciousness of Krishna will increase and we will eventually become Krishna conscious in other things also.
And we may change what I am committed to also. That means if I want to improve some particular thing, I may change that after a periodic interval, after one month, after three months. But that we change as per a plan, not just as per the impulses of the mind.
Otherwise, we will always find the initial poison and we will just give it up. It is commitment that enables us to go beyond the initial poison to the eventual nectar that is there in bhakti. And that experience of the nectar, that purifies us, that gives us higher taste and that inspires us to move closer towards Krishna.
Thank you very much. Are there any questions or comments? Yeah. We talked about the concept of open and we made strategies plan A, plan B, plan C, plan D like that.
So if one doesn't work, another will work like that. Yeah, okay. Good point.
So when we talk about keeping all the doors for mental enjoyment open, isn't it useful to prepare for emergencies like in company when you plan, if plan A doesn't work, then plan B, plan C is there. Yes, that is possible, but there is a difference. When a company also has plan A, plan B, plan C, when they decide to adopt plan A, they commit to plan A. And if plan A doesn't work, then they go to plan B. But when people are averse to commitment, they simply want the enjoyment over there, but they are not ready to have any commitment at all.
So aversion to commitment basically means that I want to get whatever pleasure I can out of a particular thing without having to put in anything. It's like if two armies are fighting a war, they decide we are going to attack from the left flank. And that's a plan.
Now, if they have too many troops on the left flank, they have too many weapons there, they may decide we will attack from the right flank. That is fine. Having alternative courses of action is fine.
But when we have chosen a course of action, we have to commit ourselves fully to it. It is not if, actually in armies also they say that if you are going to fight a war, you should burn the bridges. That means if, say, if you are going to cross a river and attack the enemy, that if the bridge is there in between, then always thought will be there.
In case we can't win, we will always flee. But if you burn the bridges, then the soldiers know that the only way we can live is if we win, otherwise we are going to die. Then they will fight wholeheartedly.
So, it's not necessary that we always have to burn the bridges. But the point is that any option that we pursue, there has to be commitment. And quite often the aversion to commitment means we want to just fool around and dabble in various things without really in a serious way pursuing anything.
That's the difference. Does that answer your question? So, the initial poison that is experienced in spiritual life, is it same for everyone or is it different? No, it depends on one's conditionings. It depends on one's nature.
It depends on one's circumstance. Lot of factors come in. See, for example, if I have an intellectual nature, then in studying scripture, I may find very little poison.
It's natural. I like to study and I study scripture also. It's not necessarily so.
If I have an intellectual nature, that intellectual nature might also mean a sceptical nature. And then I study scripture, I read scripture, but I get a lot of doubts also which others don't get. So, it's not necessarily always a blessing.
But depending on our particular situation, there are certain activities which will be naturally relishable for us. If somebody already had an interest in music and singing, when they come to bhakti, for them, there will be very little poison in kirtans. Of course, the poison may be when others don't sing well.
But for themselves, if they're singing, they can easily connect themselves. So, it's our own nature, our own conditionings. So, because of certain conditionings, we may just not be able to do certain activities.
So, for some people, say, if they have a little unhealthy body, sitting on the floor, that may be very difficult. And then if they try too much to do that, now better sit on a chair and whatever is required and continue practicing. If you just try, that may be too difficult.
Certain physical activities may be too difficult because of our own body-mind conditioning. And a lot depends on association also. Or that inspiration to move forward through that poison, that comes through association.
Like initially, say, if we decided to go for Harinam kirtan, now we may think, you know, how can I go and dance on the streets? What will people think? When the first time we come to the temple, the first time we decide to go Harinam, we may have a lot of apprehension. There may be that poison. But then all other devotees around us are, you know, they're enthusiastically dancing and singing and we say, they're all blissful.
The world is not falling around. Nothing is going around. We may also start dancing and singing.
So our association determines also how much we feel that poison. Because this joy is also contagious. So if we are associating with the devotees who have taste in a particular thing, then by their association also we get taste.
So basically our nature, our conditioning and our association, they determine how much will be the poison that we experience. And usually we find out that activity where we have the least poison and at least commit ourselves to that. And then we can move forward and do other activities also.
Any other questions? So in Sankhya, is it before analysis that we know Krishna is supreme or only after analysis we come to know? When we study this in bhakti, the literature, we often have a very ahistorical approach. Ahistorical approach means that we just, okay, all this knowledge is there and we are studying the knowledge. But actually all this knowledge developed at different times in history.
So Sankhya is a particular school of thought that developed from Vyasadeva. Vyasadeva studied the Vedas. Actually Vyasadeva studied the Vedas and then he taught the Vedas.
He taught the Vedas to different disciples. Different disciples, they took up different aspects of the Vedas. And based on taking different aspects of the Vedas, they developed their own schools of thought.
Originally, these schools of thought were meant to be progressive, like first standard, second standard, third standard, fourth standard, so like that. These six systems of philosophy were meant to be progressive, ultimately culminating in Vedanta, which leads to Brahma, reality, the ultimate spiritual reality. But over a period of time, those, these six branches, instead of being progressive, they became parallel.
And then they became competitive. That means each developed its own epistemology, its own way of knowing, its own conceptions. And then eventually, say by the time of the Mahabharata, it says in Mahabharata, it said that there were three types of Sankhya.
There is what is called as 24 Sankhya, 25 Sankhya and 26 Sankhya. 24 Sankhya is materialistic Sankhya, where only the material world is analysed in 24 elements and that's all it is thought there is a reality. So that is the Sankhya which Prabhupada often condemns when he says atheistic Sankhya of Kapila.
That Kapila is different from the Devadiputra Kapila. So then there is another Sankhya that is 25 Sankhya, that is the monistic Sankhya, where the 24 elements are analysed and then after that the 25th element is the spiritual reality. But that is thought to be one spiritual reality.
And what the Bhagavatam offers us is the 26 Sankhya. Bhagavad Gita also offers us the 26 Sankhya. That means there are, there is 24 elements which is analysed in the material world and there is the soul and there is the Supreme.
So these three are, all form the Sankhya. Today in academic circles if we see, it is primarily, if we go and study Indian philosophy and there if we study Sankhya, the primary version of Sankhya is the 24 Sankhya, where things are analysed in the material world. And because of the widespread influence of monism in India, so 25 Sankhya is also popular.
The Bhagavat Sankhya is not much known in academic circles also. So primarily as it was taught originally, Sankhya went to be a means to progress towards Krishna. As it developed historically, it developed strands where Krishna was often lost.
And as it is revealed in the Bhagavatam, Krishna is the centre, Krishna is the purpose. So when devotees study Sankhya, we study it to understand the insubstantiality of the material world and thereby focus on the ultimate substance, Krishna. So when we see in the material world things, they look so beautiful and we think there is so much pleasure in these things.
But if we analyse, ultimately what is this? Everything that looks so beautiful is just earth, water, fire, air, ether. You know, if somebody puts some earth in front of me, somebody puts some water in front of me, somebody some air in front of me, it's not that I'm going to fall in love with that. It's not that I'm going to sing songs of separation from that.
Is it? So when we analyse things that way, when we understand this is what it is made up of, then we can get some detachment and then we can turn towards Krishna. So for us, when we study Sankhya, it is primarily to aid us in our Bhakti. But not everyone studies Sankhya like that.
Any other questions? Yes, please. Okay, good question. So in Bhakti, I said we had to move to work beyond attachment and detachment to commitment.
But isn't that in Bhakti there is beyond commitment, there is attachment? Yes, that is the purpose and that is the perfection. So what happens is, Jiva Goswami in the Sandarvas says that for the Siddhas, they stay on the spiritual platform because of Kriti. Because they have love for Krishna, that's why they naturally stay on the spiritual platform.
But for the Sadhakas, what keeps them on the spiritual platform is not Priti, but Buddhi. This is Priti. We say sometimes we feel good when we are practicing Bhakti, we come and take Darshan, we dance and Kirtan.
We sometimes feel good. Sometimes we do not feel all that good. So what will keep us steady is Buddhi.
And when we act on the level of Buddhi, that means actually commitment. Because using our intelligence, I understand that this is important, this is beneficial for me and therefore I will do it no matter how I feel like it. So yes, our goal is to become attached to Krishna.
But attachment to Krishna will not just come automatically. Before that, we will have to become committed to Krishna and from that commitment, gradually attachment will develop. In 12.9, the Bhagavad Gita Krishna says that, By Abhyasa Yoga, try to fix your mind on me again and again and again.
What will happen by that? Iccha for me, desire for me, attraction for me will come. So by repeatedly striving to fix the mind on Krishna, through a committed practice of Bhakti, our attachment to Krishna will develop. So, suppose we make some commitment, but then sometimes other engagements come up and then if we try to stick to that commitment, our overall balance of life gets affected.
If we have to stay awake late, so we read Bhagavatam, then here we can't wake up for morning program or we feel sleepy throughout the day. So what do we do at that time? See, even when we talk about commitment, it is always better to see it more in terms of a direction for progress, rather than the specific quantity of progress. So what that means is, that rather than just saying that, I'll read 30 minutes every day, it's a good plan, but life often comes in the way of our resolutions.
But when life comes in the way of the resolutions, that doesn't mean that we have to just give up going on the way. Sometimes you just may not be able to go. So instead of 30 minutes every day if I plan, okay, I'll read three and a half hours every week.
On some days, I may be able to read more, some days I may not be able to read more. So if there is an overall direction, this is the direction which I need to go. Just like if I am going, if say I am coming from the place where I am saying temple here, then if there is traffic, at that time naturally I'll have to move slowly.
And now if I am moving slowly because of traffic, that's unavoidable. But if after the traffic goes, I am going to keep moving slowly, that is pointless. So like that, sometimes there's too much traffic in our life and we cannot move forward.
That's just acceptable, that's okay. But it's not that things are like that all the time. The problem happens when we make resolutions and we oscillate from one extreme where I think if I make a resolution, I must stick to it.
In all conditions, no matter what happens. That's why I said that don't make resolutions like lines in stone. We have to be a little flexible, we have to be realistic.
But the other extreme is we try to make resolutions like that and if they don't work, then we go to the other extreme and we think let me not make any resolutions. That is also not desirable. So we can have overall balance.
Sometimes even a week may not be able to do anything. Sometimes even in a week, but we can have in a month. Sometimes in this week, I may not be able to study, but next week I can compensate.
So if we have an overall sense of direction in which we are going, the resolution is primarily about the direction where we want to go. It's not about a specific distance that we cover every day. That distance is not in our control.
But at least if we have a sense of direction where I want to go, then whenever the opportunity is there, I can grab that opportunity and then I can move onwards. See, if you don't have any resolution at all, then I think, oh, you know, today afternoon, I don't have anything to do. What should I do? Maybe I can study.
Maybe I can chant. You know, maybe I can, you know, I don't associate with devotees. You can say, you know, yesterday night, I slept for only 5 hours, 50 minutes.
So let me sleep for 10 minutes. And then 10 minutes becomes 1 hour or 2 hours. So if we don't have any direction also in our spiritual life, then the mind makes us choose the path of least resistance.
Whenever we don't have anything to do. So it should never happen in our spiritual life that we have time and we don't know what to do. So if we have a plan, we'll be looking, okay, whenever I get time, then immediately I can start doing these things.
So that's why we don't have to necessarily make the resolution and absolute commitment to a particular level of quantity of achievement. It should be a commitment to moving in a particular direction. We can change our commitment.
But if it is too much flexible, then multiple interests are coming. So in that sense, how do we actually do it? Yeah. So if we find that we have multiple interests and while we are doing one commitment, we feel like doing another commitment.
So how do we manage that? There's a similar question. How do we know whether we are changing based on the plan of the intelligence or the impulse of the mind? Yes. Broadly speaking, there is one discover yourself course that we may do initially.
But to discover yourself is a lifelong journey. So I'm talking about discover yourself, not just in terms of realizing that I am the Atma. It is also realizing what kind of body I have, what kind of mind I have.
Sometimes we say the mind is the enemy. I have a whole series of seminars on learning to live with the mind. Ultimately, we can't do anything.
The mind I have is the only mind I have. The mind is not like a changeable part. I don't like this mobile, I'll get a new mobile.
I can't do that. So the mind I have is the only mind I have. And I have to train it.
And I cannot change it overnight. So I have to learn to live with it also. So understanding the mind itself, not so that we give in to it, but we need to negotiate with it and work properly.
That requires time, that requires introspection, requires self-observation. So when we do that, we ourselves learn, what are the fleeting impulses of the mind? And what are the fleeting impulses? And what are my enduring interests? So sometimes, I may just see on the internet, I may see some nice article here. And I may read this article, I may find something there, I read that there.
Now that is okay, we can read a few things here and there. But that should not be our main reading. That should certainly not be our only reading.
There can be some small part of the time, some part of our schedule where we do that. So anything new that might trigger our interest. But initially, it will just be impulses, it will be short-lived.
Okay, I read it, it's finished. But sometimes, we may read something, this seems very interesting. Say, then I may find, okay, this whole concept of, say, Sankhya, I want to study it.
Or somebody may say, I actually want to understand what is really humility. And I want to study it deeply. So I am just giving an example of study over here.
But in anything, we ourselves, if we observe ourselves, we learn that what are fleeting impulses and what are enduring interests. And just like with respect to eating. Now, nobody can tell us you should eat this much.
We ourselves learn by experience. If I eat this much, it is too less. If I eat this much, it is too much.
So like that, sometimes we may give in to some impulses and do something. But then we find it is not very interesting. I should not have done this.
So it's not that, you know, we shouldn't think of spiritual life as just doing right and wrong. It is that there are even different degrees of rightness and different degrees of wrongness. So sometimes I'm going like this.
I just go off like that. Well, I'm going like that. It's not that, Bhaktivinoda Thakur says, if you got on the wrong track, that does not mean you have to come back to the starting point and start again.
He says, wherever you've gone wrong, correct yourself from there. So if we have an overall time for reflection in our life, some time when we have sattva guna and we can reflect at ourselves, then we can understand the thing which we are doing, whether they are taking us forward or they are taking us a little off track. And then we can course correct.
So in general, it is good to, if we commit to a particular activity, it is good to stick to that commitment for that period of time, whatever we have decided. And then after that, maybe we can write down what I felt inspired by doing this or what I felt I would be inspired, but I was not all that inspired by this. And then what I felt, this is not really very important.
There are so many other things important in my life. Just write something down. And if I feel inspired about something else, write it down.
Why do I feel so inspired? Okay, I feel I should learn how to speak because I want to preach. Why is that important? So basically, if we write it down, then later on, whenever the mind starts having second thoughts, if you have written it down, then you can look at it. These are the reasons why I'm doing this.
Then that gives us intelligence. You know, one of the strategies for self-destruction, which I may not be able to take is to trust our memory. You know, our memory is very untrustworthy.
If we make important, if important things are there, we have to write them down. If we have to, if we just depend on our memory, at that time I will remember this, it is not going to work. If I make a resolution, I have found that I make a resolution, and then the next day, I forget why I made the resolution.
And then I start thinking, maybe I should do this, maybe I should do this. And the next day, by evening or night, I remember that I had not even remembered the resolution throughout the day. So it happens that it's a complete blackout of the memory.
That's why trusting our memory, especially in terms of the resolutions and in terms of the inspirations for the resolution, that doesn't work. And once we start writing something down, why do I want to do this? Then writing itself, it requires some effort, but it clarifies our thinking. This is a sound point.
This is not that sound. I was feeling like I should do this because of this, this, this. And then when we write it down, then we can crystallize our thoughts.
And then that becomes that written notes of our own inspiration for doing something, that we can use it as a weapon to beat down the mind later when it tries to weaken our resolutions. So that way, by self-observation and by using our intelligence to analyze, to reflect and to note down, we can make sure that we move from one interest to another in a more sustainable way and not just a flitting away like a bird moving here and there. Does that answer your question? Yes, Atul.
Wasn't that, didn't I answer the same question just now? How do I know that whatever resolutions I'm making are under the mind of the intelligence? As I said, if something is enduring or something is just fleeting, the mind is very usually fleeting. It likes one thing, afterwards it just gives it up. So if we, if we, there are times when we are in Rajoguna, there are times when we are in Tamoguna, there are times when we are in Satoguna.
So in Satoguna, if we reflect and analyze, then we will also be able to make sense. Okay, this, this is important. This is not all that important.
We are able to see things. sarva-dvareshu dehesu me prakasham upajayate jnanam yadadavidyar nirdham sattva-muktyur In 14.11, Krishna states that actually when the doors of the senses are illumined by knowledge, that time we can perceive things properly. That is, that's mode of goodness.
So if we reflect in the mode of goodness, we can understand what we are, we can understand whether what we are doing is important or not, or what is really important for us. So introspecting the mode of goodness, writing things down to see whether, what are the, how sound are the reasons because of which I want to do something. And seeing whether something persists or not.
So, you know, today I may feel like I should go for a yatra. No, I have not gone to holy places for so long. But then tomorrow I feel, who will go so far? I have so many things to do.
So, you know, the mind is sometimes something just, we just come and go. Sometimes something stays for a sustained amount of time. So the longevity of the thing, the intellectual soundness of the thing, and the self-observation of all this, when we are in goodness, all that can help us to understand.
Something is coming from the mind, or something is coming from the intelligence. And ultimately, of course, we know that what comes from the intelligence is actually that which is in accordance with Guru Sadhu Shastra. So something is taking us away from Krishna, then that is usually coming from the mind.
Something that is taking us towards Krishna, that is coming from the intelligence. But even when we are going towards Krishna, there may be multiple options how we can go towards Krishna. That's why we also need to further observe, introspect.
And then we can learn. Is that answer your question? Okay. Anyone who has not asked any question till now? Okay, yes, we will.
We will come to that. By the way, till what time should we go on? Let me know. Okay, fine, yeah.
So even if we do some service, for example, we are in like three modes. So in that, like our service, whatever we do to Krishna, that is also in three modes, and if we are comfortable with Krishna or not. Okay, if we are in three modes, and then we do a service, is that also in three modes? And if it is, is it accepted by Krishna? First of all, we have to know that Krishna is not a judgmental God.
Krishna is a compassionate God. He wants us to come to him. And it is not that, you know, he's waiting to find faults with us.
You and Rajoguna while doing the service, I'll not accept the service. It's not like that. So Krishna is Bhavagrahi.
You know, whatever service we do, he accepts that. But there are levels of acceptance. And any way we serve Krishna, that is always auspicious.
That's why we see in 12, from 12.8 to 12.10, Krishna goes various levels. Always fix your mind on me. Just try to fix your mind on me.
Otherwise work for me. Otherwise work for some good cause and just give the, or work and sacrifice your fruits for some good cause. Krishna has various levels at which we can stay connected with him.
So first of all, we don't have to go too much into this analysis of whether I'm doing the service, in which way. The primary thing is, first do the service. So, because service itself keeps us connected.
And after we are connected, we try to refine the connection. So it's like, it's like, you know, if I am trying to tune into a radio, now most of us don't use radio. Maybe some FM, we might use radio also.
If I am trying to tune into a radio, see there is a, there is a, like a big tuner, which moves the signals from one station to another station. And there is a fine tuner. An older model that they had.
So, you know, the fine tuning has to be done after we have to come to the right station. Isn't it? Before I have come to the right station, I start doing the fine tuning. It's a waste of time.
I have not even connected to the station. So like that, doing service is doing the big tuner. So at least I have come to the right station.
And then doing devotional service, that is like fine tuning. So I may not always have a devotional consciousness while doing service. And I need to cultivate devotional consciousness, no doubt.
Just like if I am not fine tuned to the station, then so much noise comes up. So like that, if our consciousness is not really devotional, then bhakti is not joyful. Because if our consciousness is not devotional, then we are always expecting.
Things should work out right, people should praise me and I should be able to do things perfectly. And all these considerations, they impede our remembrance of Krishna and that's why bhakti is not so joyful. So we do have to fine tune our consciousness also.
But first is, we need to tune our consciousness. First, start doing service and after we are doing service, then we can refine our consciousness. So, usually speaking, while doing certain services, certain modes of functioning are required.
Now if we are, say, if we are raising funds, if we are distributing books or we are doing certain activities, sometimes certain activities may have some deadlines or we have certain targets. So we may be more caught in the mood of getting the things done. And that is fine.
That is what is required for the service, that is fine. The important thing is that before the service, after the service, we remember, Krishna, I am doing this for you. And we offer it to Krishna.
If you are able to do it well, also we thank Krishna for doing it. And over a period of time, what we are doing becomes less important than for whom we are doing it. All that happens over a period of time.
Just like Bhakti Krishna Chakrathapur gives this example that, say a person is working at a job and they have gone to a new place for working for a job. So that they can maintain their family. Then when they are at a new place, initially they think, oh, this is a new place.
There are new people, new staying place and new boss, new work associates. So that newness of the place is what dominates the consciousness. But after they were habituated to staying over there, they may be in that place, but they remember their family.
They remember, okay, I am doing this for my family, my children. And where they are working is not as important as for whom they are working. So like that also for us, initially when we are doing services, it is natural to be caught up in the externals.
And then in that case, if I have to meet this target, I have to achieve this, I have to get that. So that's how it will be. What we are doing will be very important for us.
But over a period of time, as we keep doing services, then the externals don't matter so much. We still are responsible in trying to give the best contribution. But the external don't matter so much.
What matters is for whom we are doing it. Yes, I may be giving a class or I may be going to ask for funds or I may be distributing books, whatever I am doing, I am doing this for Krishna. That will come gradually.
So we don't have to worry too much about the modes when we are trying to do service. First focus on doing service and before and after, we make sure that we have a prayerful consciousness which connects us with Krishna. Yes, one last question.
Yeah. The goal of commitment to Krishna and Vaishnava or the poison that penetrates the poison, right? That is a by-product. Okay.
Yeah. So is the goal of commitment to please Krishna and Vaishnavas or is it simply to penetrate through the poison to the nectar? Yeah, both happen naturally. See, we all need happiness because that's what we are by nature.
We are Sat-Chit-Ananda. Ananda is a part of our nature. So we naturally look for happiness.
So just to look for happiness in itself is not necessarily selfish or self-centered. It is the very feature of ourself. But when it becomes a problem is when we look for happiness in ways that are harmful to us, harmful to others, that becomes a problem.
And even in bhakti, when we start looking only for happiness, then also we just, we again start evading responsibility, evading commitments and just doing things whatever the mind pleases will make us happy. So when we are trying to practice bhakti, we are focusing on developing a relationship with Krishna and developing a relationship with Krishna means trying to please him, trying to please his representatives. That is naturally a part of bhakti.
And as we keep doing this, a natural result of that is that we also get to the nectar. So both happen parallel. But see, the mind is tricky.
And we have to, like yesterday I said, because the mind tries to trick us, we have to out trick it. Sometimes if you tell the mind, don't think about happiness, think only about pleasing Krishna, the mind will say, why? Why should I do that? What am I going to get by that? So at that time you can tell the mind, actually you will get a lot of happiness there also. So ultimately we want to develop a relationship with Krishna and that relationship means we want to have a mood of service where we try to please him.
But we have to find out the way in which we can keep ourselves committed to that process. And sometimes contemplating that actually there is a lot of happiness there. That may be what is required for us to stay committed.
Does that answer your question? So shall we stop here? I think if you have questions, more questions, we will have more sessions today evening and afterwards also. So you can have questions at that time also. Thank you very much.