Bhakti Shastri (075) – Bhagavad Gita Chapter 05 Text 01 to 07

Podcast

… … … … … … Hare Krishna welcome back to our Bhagavad Gita Bhakti Shastri course, we have completed the fourth chapter fourth chapter was transcendental knowledge, this chapter titled Jnana is sandwiched between two chapters on Karma Yoga Prabhupada titled chapter 3 as Karma Yoga and chapter 5 as Karma Yoga, action in Krishna consciousness, conventionally fifth chapter is titled as Jnana Karma Sanyasa Yoga it is called as Karma Sanyasa Yoga and fourth is titled as Jnana Karma Sanyasa Yoga so Jnana Karma Sanyasa Yoga means by Jnana one understands how one can actually practise Karma in such a way that one does the fruit, one does enunciation within Karma, so it is not about per se Sanyas, but it is about Sanyas in Karma, not Sanyas of Karma, so that Jnana we acquire in the fourth chapter and practically how do we do it, that we will learn in the fifth chapter so Karma Sanyasa Yoga doesn’t mean Sanyas of Karma it means Sanyas in Karma so Krishna is going to talk about this essential principle of not renunciation of action, but renunciation in action, in the fifth chapter and the whole theme of the Bhagavad Gita is that action itself can lead one to disentanglement and liberation if that action is done intelligently, so that we will discuss in the fifth chapter now the fourth chapter concluded with Krishna telling Arjuna Atishto Tishta Bharata, rise and fight, the fifth chapter begins with Arjuna having a doubt, Arjuna’s doubt comes because prior to that in 39 Krishna has talked about Shanti and in 41 Krishna has talked about Karma Sanyas, so both these coupled with the non-reference to fighting in the entire fourth chapter make Arjuna think that make Arjuna doubt whether Krishna really wanted Arjuna to fight or not so the last instruction Atishto Tishta seems to be contrary to the tenor, the tone, the mood of what he has spoken what Krishna has spoken earlier, that creates a doubt in Arjuna’s mind and Arjuna asks a question so in principle Arjuna’s question is similar to his question in third chapter so some chapters in the Bhagavad Gita are similar, third and fifth are similar seventh and ninth are also similar so although they are similar their themes are similar, Krishna whenever he has to discuss, same similar themes also, when he is discussing second time, he takes the concepts deeper, he gives us deeper understanding of the concepts so we will see how that happens in this particular chapter, so let’s look at fifth chapter before we go start reciting the verse, let’s look at the overview of the chapter so we can divide this into three broad sections so the first section is Karma Yoga is equal to, but easier than Jnana Yoga they are equal, both will give the same result, but Karma Yoga is preferable because it is easier then 7 to 16 talks about, by fixing mind on Atma Karma Yogi remains free from bondage so elaboration of the first theme of the first six verses, how is Karma Yoga equal? Karma causes bondage and renunciation leads to liberation so Krishna is telling that if one is not fixing the mind on sense objects, instead one is fixing the mind on the soul, then the Karma Yogi will remain free from bondage and after that Krishna says that by fixing the mind on the super soul, on the Paramatma at 17 to 29 the Karma Yogi will attain liberation so there are two phases, one is not getting bound further and second is getting liberated just like we may say that when we are sick one is to, one part of recovery is to remove the sickness, remove the infections the germs that have caused the sickness and second is to regain the strength so the first part is to prevent the aggravation of the sickness, whatever the infection, they should not spread further and second part is to ensure that one removes the sickness and then one regains the health also, whichever way we look at it, the point is recovery involves these two parts remove the negative stop the negative and then bring out the positive, so Atma Gyan can help one to prevent further acting in a way that leads to further bondage and Paramatma Gyan knowledge of the super soul, knowledge of the supreme will lead to liberation and in 29, and that last section 27, 28 to 29 actually Karma Yoga will eventually lead to some form of renunciation but Krishna doesn’t recommend Gyan Yoga over here he will recommend Ashtang Yoga that is talked about verses 27 to 28 and that will be elaborated in chapter 6 and verse 29 talks about Bhakti Yoga which will be elaborated in chapters 7 to 12 so let’s look at the first verse of the 7th chapter now Arjuna Vacha Sanyasam Karmanam Krishna Punar Yogam cha samshasi Yashreya etayor ekam Tanne Dhruhisu nishchitam Sanyasam Karmanam Krishna that Sanyasa when somebody wants to do Sanyasa Sanyasam Karmanam Krishna when one takes Sanyasa and one does Karma accordingly Krishna is telling here that you have recommended Karma Sanyasa, that is referring to verse 1049, Sanyasam Karmanam Krishna, but then in 10.42 you said Punar Yogam cha samshasi Yogam Atishtho Tishtha Parantham, equipped with Yoga, rise and fight Yashreya etayor ekam please tell me one one that which is Shreya, that which is long term so Krishna has persistently been asked by Arjuna, please tell me what is Shreya and Tanne Dhruhi Dhruhi is, I ask you now please tell me, Su Nishchitam this is a question that has been going on but now tell me definitely Su Nishchitam itself is definitely Su Nishchitam is with absolute definiteness, with conclusive definiteness, please tell me what I should do so now to this question Krishna will reply Shree Bhagavan Vacha Sanyasa Karma Yogascha Nishreyasakaraabhaam Tayostu Karma Sanyasa Karma Yoga Vishishta so Sanyasa Karma Yogascha Nishreyas so Arjuna had asked what is Shreya so Krishna is telling that Ubhav, both of them are Shreya, both of them will lead to Nishreyas, Nishreyas means long term benefit, both of them will lead to long term benefit, Sanyasa Karma Yogascha but among those two Tayostu Karma Sanyasa among those two Karma Yoga Vishishta Karma Yoga is better so now the point of the Bhagavad Gita is that one should ensure that one doesn’t become bound in material existence stay bound in material existence so now what causes bondage is attachment and to the extent one doesn’t have attachment, to that extent there is no bondage so now Krishna is saying that actually both Karma Yoga and Karma Sanyasa both they prevent attachment so in that sense both are good but among the two Krishna says Karma Yoga is better, why is that better? because that is more easy, easier so now Sri Prabhupada doesn’t focus so much on the comparative virtue of Karma Yoga or Karma Sanyasa in this purport, he focusses more on the point that we shouldn’t get bound that staying free from bondage is fundamentally important and Nishreyas therefore one should avoid karmic bondage and Prabhupada quotes a series of verses from the teachings of King Rishabhdev in 5th Canto 5th Chapter which essentially underscore how the conditioned soul becomes bound and how we should stay free from bondage let’s look at the verses so 5.5.4 to 6 noonam pramattha kurute vikarma indriya pritaya apranoti sadhu manyetha atmanoyam asanapi kileshita asadeha so noonam pramattha pramattha means mad intoxicated with madness pramattha can be intoxicated, can be mad so kurute vikarma a person does vikarma and what is vikarma? indriya pritaya apranoti when one acts for sense gratification acts for indriya priti so one should not act like that na sadhu manye this is not good with atmanoyam why is it not good? by that ayam by the soul will soul will get another body asanapi kileshita asadeha so what will happen is one will continue the cycle of birth and death and asan the body is temporary but along with temporary that is kileshita it gives misery asanapi kileshita asadeha so we already have a miserable body and if we act for sense gratification and we show natural nature that I want to enjoy the sense objects so then we will get another material body but the material body is subject to so many miseries so we will get all those miseries also material body gives us insignificant pleasure and significant pain it gives us insignificant pleasure the pleasure lasts for a few moments but it gives significant pain actually the pain sometimes lasts for hours, months years sometimes when a person gets terrible diseases so asanapi kileshita asadeha so it is kileshita it is not sukhada the body is kileshita now how long will a person continue like this parabhavastavad abodhajato yavanna jijnasat atma-tattvam yavat kriyasatavadidam manovai karmatmakam yena sharir bandhah so parabhavastavad till that time there will be parabhav till we had abodhajato as long as a person remains ignorant abodha means knowledge, abodha means no knowledge and so as long as a person is ignorant a person will stay, will have parabhava parabhava is failure so why? because yavanna jijnasat atma-tattvam as long as one doesn’t enquire about the soul then there is some default activity which all of us have to do so if we don’t know about spiritual activity by default we will do material activity so as long as there is no spiritual enquiry then by default yavat kriyasatavadidam manovai so the mind will be involved in kriya what kind of kriya? karmatmakam yena sharir bandhah one will act for karma and one acts for fruitive activity sharir bandhah one will become bound to the body so actually the soul and the body are separate just like we give the example of the car and the driver the car and the driver are two distinct things the driver can go out of the car and the driver can walk somewhere else also or can take some other car or can reach home and may not need a car whatever way so the two are different but the soul and body are for all practical purposes identical now we don’t think of us as a soul we thought of the soul as a theoretical concept ok, eta says I am not the body I am the soul I also intellectually understand it but for all practical purposes the soul has become melded into the body right now not in terms of identity the soul is always separate but practically means from our experiential perspective right now it’s very difficult to understand the soul is different from the body why? that’s because of the enjoying mentality the enjoying mentality welds the soul to the body the welding when it happens two materials come together and they get heated and tied together, soul is actually different from the body but the soul has become welded and melded to the body because of the desire to enjoy the body so one becomes bound by the desire to enjoy the sense objects, the desire to engage in fruitive activity by which one can get sense gratification so sense gratification and fruitive activity both of them bind the soul, now what is the difference between the two? both are in one sense similar but sense gratification is directly acting to gratify the senses so I may eat something, I may touch something I may enjoy something, that is sense gratification fruitive activity is the activity that leads to sense gratification so for example somebody may do some karma kanda rituals by which one may later get sense gratification or we may do many other activities which will also lead to sense gratification, so fruitive activity is that now after that Krishna describes karma this is Shabdeva Maharaj describes here evam manah karmavasyam payunte avidyatmanya upadhiyamane pritirnayavan mayi masudeve namuchyate deha yogena tavad so evam manah karmavasyam payunte so the mind will be in karmavasyam under the vasyam, vasyam means control of karma avidyatmanya avidyatmanya upadhiyamane, one will be controlled by avidya about the spiritual reality how long? pritirnayavan mayi masudeve till one does not develop priti for lord Vasudev and then namuchyate deha yogena tavad the contact of the soul with the body we use the word yoga to refer to connection or contact so we want karma yoga, bhakti yoga but here the word curiously is used deha yoga so soul has become bound to the body at that time namuchyate so that contact that bondage of the soul to the body namuchyate, one will not become free from that till pritirnayavan mayi masudeve till one has not developed affection to lord Vasudev what happens when we develop affection to lord Vasudev then the mind is no longer filled with the enjoying mentality and the enjoying mentality is what binds the soul to the body that’s how, by developing affection for lord Vasudev we become free from the enjoying mentality and we become free from material bondage thereof so Prabhupada’s whole purport focusses on this point of staying free from bondage, that is the first point then Prabhupada writes that, significant statement over here gyan or knowledge gyan or knowledge that one is not this material body but spiritual soul is not sufficient for liberation one has to act in the status of spiritual soul, spirit soul otherwise there is no escape from material bondage so it’s not enough to know it’s enough to, what is required is also to act so therefore when we act then there is liberation by that so now Prabhupada explains that, acting on the spiritual platform is practising devotional service and we discussed this in the verse of how renouncing that which can be used in Krishna’s service is not renunciation that is actually false renunciation that is phalgo vairagya, yukta vairagya is to renounce the enjoying mentality and to use the things in Krishna’s service so Prabhupada makes the point also, which he would often speak that, actually nothing belongs to us so what is there actually to renounce everything even our body belongs to Krishna because it belongs to Krishna so therefore the only thing for us to renounce is the illusion that we have anything to renounce actually nothing belongs to us everything belongs to Krishna and the only thing to renounce is the illusion that we have anything to renounce so that is the illusion, this is mine, this is mine this is mine this is mine. And when we become free from that illusion, when we renounce that illusion, then we understand, rather than things being mine, I am Krishna’s.
I am Krishna’s. And when I understand I am Krishna’s, then Krishna is mine. Ami to tomara, tumi to amara.
Ki ka je? Apare dhana. What else do I need? Bhakti no thakur says, I am yours and you are mine. That’s all that matters.
So, in this way, one makes steady spiritual advancement. See, Prabhupada’s point in the purport is, we don’t have to renounce action. We don’t have to renounce possession.
We have to renounce the misconception that we are the enjoyers. We are cooperators. When Krishna enjoys, then we also enjoy as His subordinate enjoys.
Now, Krishna continues this. So, he is saying that karma yoga is better. Now, why karma yoga is better? I will explain in the next verses.
So, one should know, such a person is Nitya Sanyasi. Such a person is a constant renunciate. Who is? Yonadveshti na kankshi.
Such a person neither resents nor hankers. What is a person? Nirdvandohi mahavaho. Without duality, a person acts and sukham bandhah pramuchyate.
Such a person will happily become free from bondage. So, here Krishna is talking about renunciation in action, instead of renunciation of action. Renunciation in action, he says, is that we act.
Yonadveshti na kankshi. One doesn’t hanker, one doesn’t resent. Hanker means, I want that, I want that.
And resent means, why I got this, why I got this, I don’t want this. Why I got this, like that. Hanker and resent.
Yonadveshti na kankshi. Nirdvandohi. In this way, one stays free from duality.
So, how will this happen? When internally one doesn’t have attachment. So, that detachment, at this stage Krishna is talking, by the Atma Gyan. Later on in the Bhagavad Gita thought process, that will come by Bhagavad Gyan.
When we are attached to Krishna and want to please Krishna, then that attachment and aversion will go away. And Krishna says, in this way, sukham bandhah. How sukham bandhah? Because activity is natural for us.
And giving up activity is unnatural. So, because activity is natural, therefore it is much easier to do activity and stay free from bondage, rather than to do inactivity and seek freedom from bondage. So, externally, inactivity seems very easy.
Yes, I can do nothing. But internally, inactivity is very difficult. Because there is so much passion in the body and the passion makes, I want to go here, I want to see this, I want to do that.
And that will make us go round and round and round. It will not allow us to stay peaceful. So, externally inactivity may seem easy, but internally it is difficult.
And externally activity may seem difficult, but internally activity is easy. It is according to our nature, not just our conditioned nature, but also our eternal nature. As souls also, we are active in service to Krishna.
Therefore, sukham bandhah pramucyate, sukham bandhah. Happily one will become free from bondage. So, Prabhupada explains in the Purport, that a devotee is always liberated because a devotee acts always for the pleasure of Krishna.
There is no duality in the mind, because whatever he does, he does for Krishna. Being thus free from the platform of duality, he is liberated, even in this material world. So, how does doing everything for Krishna keep one free from duality? Because a devotee does not think in terms of this is good, this is bad, from material terms.
A devotee simply thinks, I want to serve Krishna. Whatever comes in my life, I will see how it can be used to serve Krishna, how it can be tapped as an opportunity for service to Krishna. And because service to Krishna can be performed in all situations, of course the form of service may change, but the idea that I am the servant of Krishna, that can be sustained in all situations.
That is how a devotee stays liberated from the circumstances. Now, Krishna will clarify this further, this point of how one can stay free from bondage. So, here Krishna is saying that Sankhya refers to the process of Jnana, the process involving action, and Yoga refers to the process involving action.
So, going back to 5.2, Sankhya refers to Karma Sanyasa, and Yoga refers to Karma Yoga. These two are separate. The people who think this are Balaha.
Balaha are childish or ignorant or less intelligent. And he says as contrary to Balaha, there are Pandita. Pravadanti na Pandita.
The wise people do not say that two are different. They are Krishna. How are they same? Because it says that ekam api astitah samyak.
If one becomes situated with one of them, then ubhayor vindate palam. One gets the fruits of both of them. So, ekam api astitah samyak.
Situate yourself with one of those, one will get the fruits of both. Vindate palam. Both fruits will get.
So, Krishna is saying that both are similar, both are not different, are different, because their ultimate goal is the same. And that he will make more explicitly clear in the next verse. So, I will explain both the verses together.
That which is obtained through sankhya, that is obtained through karma sanyas, prapyate sthanam, the sthanam, the destination that is obtained, tad yogair api gamyate. That one attains by the practise of yoga also. Understanding this, ekam sankhyam cha yogam cha.
When one sees sankhya and yoga both to be equal, yaha pashyati. When one sees like this, sa pashyati. One who sees thus is the actual seer.
Is the actual seer. Yaha pashyati, sa pashyati. So, there is diversity in paths, but there is uniformity in goal.
There is diversity in paths, but there is uniformity in goal. Now, Krishna, these verses are no way supporting the idea that all paths lead to the same goal. Krishna is talking about two specific paths over here.
The path of intellectual introspection and inaction, and the path of inaction based on jnana yoga, and the path of action based on karma yoga. Both these two lead to the same goal. Not that all paths lead to the same goal.
That is not a Gita teaching at all. In fact, that is not a logical teaching also. Leave alone a scriptural teaching.
So, that was what we already discussed in 4.11. Here Krishna is talking something different. He is taking two specific paths. And the goal of both these paths is to ultimately free us from bondage.
And he is saying that both these paths can free one from bondage. But the vital point is, when will they free us from bondage? When they are done with detachment. So, whether one has authentic detachment and renounces the world, renouncing all the activity and renouncing all involvement with the world.
Or one has detachment and one lives and acts in the world. If one has detachment, in both cases, one will be able to attain freedom from bondage. But actually, while doing activity, because doing activity is natural for us, so detachment while doing activity is easier to do than detachment while giving up activity entirely.
Because giving up activity is unnatural. But here Krishna is not talking about the difference. Now, he already said that this is better.
Which is better? Karma Yoga is better. But now he is saying both of them are the same. Both of them ultimately lead to the same goal.
That destination is obtained by Sankhya. That destination is also obtained by Yoga. And therefore, ekam sankhyam ca yogam ca.
So now, how does this work out? Do both lead to the same destination? See, normally there is a hierarchy. There is Karma Yoga and there is Gyan Yoga and there is Bhakti Yoga. So, Karma Yoga is lower and Gyan Yoga is higher.
But when Gyan Yoga is higher, why is Krishna saying that the two are not different? The two, both are ultimately similar. They are ekam. How are they ekam? Because both are meant to take one towards the same goal.
So, the Karma Yogi is also ultimately aiming for liberation. The Gyan Yogi is also ultimately aiming for liberation. And by practising Karma Yoga also one can attain liberation.
By practising Gyan Yoga also one can attain liberation. So, in terms of the goal, Karma Yoga and Gyan Yoga are similar. So now, Krishna is doing something significant.
If you remember the flow of the third chapter. In the third chapter, if you remember, the flow was like a spiral. Krishna is saying that you practise Karma Yoga because that is what you are qualified for.
And even if you are qualified for Gyan Yoga, still practise Karma Yoga, because you set a good example by that. So there, in that discussion, Krishna had allowed the notion to continue that Gyan Yoga is higher and Karma Yoga is lower. But there he was saying that, Gyan Yoga, you are not qualified, so don’t practise it.
It may be higher, but don’t practise it. By that, by practising, you will become Mithyacharya. But here Krishna is taking the discussion to a deeper level and he is saying that actually Gyan Yoga is not higher.
In one sense, in the Yoga level, it may be higher. But it is not that Gyan Yoga will lead to a higher destination. Actually, whatever destination is obtained by Gyan Yoga, that can be attained even by Karma Yoga.
Ultimately, both are meant to bring about liberation. So, ekam sankhyam cha yogam cha One who sees that both of them are one, in the sense that they both lead to the same goal, that is, that person is a true seer. So this is the phrase, yaha pashyati sa pashyati This will come again in the Bhagavad Gita.
And the Bhagavatam also has another verse. It says, pashyan, another verse conclusion often, which comes, pashyan api na pashyati. So these are very significant verses, which indicate something deep.
So yaha pashyati sa pashyati means that actually, one who sees like this is a true seer. So Krishna is talking about seeing with knowledge. You know, if somebody gets a chest x-ray and shows it to a layman, oh, this is a black film with some image on it.
And a doctor sees, you have got terrible TB? Your whole lungs are filled with lesions? What is this? So now, actually speaking, it is the same thing. But who is seeing it actually? The patient is seeing it, a layperson is seeing it, the doctor is seeing it. When doctors see, the doctor understands.
yaha pashyati sa pashyati The layperson sees, pashyan api na pashyati The layperson sees, but he doesn’t see because he doesn’t understand. So we see with knowledge. We see with the pre-existing understanding that we have.
So actually, what we can know depends on what we know. What we can know depends on what we know. If somebody tells me that if somebody tells an illiterate villager that damage to the medulla oblongata can be fatal.
What is medulla oblongata? Person has no reference to connect it with. You see, in the head, in the whole system of management of the body, there is an organ below this, the head part, it is called the medulla oblongata. And it is a very important organ.
And if that is damaged, a person can die. Die, a person can connect. And brain, yes, brain also, even a literate person has to understand that brain is important.
So when, whatever we hear, we have to be able to connect with something that we know. And then we integrate it into our conceptual framework. And then that expands our understanding.
So what we can know depends on what we know. So if I don’t know anything about x-rays, then I look at an x-ray, nothing makes sense to me. But a doctor already knows something, and therefore, when the doctor sees, the doctor sees actually, and understands further.
So what we can know depends on what we know. Therefore, if we just arbitrarily start studying scripture, or quoting, there are people who just know some verses, and they quote some verses from the scripture. See, I also know Bhagavad Gita.
I also say I know this verse, I know that verse. Well, it is good that somebody has memorised Bhagavad Gita verses and is quoting that. That indicates one’s piety.
But just quoting stand-alone verses doesn’t indicate a deep understanding of the Bhagavad Gita. All that it indicates is one has some official piety because of which one has memorised some Gita verses. So if you want to understand the Gita in its flow, in its integrity, then you have to study it systematically.
So Krishna is telling over here, when we understand things properly, when we see things properly, then we actually see when we see. Otherwise, we don’t see even if we see. So externally it appears as if a person is doing Karma Yoga, a person is engaged in the world.
Externally it appears as if a person is doing Jnana Yoga, a person is renounced from the world, sitting in silent contemplation, grave, austere. This person is much more advanced. This person is not so advanced.
That’s what I would think. But no. Both are working towards the same destination.
When we see the commonality of the destination beyond the diversity of the process, then we understand that actually they are, then we actually become seers, then we truly understand. So, यह पश्चति सपश्चति Now Prabhupada explains in the Purport that the real purpose of philosophical research is to find the ultimate goal of life. Find the ultimate goal of life.
So, what is the ultimate goal? It is नतेविद्धु स्वार्थगतिम्भिविश्णु The Parlada Mahajan’s 7th Canto explains that नतेविद्धु people don’t know that the ultimate goal of life is Lord Vishnu. To know Lord Vishnu, to love Lord Vishnu, to serve Lord Vishnu. So, the Bhagavatam establishes that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
He is the original manifestation of the Absolute Truth. But after that, the Bhagavatam uses the names Krishna and Vishnu as identical and interchangeable. So, even in the Raasthila, where there is no conception of Vishnu coming up, it’s only Krishna.
But at the end of the Raasthila it is said that one who hears these pastimes of Lord Vishnu. विक्रीदितमिद्रजुबिदुविरिधम्जविष्णु So, why? Because the Bhagavatam, the philosophical point it makes it clear. Krishna is the Bhagavan Swamy.
But after that, it doesn’t go and do a hair-splitting analysis. It simply focusses on the point that Krishna and Vishnu, as names are identical and interchangeable. So, now Prabhupada explains that how are the two similar? Suppose somebody wants to know how to nourish the tree.
Suppose he may find out, some people try just watering the leaves. Oh, the tree looks very nicely watered. It may look nicely watered, but it will not be nourished.
So, somebody else may say, OK, this tree, it has its roots, maybe something is there down. Then I start digging it, digging it carefully, without damaging the roots, but I dig it and I reach. I see all these roots are going down, down, down, they go till here.
Now, what after that? So, after I find the root, what I have to do is, I have to water the root. On the other hand, otherwise somebody understands in faith, hears from authority that actually, we have to water the root of the tree. Then the person starts watering the root.
After watering the root, the tree starts growing. So, both ways, essentially, what is happening is, that one is going to water the tree, and when one waters the tree, the tree is going to grow. But the second process is easier.
Karma Yoga Vishishti Krishna says. Why? Because one does not have to go through the laborious process of digging, and digging without damaging, digging the area around the tree’s roots, without damaging the roots, and then after digging also, what we have to do is water only. So, if you water initially itself, then that’s much easier.
So, actually, even when comes in one by philosophical analysis, so, the body is like the tree, and below the body, something deeper, that is the soul. The soul is the root. So, the soul is the essence of existence, and ultimately, the soul comes from the Supersoul.
So, the Supersoul is the root of all roots. Krishna talks about himself as Bijamavayam, in the 7th chapter, the imperishable seed of all existence. So, after one comes to know that I am not the body and the soul, through the process of Sankhya, even after that, what does one have to do? One ultimately has to water the root of that.
One has to act at the level of the soul, and that is perform devotional service, ultimately. So, if one can start off acting at the level of the soul right now, by acting with detachment, then also one can make spiritual advancement. So now, for all practical purposes, Karma Yoga and Bhakti Yoga, their main difference is the understanding of the absolute truth.
The Karma Yogi may not know what is the absolute truth, that there is some absolute truth, and I am not the body, I am the soul, I have to become detached from the body, and let me act in this mode of sacrifice, don’t pander to the body. So, Bhakti Yogi understands also that I am a part of Krishna, Krishna is the absolute truth, and I have to work, not just in the mode of sacrifice, but in the mode of divine sacrifice, in the mode of sacrifice, for the pleasure of the Supreme Lord. When I act in this way, then I will become liberated.
So, actually both involve something similar, but Krishna says that the ultimate goal being similar, the two are similar, but there is a difference because one process is easier. So, he will come back to the same point again. So, Prabhupada concludes very nicely over here.
So, Prabhupada says, superficially, one process appears to involve detachment, that is Jnana Yoga, and the other process appears to involve attachment. But, what is the difference? For one, there is detachment from matter, that is, detachment from matter is Jnana Yoga, and attachment to Krishna is Bhakti Yoga. Attachment to spirit in general will be Karma Yoga.
Arvananda says, one who sees things, sees this, sees things as they are. Now, Krishna continues this thread of thought, and he concludes this part by saying, why Karma Yoga is better, or why Jnana Yoga is to be discouraged. duḥkham āptam ayogatah yoga-yukto munir brahma anchire nādhi achyuti sa sannyāsas tu mahābhāho sannyāsas tu mahābhāho means, oh Arjuna, your mahābhāho is what has been used again in this chapter now, earlier, now it has been used again, duḥkham āptam ayogatah when one has, when one does sannyās without doing yoga, that means one renounces action, ayogatah, one gets duḥkham.
Why duḥkham? Because inactivity is difficult, it is troublesome, it is unsustainable, it is unnatural. yoga-yukto munir brahma On the other hand, if somebody is yoga-yukto, such a muni, person engaged in activity, brahma, nachire nādhi achyuti such a person not in brahma, and then, nachire nādhi achyuti not after a long time, nachire nādhi is a long time, nachire nādhi is not after a long time, nachire nādhi achyuti one will attain, one will attain soon, it will not take too much time. So Krishna is saying that, again he is reiterating, sannyās tu mahābhāho duḥkham āptam ayogatah ayogatah if one is dispossessed of yoga, one doesn’t have a connection with spirit, connection with the absolute truth, then duḥkham āptam because what is happening, one is detached from matter, so one is not getting into any bondage, but when one is detached from matter, one is not getting any satisfaction, one is not allowed to do any activity when one is detached from matter, because any activity in the material realm causes bondage, so detachment from matter means staying in activity, so that is duḥkham āptam, it’s difficult to be in activity, it’s difficult to be without pleasure, and because one is ayogatah, so one cannot, one is not connected to the absolute truth, one is not experiencing higher happiness, so it’s neither here nor there, one is trying to come out of matter, but one is not entering into spirit, and in that situation one is lost, therefore one is kleshya, one gets kleshya, duḥkham āptam ayogatah, therefore Krishna says, what one should do is be yogayukta, and by being yogayukta, one will soon attain liberation, one will attain Brahma, so Brahma is generic word used for attaining the absolute truth, so Prabhupāda explains how this jñāna is referring to the impersonalists, the MāyāvādÄ«s, and how the MāyāvādÄ«s have their own commentaries, but those commentaries do not give the ultimate conclusion, so Prabhupāda tells the MāyāvādÄ« sannyāsÄ«s and the Vaiṣṇava sannyāsÄ«s, the MāyāvādÄ« sannyāsÄ«s engaged in studies of Sāṅkhya and Vedānta, speculation, cannot release a transcendental service of the Lord, because their studies become very tedious, they sometimes become tired of Brahman speculation, thus they take shelter of the Bhāgavatam without proper understanding.
It is an interesting point. If we look at the Vedas, at the Vedic history, Shankaracharya did not comment on the Bhāgavatam, Rāmānucārya also did not comment on the Bhāgavatam, Madhvacharya started commenting on it, he wrote a Prathamaśa, so actually he commented on the Bhāgavatam, Bhāgavata-tattva-nirvana, as he wrote Mahabharata-tattva-nirvana. So, basically, the Bhāgavatam is a profound philosophy which concludes in personalistic, theistic devotion.
Shankaracharya did not mess with it, and because Rāmānucārya was primarily responding to Shankaracharya, he also did not refer to the Bhāgavatam, although he quoted concepts of bhakti, which are similar to what is given in the Bhāgavatam. But, to our context, what is important is, Shankaracharya appeared in the 7th century. So, after him, Rāmācharya came in the 10th century, the 10th-11th century, then Rāmānucārya in the 11th-12th century, and after that, in the mediaeval Indian history, there is a bhakti renaissance.
Now, bhakti was there long ago, before 5000 years when the Vedic culture was present in the world. But, we are talking about recent history now. So, when this bhakti renaissance started, the appeal of Māyāvāda started appearing stale as compared to bhakti.
Ultimately, the idea that I am Brahman, it may be relating to the ego, but there is no satisfaction in the heart. In the Māyāvādī path, unless you renounce the world, you cannot even begin the spiritual journey seriously. Because, if you are an illusion, you have to come out of illusion.
So, everybody has to take sannyāsa. So, it’s a very demanding path, and not only is it demanding, it doesn’t lead to the ultimate destination also, actually. But, what happened is, the MāyāvādÄ«s, they found that they were not able to sustain themselves in their renounce path, and they were not able to sustain people’s attention also.
So, within impersonalism, slowly, the bhakti cult, we could say, Prabhupāda uses the word cult, we don’t use the word cult generally, because, the word cult has got a very negative connotation. Cult conveys the idea of people who live in isolation, and people who are brainwashed, and they do all sorts of weird things. That’s what we refer to by the word cult nowadays.
Of course, during Prabhupāda’s time, the word cult was just a group, referred to a group. So, it had no negative connotation to it, just objective meaning, it meant a group. So, we avoid the use of the word cult, although Prabhupāda does use it.
Now, in our context, bhakti started spreading very rapidly. So, the Māyāvādīs, among their ranks also, some people started practising bhakti. Not bhakti in the sense that they wanted to practise bhakti as the ultimate goal, but still they started practising bhakti, and they also started studying bhāgavatam, and they also started teaching, based on the bhāgavatam.
For example, Madhusundara Saraswati was a prominent scholar in the Vedāntic line, in the Advaitic line, and he wrote a commentary called, he actually wrote many books. So, one of the books is ÅšrÄ«mad-Bhāgavatam, patama-Å›lokatātpari. It’s almost a book of dozens and dozens and dozens of pages.
Just the first shloka of the ÅšrÄ«mad-Bhāgavatam, there is extensive elaboration on it. So, in this way, the bhāgavatam is commented on by the MāyāvādÄ«s, and nowadays many MāyāvādÄ«s are also in the bhāgavat-sattva. But, actually, they just can’t, they can’t enter into the history of bhāgavatam.
They try to interpret everything metaphorically, and then they, they feel almost embarrassed by Krishna’s pastimes with the gopÄ«s. You know, this man is the absolute truth, why is he acting immorally? And they try to explain away everything as symbolic, or whatever. They say, oh, what does the Rāshtalā represent? It represents the union of Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa, it represents the merging of the soul with the absolute truth.
Actually, this is not at all what the bhāgavatam is teaching. And this is quite offensive. But, even if they speak on the bhāgavatam, they cannot really relish the bhāgavatam.
Because their underlying, defining conceptions are all wrong. They are not studying the bhāgavatam to understand Bhagavān, they are studying bhāgavatam to transcend Bhagavān, to, in one sense, denigrate and destroy the form of Bhagavān, and thereafter attain Brahman. So, that’s why they cannot be satisfied.
So, there is this strand of bhakti which is there among the impersonalists also. And somehow, what has happened is that there are some bhaktas, some people who may have genuine bhakti also, but they get attracted to the māyāvādÄ« path, because they think those organisations are prominent, they are respectable in public’s eyes. They think, I want to practise spirituality, these people are doing bhakti, let me also do bhakti.
So, we have to understand that not all people who are in māyāvādÄ« organisations are necessarily māyāvādÄ«s. They are māyāvādÄ«s by affiliation, but they may not be māyāvādÄ«s by inclination. So, affiliation means that’s what they are affiliated to, but by inclination, they may not be māyāvādÄ«s.
So, Śrīdhar Swami was actually like that. Śrīdhar Swami is the seminal commentator on the bhāgavatam. There may have been commentators before him, but their commentaries are not available.
ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami’s commentary is seminal. Jaitanya Mahāprabhu also referred to that commentary and glorified ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami. Now, ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami, if we see, he was not belonging to the Vaishnava sampradaya, externally speaking.
He was a devotee, exalted devotee, great ācārya, but he was externally belonging to the māyāvādÄ« sampradaya. And that’s why when he wrote his commentary, in some places, he gave certain understandings which seemed to support māyāvāda. So, in the ÅšrÄ«mad Bhāgavatam, in the Antalila, by the past time of Vallabh Bhatta coming to meet Jaitanya Mahāprabhu, Vallabh Bhatta tried to counter the conception that ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami has given.
Jaitanya Mahāprabhu understood the heart of Śrīdhar Swami. And he understood that, actually, whatever he has given is appropriate. He has given the highest devotional conclusions in the right places.
In some other places, there are certain statements which may lead to some misunderstanding. But when we understand the context and we understand the heart of ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami, there is no mistake. Jaitanya Mahāprabhu did not approve of Vallabh Bhatta’s attempts to counter and correct ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami’s commentary.
But what was Vallabh Bhatta’s objection? It was that everything is contextual in his commentary. There is no consistency. Actually, the consistency was there, but because of affiliation, he had to make certain statements.
So, Jiva Goswami, when he is writing his sandarbhas, he uses ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami as the standard reference for commenting on the Bhāgavatam. And he says, tika iti. He will say that, okay, the tika, he does not even mention whose tika, because he understood he is quoting ÅšrÄ«dhar Swami’s tika.
When Śrīdhar Swami is making a point that supports personalism, Jiva Goswami quotes it directly and then explains it. And when Śrīdhar Swami, at certain places, because of the affiliation to impersonalism, has to give some impersonalist explanations, then what Jiva Goswami says is, he does not refer to Śrīdhar Swami at all, and he simply says that according to an imaginary interpretation, some people say it is like this. And he says, no, it is not like this.
Actual understanding is this. And he gives logical and scriptural basis for his understanding also. So, Jiva Goswami shows how Vaishnavatic ideas were maintained, something which Vallabhatta could not do.
Śrīdhar Mahāprabhu told him that, I do not want to hear this. Śrīdhar Mahāprabhu tried to chastise him quite a bit strongly at that time. So, even now, there may be some people who are impersonalists, but they are Māyāvādīs by affiliation.
We should not assume that those are Māyāvādīs by affiliation necessarily, they have to be Māyāvādīs by inclination. So, there are people, look, they get the proper understanding, they may turn away from Māyāvāda and come to the process of Bhakti Yoga, if they are given the right understanding. Now, Krishna will talk about how one can be Yogayukta.
yogayukto viśuddhātmā vijitātmā jītendriyā sarvabhūtātmā bhūtātmā yogayukto So, yogayukto is the word used in the previous verse. So, when one is yogayukta, one is viśuddhātmā, the soul is purified, vijitātmā, the second ātmā refers to self-controlled, and jītendriyā, one who has stopped the senses. So, one who is pure and one who controls his mind and senses.
sarvabhūtātmā bhūtātmā This is an interesting compound word, kurvan api nalipyate, which a person, even as a person acts, does not get bound. So, the prior qualifications are fine. Actually, in this fifth canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there is the pastime of Mahārāja Utānapāda, who was a descendant of Swayambhuva Manu.
He and his descendants, they keep ruling the earth. So, he is described in the fourth canto. His description comes in Dhruva Mahārāja’s pastime, the 7th, 8th, 9th chapters.
And then, his descendants keep ruling the world, but then his dynasty ends. So, when his dynasty ends, the rule has to go on. So, therefore, from Utānapāda, Priyavrata is told.
Priyavrata is the other son of Swayambhuva Manu. And he is told, you please become the king. And Swayambhuva Manu has actually already, he had gone to the forest as a brahmachārī, as a renunciate.
And his plan was that he wanted to live as a brahmachārī and take sannyāsa eventually and then become liberated from material existence. So, for this purpose, when he was acting, at that time, he was under the guidance of Nārada Muni. And he went to renounce the world, more or less.
So, at that time, Swayambhuva Manu came to him and told him that there is no one to rule the kingdom. Please come back and take the responsibility of ruling. So, Priyavrata was extremely reluctant.
He said, I have saved myself from entanglement in this world. I don’t want to become entangled now. So, then, when he said this, at that time, Swayambhuva Manu became disturbed.
So, we see Priyavrata, he was caught between the two. Nārada Muni was telling him, don’t get entangled. Nārada Muni, you see, he preaches so powerfully that he gets people disentangled from material existence by his strong instructions.
So, now, both of them are mahājanas. Swayambhu, Nārada, Shambhu, Kumāra, Kapila, and Manu. So, Manu is also mahājana.
Nārada is also mahājana. So, what to do? Priyavrata was in a dilemma. So, when two authorities are saying the same thing, then, what should one do? He wanted to continue what he was doing.
So, seeing the grave need in the world for a competent administrator, BrahmājÄ« himself depends on a swan carrier. And BrahmājÄ« told him that actually, don’t resent the orders of the Lord. You don’t be envious of the Supreme Lord.
Whatever He wants, you should do. That is the meaning of being a servant. And he told him at that time that if somebody is not attached, if somebody is attached, then even if that person lives in the forest, that person is living with six wives.
The five senses in the mind. They are themselves six wives. And one is staying with the six wives, one will be bound.
One will simply be a hypocrite. One will stay in bondage because of contemplating sense objects. On the other hand, if one is self-controlled, one is detached, then even if one stays at home and has other wives also, one will not become bound.
Therefore, because the service is required, please accept it. So he accepted it eventually. Why did he accept? Because he thought, this is the way, the Lord is asking me to serve Him.
And Brahmājī himself has come. So Brahmājī is the spiritual superior and teacher of both Swayambhu Manu and Nārada Muni. He is like the spiritual master for both of them.
So when Brahmājī came and gave a decision, both the disciples, they agreed. Now, it seems that Swayambhu Manu won and Nārada Muni lost. But Swayambhu Manu did not gloat in his glory, looking down at Nārada Muni.
And Nārada Muni also accepted what was the will of his superior, Brahmājī. So that is the point. There are also similar words that are used.
And the point is, if one is not attached, then even if one stays at home, stays in family, stays in a palace, still that person will not become bound, even if that person is a king. So when will that happen? kuruvan api nalipyate. yogayuktava vishuddhātmā vijitātmā vijitendriyaha.
So one who is purified, vishuddhātmā is purified. vijitendriyaha is one. vijitātmā and vijitendriyaha is one who has controlled the mind, controlled the senses.
So one who has done this will stay liberated no matter what happens. kuruvan api nalipyate. Now, Prabhupāda explains.
So if he says that Prabhupāda’s purport goes into the point of sarva-bhÅ«tātmā-bhÅ«tātmā. sarva-bhÅ«tātmā-bhÅ«tātmā means what? The person is compassionate to all living beings. Prabhupāda translates it as he is dear to everyone and everyone is dear to him.
So the other’s ātmā becomes like his ātmā. I mean he treats others so lovingly that other’s ātmā becomes like his ātmā. This doesn’t mean that they all become an impersonal one.
It simply indicates that there is a deep emotional connection that comes about that almost makes the feeling to be like oneness. So we’ll discuss about this in ātmā-bhÅ«pā-mÄ«lā-sarvatā in 6.31, 32. In 6.32 we’ll discuss it more.
But at this stage, the point is Krishna is talking at this level that he is assuring Arjuna that Arjuna will stay free from bondage if he acts in this way. yukto yo yukto shuddhātmā vijitātmā jitendriyā And such a person becomes dear to everyone because that person has no selfish motivation. That person doesn’t want anything from anyone.
That person simply wants to serve. Now there can be various definitions of material and spiritual. You know, how do we know whether our relationship is material or spiritual? We can start with selfish and selfless.
When we meet someone, if I think, what can this person do for me? Then my relationship is selfish. If I meet someone and think, what can I do for that person? Then that person is selfless. And if we deepen this and connect this with Krishna, what can this person give me for personal enjoyment? Then I’m thinking material.
I think, oh, how can this person bless me with advancement in Krishna consciousness? Maybe I please this person by going and talking respectfully, attentively, by hearing the classes that this person gives me, or by associating with this person, asking questions and hearing the discussions attentively and submissively, whatever way is possible. You get that association and you make spiritual advancement by that. A devotee is the well-wisher of all living beings.
A devotee is selfless for oneself and selfless for the sake of others. The sake of others means that the devotee is concerned about others. Even if a person doesn’t become bound.
Let’s continue our discussion in the next class. Thank you very much.