Chatur Shloki Bhagavatam 2 – Understanding Maya

Okay. So, thank you very much.

tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ Vaishnavism trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ trutey arthaṁ yat pratiyeta na pratiyeta cātmani na pratiyeta cātmani tad vidyadātmano māyāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ yathā bhāso yathā tamo hāṁ The two word meanings, ritey, without arthaṁ, value yat, that which pratiyet appears to be na, not pratiyet appears to be ca and ātmani in relation to me tad, that vidyāt, you must know ātmanahā, my māyāṁ illusory energy yathā, just as ābhāsahā, the reflection yathā, as tamo hāṁ, the darkness Translation and purport by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta, Swamishla Prabhupāda Translation, O Brahmā, whatever appears to be of any value, if it is without relation to me but has no reality know it as my illusory energy that reflection which appears to be in darkness purport, in the previous verse it is already been concluded that in any stage of the cosmic manifestation its appearance, its sustenance, its growth its interaction of different energies, its deterioration and its disappearance, all has its basic relation with the existence of the personality of God and as such, whenever there is forgetfulness of this prime relation with the Lord, and whenever things are accepted as real without being related to the Lord, that conception is called a product of the illusory energy of the Lord because nothing can exist without the Lord, it should be known that the illusory energy is also an energy of the Lord the right conclusion of dovetailing everything in relationship with the Lord is called yoga māyā, or the energy of union, and the wrong conception of detaching a thing from its relationship with the Lord is called the Lord's daivī māyā or mahamāyā, both the māyās also have connection with the Lord because nothing can exist without being related to Him, as such, the wrong conception of detaching relationships with the Lord is not false but illusory misconceiving one thing for another is called illusion for example, accepting a rope as a snake is illusion but the rope is not false, the rope as it exists in front of the illusioned person is not at all false, but the acceptance is illusory, therefore the wrong conception of accepting this material existence as being divorced from the energy of the Lord is illusion, but it is not false and this illusory conception is called the reflection of the reality in the darkness of ignorance anything that appears as apparently not being produced out of my energy is called māyā, the conception that the living entity is formless or that the Supreme Lord is formless is also illusion, in the Bhagavad Gita 2.12 it was said by the Lord in the midst of the battlefield that the warrior standing in front of Arjuna Arjuna himself and even the Lord had all existed before they were existing in the battlefield of Kurukshetra and they would all continue to be individual personalities in the future also even after the annihilation of the present body and even after being liberated from the bondage of material existence, in all circumstances the Lord and the living entities are individual personalities and the personal features of both the Lord and living beings are never abolished only the influence of the illusory energy the reflection of light in the darkness can by the mercy of the Lord be removed, in the material world the light of the sun is also not independent nor is that of the moon the real source of light is the Brahma Jyotir which diffuses light from the transcendental body of the Lord and the same light is reflected in varieties of lights, the light of the sun, the light of the moon, the light of fire and the light of electricity. So the identity of the self as being unconnected with the supreme self, the Lord, is also illusion and the false claim, I am the supreme, is the last illusory snare of the same maya or the external energy of the Lord. It's a long purport so we will focus on this part today.

Tasmai Shri Gurave Namaha, Nama Om Vishnupadaya, Krishna Prashtaya Bhutale, Shrimate Bhaktivedanta, Swami Atinamine, Namaste Saraswati Deve, Gauravani Pracharine, Nirvishesha Shunyavadi, Pashyatya Deshatarine, Vancha Kalpataru Bhyascha, Kripa Sindhupya Evacha, Patitanam Pavanibhyo, Vaishnavibhyo Namo Namaha, Jai Shri Krishna Chaitanya, Prabhu Nithyananda, Shri Advaita Gadadhara, Shri Vasadhi Gauravakta Vrinda, Hare Krishna Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna Hare Hare, Hare Rama Hare Rama, Rama Rama Hare Hare, Hare Krishna So today morning we are discussing the second verse of the Chatur Shloki Bhagwat In the first text, how the Lord is the supreme reality at all times that was discussed. In this verse, how that which appears to be real but is disconnected from the Lord, that is Maya, that will be discussed over here. So some of you may have found yesterday's class a little intellectually demanding So I'll try to keep things simpler in today's class.

Actually the subject itself the Chatur Shloki Bhagwat is a very philosophical subject. So I'll try to balance between doing justice to the subject and keeping the subject intelligible So we'll focus on three main things here Prabhupada's purport actually continues from the previous purport and here we'll talk about, yesterday I mentioned how there is a problem of evil. If God is good, why is there so much suffering in this world? And we discussed within the western intellectual traditions, the problem of evil was zeroed down to why bad things happen to good people, why children get sick, why there are natural calamities, why sometimes tyrants flourish and commit so much tyranny.

Whereas the Vedantic perspective is, yes these specific evils are a problem but more fundamentally the very material existence where we want to live and we are forced to die. Where we want happiness and misery is imposed upon us. That itself is a problem and how is that to be resolved? Now within the Vedantic tradition there have been two primary interpretations of Vedanta.

That is the Advaitic interpretation and then there is the Vaishnava interpretation. Now both of them use more or less the same terms So the word Maya is used within the Vedantic tradition both by Advaitins and by the Vaishnavas but the word Maya has significantly different meanings in both contexts. So we will discuss first the problem of evil and how that is related with the concept of Maya.

Then we will discuss the two conceptions of Maya the Advaitic and the Vaishnava and then we will discuss the special Gaudiya Vaishnava conception of Maya itself being of two types, Mahamaya and Yogamaya. That is what Vishwanath Chakra Thakur in his purport focusses on. So the problems in this world, the Abrahamic religions they try to explain it by postulating an entity separate from God.

That is Satan, Shaitan, whoever they call it. Now this being is considered to be almost as powerful as God not as powerful but still there is a fierce battle between this being Satan and God and at the time of final judgement God will win and at that time whoever has stayed faithful to God despite the temptations and troubles created by Satan they will be delivered. Now this conception leads to the question that okay if Satan is a being independent of God then where does Satan come from? If God is the source of all good then where does Satan come from? And that is a question which doesn't have a very clear understanding.

Now rather than postulating a separate living being for explaining the sufferings of this world. Why there is the sufferings in this world are broadly of two types. There is what is called as natural evil and there is moral evil.

Natural evil means when nature does bad things. When there are calamities, when there are earthquakes, when there are tsunamis. It's nature doing something bad.

And moral evil means people themselves tend to do bad. So some people act very viciously. Some people are brutal tyrants.

So this means both ways. The Upanishads talk about three tattvas. If you want to use an alliterative reference for it from J they are called as Jagdish, Jiva and Jagat.

Jagdish is the supreme lord. Jiva is the soul and Jagat is the universe. So Jagdish is considered to be the source of the Jiva and the Jagat both.

So when the Jagat seems to bring about problems in this world, when the universe is the source of misery, that is called as natural evil. And when the Jiva, the living being does evil things and that causes suffering. That is called as moral evil.

So now if the Jagat and Jiva both have come from the Jagdish and the Jagdish is all good. Then why is there evil from both of these? So the Abrahamic answer is that this Jagat is presently controlled by Satan. And the Jiva, the soul, their conception of soul is different.

But whatever it is, the idea is that when Adam sinned and accepted the seduction of Satan, accepted the forbidden apple, from that time Adam and all his descendants, they chose to put themselves under the jurisdiction of Satan. And that's why they are also controlled by Satan. They are also manipulable by Satan.

That means, that's why yesterday I mentioned that there is a radical disjunction or radical disconnect between the world and God in the Abrahamic religions. God is considered the utterly other. He is so different, so great, so transcendental that we can't even conceive of him.

That's because we are completely under the spell of Satan. Now I am giving a Christianity also is not one religion in the sense that they accept one Jesus, but there are thousands of denominations of Christianity and they all also have their individual beliefs. But we just give a broad outlines for the purpose of contrast over here.

Now the Vedantic understanding is that actually all these three, Jagdish, Jiva and Jagat they are all integrated whole. Rather than conceiving of these two as separate, both of them, the Jiva and the Jagat they are connected with Jagdish. So now, this verse explains what is Maya when we don't see the connection of the Jiva or the Jagat with the Jagdish.

That is Maya. So Maya is not just illusion in perception. It is illusion in conception.

Now what is the difference? Illusion in perception means if we are going in a desert and we see a mirage over there. Actually there is no water, but to us water appears to be there. That is illusion in perception.

How we see things, that's not what they actually are. Or if we take a stick and we put it in water a transparent beaker if we put, because of refraction the part of the stick which is inside the water beaker, it appears to be bent. So that is also illusion in perception.

Illusion in perception is itself not Maya. That is one aspect of Maya. But fundamentally Maya is illusion in conception.

Perception is what is related with the senses. Conception is what is related with the mind. We perceive with our senses, we conceive with our mind.

So yes, we could say Maya is also at one level illusion in perception. So we see the attractive things of this world and we think that this will give me happiness. That we could say at one level is Maya.

But that is not essentially Maya. Maya originates in the mind where there is an illusory conception. What is that illusory conception? That is mentioned in this verse rte artham yat pratiyet na pratiyet chatmani rte artham The word artha has many arthas.

Artha has many meanings. So one is of course meaning. The other is wealth.

We say artha parmartha. In Hindi we say artha mantri, the finance minister. So artha means wealth.

Dharma artha kama moksha. In that artha means wealth. So rte artham yat pratiyet.

That which appears meaningful. That which appears valuable. But na pratiyet chatmani na pratiyet.

But in our appearance we don't see any connection. Here the word atma, Sri Prabhupada translates as Supreme Lord. So I'll explain the rationale for this translation in due course.

But I'll just explain the verse here. So that which appears to be meaningful, to be valuable, but it does not appear to have any connection with the Supreme. rte artham yat pratiyet na pratiyet chatmani tad vidyad atmano maya That is maya.

yatha bhaso yatha tamaha In the Ramayana when Ravana has his own plan, whole plan to abduct Sita. So actually, initially he doesn't want to abduct her. He wants, he has been cursed that if he forcibly violates any woman, he will die.

So he makes his whole plan. He has Rama out of the way through Maricha. And his plan is to attract Sita.

Captivate Sita. To seduce Sita. So he appears in the garb of a saint and then after Sita comes and offers him some food, then he starts, he reveals his form.

He doesn't reveal his ten headed form at that time. Ten headed form is not particularly attractive. And he wants to attract.

So he reveals his one headed form and he says, he starts bragging about his strength. He says, I am the king of the Rakshasas. I am the most powerful being in the whole world.

I have defeated Indra. I have defeated everyone else. So basically in his speech he does three things.

First thing, he just brags about himself. All that he says so that he wants to impress Sita. And second thing is, he is thinking, actually Sita is a married woman, but for him marriage holds no sanctity.

So he considers Rama to be like a competitor for him. So he starts deriding Rama. He says, you know, he is a pauper.

What can he give you? You know, you have left everything for him, but just see he has left you and gone away now. And then afterward, the third thing that he does is, he starts flattering Sita for her beauty. And there he says, a lot of verses he says, and then at the conclusion he says, I think that after making you, the creator must have retired.

He says, because no one can be more beautiful than you. And then at that time, so it's interesting that Ravana also acknowledges the existence of a creator. So he acknowledges the existence of the creator, but he is thinking that the creation is for his enjoyment.

Instead of thinking of the creation as meant for the creator, instead of Sita being meant for Rama, he thinks that whoever is the creator, that creator has created you for me. And he wants to flatter her and get her. And then later, very intriguingly, when Sita has been abducted and just before Rama is going to attack, at that time there is an assembly of war declared by called by Ravana.

At that time, Vibhishan tries in various ways to warn Ravana. And there he uses a metaphor which at first glance seems very shocking. He says that Sita is like a vicious snake.

Who is the enemy that has put this snake around your neck? And he says that he goes on and develops a metaphor and he says the eye lashes of Sita are her fangs. And her smile is the bite. And you, if you get bitten by this smile, you will die.

He says and further he says that your thoughts of Sita, your attraction to Sita is the poison that is entering your system and killing you. Now, Sita is the goddess of fortune. First of all, to compare the goddess of fortune to a snake, that itself is a jarring metaphor.

And isn't it that if we think of Krishna as auspicious, so think of Rama as auspicious. But Ravana is being told by Vibhishan, who is a devotee, he is telling that thoughts of Sita are like poison for you. Why is that? If Sita is the goddess of fortune, why is it that thoughts of Sita are poison, are misfortune for him? Because He is seeing Sita, but he is not seeing the connection of Sita with Rama.

In fact, he is mentally completely divorced from Sita, from Rama, and he is thinking that Sita is meant for my enjoyment. And that thought, the thought that the world and the things within it are meant for my enjoyment independent of Krishna, that is Maya. So, here it's an important difference to make.

Sita is not Maya. We can very clearly understand it. Sita is the goddess of fortune.

Sita is not Maya. It is Ravana's perception that Sita is, Ravana is not his perception. Sita is from perception, she is very beautiful.

But it is his conception of seeing her beauty separate from Rama. That is Maya. So, it's important that when we recognise Maya, so for example, a man may say for me a woman is Maya.

A woman may say that for me a man is Maya. But actually, that is not the correct understanding. No, we cannot reduce Maya to any particular person.

Maya is our conception that that person or that thing is meant for my enjoyment. Unconnected from Krishna. So, that is Maya.

Some people, they accuse the Vedic culture of being anti-woman. And they say this anti-woman bias is seen, especially Christians criticise Hinduism in general and they say that, you know, this anti-woman stance of Hinduism is seen in that they personified illusion as Maya, as female. Now, actually the illusion is not female.

Illusory energy is female. And if you want to say that way, even Sita is female. So, the goddess is also female.

Christianity has one God. They have no goddess that way. They have Virgin Mary who is the mother.

And if you want to go that way, see, today, yes, there is a lot of feminist, anti-feminist rhetoric going on. We cannot use our frames of perception to try to reduce Shastra at all. Now, we could turn the same thing around.

I was once in a flight and Christian was arguing this. I said then, if you want to put, if you are going to interpret it this way, you're going to see scripture from a feminist lens. You can turn it on the Bible also.

You can say, Satan didn't tempt Adam. Satan tempted Eve. So, the story is that Satan wanted to give the forbidden apple.

First he went to Eve. Eve was the female in the first couple. And he persuaded Eve.

And then after that, Eve went and told Adam that, you know, let us eat this apple. And then they both ate the apple and then they fell away from God. There you could say that Satan, there also it is portrayed as if woman is less intelligent.

Satan did not go to Eve. Adam, he went to Eve. And it was Eve who fell.

Our frames of reference, our ways of thinking, we cannot apply them on scripture. And philosophically speaking, Maya is not, it's not that female is Maya. Rather, our conception of things separate from Krishna, that is Maya.

And whatever causes that separation, that will be the channel through which Maya is coming. In Krishna, in the third chapter, at 3.36, Arjuna asks Krishna, He says, By what is one impelled to sinful activities? And then Krishna replies, it is lust. But later on, when he is analysing lust and he is telling where lust is present.

So, in 3.41, 3.40, he states that actually lust is present in So, he says, The senses, the mind and the intelligence. Lust is present in these. From here, one is, the soul is deluded.

The embodied soul's knowledge is covered in this way. So, Krishna is saying that lust is present in the senses, the mind and the intelligence. So, he is not saying that lust is present in some other person.

So, he is saying that lust is present in our own senses, mind and intelligence. Now, yes, by seeing some images, by seeing some sights, lust may be triggered. But the trigger is not the primary cause.

If I press a trigger in a gun, if there is no bullet in the gun, pressing the trigger will have no result. So, the trigger is what stimulates. But something has to be present originally for the trigger will have an effect.

So, yes, certain external objects, certain external perceptions may trigger lust within us. But they are not the source of the lust. They are the trigger.

The source is what is present within us. Our own senses, mind and intelligence, they are the sitting places of lust. So, again, the point here is, Krishna is telling, एतैर्विमोहयतेश्यज्ञानमावृत्यदेहिनं Through these, the soul becomes bewildered.

The knowledge of the soul becomes covered. That means, again, Krishna is not saying that the illusion is caused by external things. The illusion is caused by our own internal, the internal presence of lust.

And similarly, it applies for all anarthas. So, the purpose of analysing philosophy is not to blame anyone. It's very easy to blame others.

But searching for the villain can't help us to find the hero. If you're looking all around in a movie, if you're watching a movie and you're looking, who is the villain, who is the villain? We will miss the hero completely. Isn't it? So, like that, the purpose of spiritual life is to find out Krishna.

He is the ultimate hero. And if we are looking for the villain, you know, because of you, I cannot practise Krishna bhakti. Because of you, I cannot practise Krishna bhakti.

Because of this, I cannot do this. Well, we are basically looking for a villain to blame. But then, searching for the villain can't help us in finding the hero.

So, yes, there are things in this world which may trigger temptation, trigger illusion within us. But those things are not primarily responsible for the illusion of temptation. It is our own misconceptions.

It is our own impurities that are responsible. And we need to purify ourselves. Of course, if there are certain things which trigger temptation a lot within us, then we have to take proper safeguards to not expose ourselves too much to them.

That is fine. But those things are not to be blamed. It is we who need to purify ourselves.

Now, why is maya there at all? What is the origin of maya? If you consider this, the soul always has free will. Without free will, there is no possibility for love. There is no possibility for loving reciprocation.

So, Krishna has given all of us free will. Yesterday, I explained how human will is founded and fulfilled in divine will. So, God has given us free will.

And the very existence of free will necessitates the existence of a world where that free will can be used. Used means misused. If I have really given freedom, that freedom can be used, it can be misused.

So, if Krishna had created only the spiritual world where there is no maya, then the free will itself would have become meaningless. So, the existence of free will necessitates the existence of an arena where free will can be executed. And that arena is the world of maya.

So, in 7.14, Bhagavad Gita states in Bhagavad Gita, … So, while describing maya, Krishna uses three adjectives. … Nowhere in the Abrahamic religions, God says, My satan. Because satan is considered to be opposite, whereas Krishna is saying, My maya.

In fact, the Bhagavatam states further that, Vaishnavi Janmohini. He says, this is Vaishnavi who is Janmohini. She is a devotee, but it is her duty to test people by exposing them to illusion, by presenting them illusion.

So, she is Vaishnavi. … And Krishna further stresses this point by explaining, And gunamayi means made of the modes. So, the modes are quite a complex concept, but essentially the modes are the founding blocks of everything in material existence.

They are the, I talked about jagat, sorry, jagdish, jiva and jagat. So, the world that exists apart from jagdish, everything within that is influenced by the modes. So, our thinking is influenced by the modes.

The external objects are influenced by the modes. So, Krishna says, the whole material energy is made of the modes. This energy is divine.

Again, the energy is not demoniac. The energy is divine. Why is it divine? Because her purpose is ultimately divine.

Sri Prabhupada was once asked that in New Vrindavan when he was giving this series of lectures which have come as the book Dharma, the way of transcendence. So, he gave them in New Vrindavan. So, after one of the classes, one devotee asked Sri Prabhupada, Prabhupada, if our purpose is to serve Krishna, why is maya so strong? I want to serve Krishna and why is maya obstructing me, distracting me? Why is maya so strong? So, Prabhupada replied immediately, because your purpose is not strong.

Our purpose is to serve Krishna, but right now the purpose is not strong. That means, yes, Krishna is good, but maya is also not bad. I shouldn't be fanatical.

Yes, Krishna is good, maya is also good. So, you know, because of the influence of maya, we have second thoughts, third thoughts, fourth thoughts, we keep reconsidering temptations again and again and again. And that's why maya appears to be very strong.

The classic example that Prahlad Maharaj gives in the 7th canto is of scratching an itch. kandu tivan manasijam vishahet dheera Suppose somebody has a rash and that person just stops scratching it. It will get completely cured.

And afterwards, that person may even forget that I ever had a rash like that. So, like that, we can all see that when we started practising bhakti, we may have had certain temptations, certain habits, which just go away. Suppose, say, somebody was eating meat in the past.

Once we become devotees, the devotees fall in various ways, but very few devotees actually feel irresistibly attracted to meat. Literally, there is prasad is param drishtvaanivartate. Prasad gives higher taste.

So, even if in the past one was attracted to meat, one doesn't feel much attraction. Why? Because we just give that up and then we don't contemplate on it, we don't dwell on it. So, it's like there was a rash, we stopped scratching it, applied the medicine, it got cured and we forgot about it.

But many other temptations, which keep troubling us, they are like rashes, which, you know, we keep scratching secretly. So, we, if we just give up the indulgence, we'll see the temptation goes away. But if we keep scratching a little bit, thinking, maybe indulging a little bit, then coming out, thinking, indulging once again, then the rash doesn't go away.

So, what Prabhupada is saying is, because our purpose is not strong. So, if our purpose becomes strong, then maya won't trouble us. Won't trouble us means what? Maya, for all practical purposes, is equivalent to our mind.

Philosophically, maya is the illusory energy of the Lord, but practically maya is the mind itself. Maya primarily acts through the mind. And so, if our mind is fixed on Krishna, if our mind is purified, if our mind is engaged in something constructive, then maya cannot trouble us much.

So, that's why the focus in bhakti is not so much on overcoming maya. The same verse Krishna says, he uses three describers, daivi, gunamayi, mama. And he says, the way for going beyond maya is, ma me vaye prapadyante, maya me tam tarandite.

Those who surrender to me, they will go beyond maya. So, here, the important point comes up that maya is not just illusion. It is the illusory energy.

What is the difference between illusion and illusory energy? If you think of maya as simply illusion, you may think, if I become clever enough, then I'll go beyond maya. This is an illusion. If somebody is going in the desert and that person is ignorant of the nature of mirages, that person will get attracted to a mirage.

But I am intelligent. I know the ways of desert. I won't get attracted to a mirage.

You may think like this. So, if we think of maya just as a random illusion that is out there, we will think that with our intelligence, I can overcome it. But maya is not just illusion.

It is the illusory energy. And the illusions that are there in this world, they are the tools of the illusory energy to reveal to us the futility of everything separate from Krishna. What is the purpose of the illusory energy? It is to reveal to us the futility of everything separate from Krishna.

It's like a student is taught by the teacher and then after that, when there is an exam, say there is a multiple choice exam, there are many wrong options. The purpose of the wrong options is what? The student, if the student studies and the focus of the study is knowing this is the wrong option, this is the wrong option, this is the wrong option. But there can be unlimited wrong options.

If the student's study is focused on knowing what are the wrong options, the student may understand 500 wrong options. But in the exam of 500, the first wrong option may come up. And the student will think that is to be right.

So the whole purpose of education is not to know what all are the wrong options. If one just gets the right understanding, then automatically what is wrong will be known. It's like if I want to understand what is 3 plus 7, if I decide to go through all the wrong options, you know the set of natural numbers is infinite.

I can have infinite wrong options. So if I just understand 3 plus 7 is 10, then what 3 plus 7 is not, I automatically know that. So like that if we think of Maya only as illusion, we think I just have to become intelligent enough to overcome this illusion.

I have to become intelligent enough to overcome this illusion. I have to become intelligent enough to overcome this illusion. Yes, we have to become intelligent but the purpose of intelligence is not just to overcome illusion.

The purpose of intelligence is to surrender to Krishna. So surrendering to Krishna is the right option. When we become devoted to Krishna, when we become fixed in the service of Krishna, whatever form Maya comes in, that Maya will not tempt us.

Krishna can free us from temptation in one moment. Sometimes we may feel troubled by lust, we may be troubled by greed, we may be troubled by anger. Krishna if he wants, he can free us in one moment.

But the problem is that if we become immediately free from lust or anger or greed, the result is that we will become proud. All these people, they are all so fallen. I may fast on Ekadashi, but if I go and see who all is eating what, and I think, all these people, they are so fallen.

I am so self-controlled. Then my body is fasting, but my ego is feasting. So, I may be able to control my senses, but I am controlled by pride.

So what happens, sometimes we may pray to Krishna, Krishna please help me to control this, please help me to give up this Anartha. And we wonder, why are we still troubled by that Anartha? Is it that Krishna is not hearing our prayers? Krishna doesn't want us to become purified? Actually, Krishna definitely hears our prayers. Krishna wants us to be purified.

But he doesn't want us to just shift from one department of illusion to another department of illusion. We may become free from lust, but if we do not surrender to Krishna, if we don't become devoted to Krishna, then our freedom from temptation will make us proud. And that is a bigger temptation.

Lust, actually all Anarthas are troublesome. Lust makes us do sinful activities, which is bad. Pride makes us feel that we don't need Krishna.

Pride makes us feel that we don't need devotees. And if we feel that we don't need devotees, that devotees are not very important, we may commit offences. And in the path of Bhakti, when we compare Paap and Aparadha, if we compare sin and offence, offence is actually much more dangerous than sin.

Because even when we do some sinful activity, still the path to Krishna is open. We can rise up and we can move onwards. But when we commit offences, then our taste for Krishna goes away.

Then we feel no inspiration to move towards Krishna. And then the difficulties that come in our path are much more. So Krishna, what he does is, when we are trying to battle our Anarthas, we sometimes succeed and we sometimes fail.

Succeed and fail. Succeed and fail. This seems to just go on and on and on.

But what is happening through it all, we gradually realise that my success in the battle against temptation doesn't come from me alone. It comes from Krishna. I need Krishna.

I must depend on Krishna. I must keep myself in the service of Krishna, in the consciousness of Krishna. When we become convinced of that, then automatically illusion ceases.

Till that time, Krishna may allow illusion and temptation to trouble us. And rather than seeing that as Krishna not reciprocating with our prayers, we can see it as Krishna focussing or purifying our intent. What do I want to be pure for? What do I want to be free from Anarthas for? Do I want it just so that I am famous? I am considered to be a sense-controlled person? Do I want it so that I can be devoted to Krishna? So if we focus on the positive of becoming more and more devoted to Krishna, temptation will gradually subside.

And we won't have to focus on battling temptation. We focus on engaging in Krishna's service. And here is another important point that sometimes our strengths can become our weaknesses.

And our weaknesses can become our strengths. What that means is, whatever is our strength, if I think I am a very intelligent person, and with my intelligence I can understand the philosophy, with my intelligence I can understand things, then whatever is our strength, we may develop overconfidence in it. And what is the overconfidence? We think that my intelligence itself is enough.

See, whatever is our strength is a gift from Krishna. If I have good singing ability, if I have good speaking ability, that may give me some fame, that may give me some prestige, that may make me wanted among others. And we think, yes, with this ability I am happy.

So our strength, whatever it is, that is a gift from Krishna. But our strength is meant to connect us with the supremely strong person. Our intelligence, our singing ability, our speaking ability, whatever abilities we have.

We are meant to use it in Krishna's service to become connected with him properly, wholeheartedly. But if whatever is our strength, we take shelter of that itself, instead of using that to take shelter of Krishna. So, if I am giving class, and while giving class I am thinking that, you know, how clever I am.

So I am speaking about Krishna and by my speech others are thinking about Krishna. But I am not thinking about Krishna. So, illusion can work so subtly.

If I may be singing about Krishna and others may be having their bhakti enhanced by hearing me sing about Krishna. But what is enhanced for me is not my bhakti but my ego. If I am centred on myself.

So, therefore, our strengths, if they become independent shelter, competitors to Krishna, then our strengths become our weaknesses. Then our strengths become our weaknesses. Because they keep us away from Krishna.

They keep us in illusion. In contrast, our weaknesses can become our strengths. What does that mean? All of us, we have certain temptations to which we are vulnerable.

Those are like our weaknesses. Some of us may be short tempered, some of us may be whatever. All of us may have different things.

Now those, if they can make us feel the need for Krishna and because of them we become more and more aware that I can't be without Krishna. I must take shelter of Krishna. I must be serious in trying to connect myself with Krishna.

Then that weakness will become our strength. So, that's how Maya works subtly and we need to recognise that Krishna will work in various ways to bring us closer to him. This does not mean that we have to worry too much about our weaknesses.

If we have some anartha, we don't have to constantly be thinking about an anartha. Because the more we think about something, our thoughts grow on that and then if we think too much about the temptation that I have to give up, then thinking I shouldn't do this, I shouldn't do this, I shouldn't do this, I shouldn't do this, I will do this. Because what happens? Even if I am thinking of something to not do it, because we have done it, because we have got some pleasure in the past, so even the thought with the negative desire that gradually kindles the desire and then we succumb to it.

So, as devotees, I said our weaknesses can become our strength, but that happens not when we think too much about the weakness. We are aware of the weakness, but we focus on Krishna. Our strengths can become our weaknesses.

That doesn't mean that we neglect our strength. Sometimes some devotees feel, I can sing well, but if I sing I will become proud. So, therefore I will not sing any kirtans.

But, this idea that if I do something well, then I will become proud. This idea is itself a proud idea. Why? Because it assumes that I am not proud right now.

So, it is not that we don't have pride. It is right now, I don't have any reason to be proud, in the sense of expressing my pride. Pride is already there within, but because I have not done anything worth becoming proud visibly, so my pride is not seen visibly.

But pride is already there. So, the cure for pride is not suppression of talent. If I have some talent, that is the gift that Krishna has given to me.

If I think I will not use that talent, that will not cure pride. Pride will be there still, and later what will happen? If somebody else does something nice in Krishna's service, that pride will express itself as envy for that person. Anybody does anything good? He is so proud, such a show-off.

She always wants the whole world to know what he is doing. Now, how do we know their heart? We don't know with what motive who is doing service. So, rather than judging others, what we need to understand is that actually, if Krishna has given us abilities, we should use those abilities in His service.

The cure for pride is not suppression of talent. The cure for pride is purification of intent. Initially, when we do a service, we will think, yes, I am doing this service.

I want others to know. Know that I am singing. I want to know others.

I am giving this class. But over a period of time, if you keep serving Krishna, see if you consider this is the circle of Krishna consciousness, of devotional service. And this is the circle of our enjoyment.

We shouldn't think that these two circles are radically non-intersecting. It is not that to practise Krishna Bhakti, we have to be miserable. No, that is not Krishna's purpose.

The idea is that if you consider these two circles, the circle of devotional service and the circle of what gives us happiness, there is an intersection in this. And there is something which falls outside the circle of Krishna Bhakti, something which is directly violating the principles of Krishna Bhakti that we have to give up. But the whole principle of Varnaashram is that whatever we are good at, we do it for Krishna.

A brahmana, a person with a brahmanical disposition, likes to study scripture. That person likes to study in general. So a brahmana is told, study for Krishna.

A person of Vaishya disposition likes to earn money. Yes, earn money for Krishna. It is not that a brahmana has to start earning money and a Vaishya has to do exhaustive study of scripture.

It is incompatible. Krishna says, There are only two shlokas in the Bhagavad Gita that Krishna repeats almost as it is. One is about devotion to him, that is It is 9.34 and 18.65. Three-fourths of the shloka is the same.

Just become my devotee. And the second shloka that Krishna repeats almost 75% is this one, 3.35 and 18.47. So what does he say? Act according to your dharma. He says that it is far better to act according to your own nature than to act according to someone else's nature.

So what does this mean? He is telling Arjuna that you are a Kshatriya, don't try to act like a brahmana. Don't renounce the world and be forgiving. You have to ensure that justice takes place.

Act according to your nature. So when I talk about the circle of things that give us pleasure, we shouldn't think that everything that gives us pleasure is wrong. Yes, the things which are connected with lust, anger, greed, envy, pride, illusion, they are wrong.

But we all have our swabhava, we all have our talents, our inclinations. And when we use those inclinations in Krishna's service, we are actually following Krishna's instructions. So we situate ourselves in the circle of the intersection between the realm of devotional service and the things that we like to do.

We act according to our swabhava. Of course, within the process of bhakti, there may be things which we don't like to do. And they are part of sadhana, we do that.

We may not like to fast, we may not like to do particular activity of devotional service. But if that's a part of sadhana, we do that in a regulated way. But the focus should be that we surrender to Krishna, we connect with Krishna.

And the easiest, the strongest way you can connect with Krishna is in this intersecting circle, intersection of the two circles. There we naturally and happily be connected with Krishna. So now, I talked about how our strengths can become our weaknesses.

That is actually what happens with the advaitins, with the mayavadis. Usually the impersonalists, they are often very analytical, very intelligent, in the sense of having intellectual capacities. But then, excess of a good thing can become worse than a bad thing.

What happens is, because they have intelligence, they become overconfident about their intelligence and they are looking around, trying to discern what is maya, what is maya, what is maya. So you remember I mentioned jagdish, jiva, jagat. So what is maya? To see jiva or jagat as separate from jagdish.

That is maya. So this is the Vaishnav understanding of maya. This is what Krishna is saying, mam maya duratya.

Jagdish is existing and his maya, because of his maya, we see things separate from him. But the advaitic idea of maya is what? That all these three are maya. That jagat, jiva and jagdish, all three are maya.

And beyond these three is the brahman. And the brahman is the only reality. So everything in existence, I, you and everything in between, it's all maya.

That's why their philosophy is called as mayavad. They say brahma satya jagan mithya. They say brahma is the ultimate reality.

But practically everything that we experience, they call it all as maya only. So what is left to experience? In that sense. So this conception of maya is maya.

To think that actually jagdish is also maya. What is their idea? How do they consider jagdish to be maya? Because they have this idea that form, in this world we are all attracted to forms. So form is the source of illusion.

We are attracted to forms and then we fall in illusion. So they think that wherever there is form, that must be illusion. I need to go beyond the form to the formless.

So when they see God's form also, they think we have to go beyond this form to the formless light. And they acknowledge that God's form is different from our forms. But that difference, the Vaishnava understanding is a categorical difference.

Complete difference. The understanding is the forms of this world are material, Krishna's form is transcendental. The more we become attracted to Krishna's form, that is the pure reality.

We become detached from captivation with worldly forms. Their idea is, yes, Krishna's form is purifying, but they think that as long as we are in the lower modes, at that time we can't think of the form as reality. So you can use the form of Krishna as a tool for meditation in the initial stages of your spiritual life.

But as you advance, then you will understand that you have to go beyond this formless. And you have to merge into the formless light. And this way they think that they have to transcend Krishna also.

Their idea is that Krishna is the means by which we will transcend everything else. All that is illusion. But they think we have to transcend Krishna.

And that is not only erroneous, that is also offensive. To think that Krishna is a product of illusion. So their conception of Maya comes from overconfidence.

So what all is illusion? They equate form with illusion. But this is a misunderstanding. Why? Because if form were illusion, then whenever we see something as an illusion, then there has to be some reality because of which the illusion is coming.

If I say that I was conned, somebody gave me a fake note. Every existence of a fake note implies there has to be a real note. Without the existence of a real note, there would not be any such thing as a fake note.

So, yes, if we say the forms of this world are illusion, then the question comes up, OK, where is this illusion coming from? If all forms universally were simply sources of illusion, would eventually lead to disappointment and suffering, then why would we at all think that forms lead to pleasure? Where is the conception that forms lead to pleasure? Where does this conception come from? Because there is eternal transcendental form of Krishna. And that form is the source of the supreme pleasure. It is supremely pious, supremely purifying.

That is Krishna's form. And this brings us to the conception of Yogamaya. So now, in English, there is a literary device called as oxymoron.

Oxymoron means if you put two words next to each other, which are contradictory. Suppose I tell you, he is a courageous coward. What do you mean a courageous coward? He is an intelligent fool.

What do you mean by that? It doesn't make any sense. But sometimes two opposite words are put together to convey a deeper meaning. So for example, somebody is very intelligent about a few things, but then is foolish about some big things.

Then we say this person is an intelligent fool. Or it is said that suicide is an act of courageous cowardice. Why? Actually speaking, if somebody decides, I am going to end my life.

If there is a train going along, I will go and lie down on the tracks of the train. Many times people go and lie down and then the train starts coming, maybe next time. And they get off.

Because to end one's life is not easy. It requires courage. When soldiers go on a water field and they are going to end their life, that requires courage in the battle.

But when one chooses the act of ending one's life, not because of dedication to some higher cause, as it does when soldiers are going on a war field, but because one is so frustrated with life's problems that one can't deal with them, then that is cowardice. So suicide is an act of courageous cowardice. So oxymoron is an English literary device, figure of speech, where two opposite words are brought together to convey a deeper meaning.

So like that, in Sanskrit, yoga maya is an oxymoron. How? Because we know maya is that which keeps us away from Krishna. And yoga means to connect with Krishna.

Isn't it? So how do we have yoga maya together? The purpose of yoga is to connect with Krishna. The purpose of maya is to keep us away from Krishna. So what is yoga maya? So yoga maya is that energy which connects us with Krishna by putting us in illusion about Krishna.

Normally, maha maya, the maya which we are subjected to right now, this puts us in illusion and disconnects us from Krishna. But yoga maya, she intensifies our connection with Krishna by putting us in illusion about Krishna. That means, Yashodamayi, she cannot chastise Krishna, she cannot run after Krishna with a stick to beat him, if she thinks Krishna is God.

So yoga maya puts her in illusion about Krishna's nature. So the Vrajavasis, they are no longer aware that Krishna is God. They know it.

But that's not the focus of their consciousness. They are not aware of it in the sense of being conscious of it. They are aware, Yashodamayi thinks that Krishna is my son.

Radharani thinks that Krishna is my lover. And Shridhama and other sakhas think that Krishna is our friend. So yoga maya is that energy which covers the knowledge of Krishna's Godhood.

So that we can love Him, the devotees can love Him as just the lovable person Krishna. So this is the maya which intensifies devotion, which heightens devotion. And the pastimes in Vrindavan especially demonstrate this maya in action.

The yoga maya is that feature of Krishna by which we say that everything can be used in Krishna's service. So through yoga maya Krishna demonstrates how illusion can also be used in Krishna's service. The illusion intensifies one's affection for Krishna, one's love for Krishna, one's desire to take care of Krishna more and more.

Then that illusion is favourable for our bhakti. I'll conclude with one anecdote. In Juhu, Prabhupada was building a temple.

At that time, there was a lot of legal issues and the owner was trying to deceive and after taking the money, take away the property again. So Tamal Krishna Maharaj was in charge of the project. And one day he came to Prabhupada.

He said, Prabhupada, this whole land dealings, they are causing me so much anxiety that my japa is disturbed. Prabhupada said, yes, they are causing me also so much anxiety that my japa is disturbed. So Tamal Krishna Maharaj had no answer.

What to say now? And Prabhupada became grave and he said, your anxiety for serving Krishna will take you to Krishna. He said, your anxiety for serving Krishna will take you to Krishna. What that means is that we often do various services for Krishna.

Cut this sabji or clean this temple hall. That is all good. And whatever service we can do, we should treasure it and do it.

But there is a difference between doing a service and taking a responsibility. Taking a responsibility means we accept that as our problem. So for example, if we say that, okay, after the programme, it's your responsibility to arrange for prasad.

Make sure that everything is cooked. You will have assistance, but it's your problem. So actually when we take responsibility for Krishna, our consciousness, our mind gets fixed in that.

Why? Because we are taking up that ownership of doing it. Then we think, okay, if this goes wrong, what will I do? If this goes wrong, maybe I'll prepare like this. We'll prepare like this.

And then at our level to become absorbed in Krishna's pastimes, to become absorbed in Krishna's holy name, we can do it for some time. But we can't do it all the time. The nature of the mind is that even when we are performing devotional service, the mind thinks that some other form of devotional service is better than what I am doing now.

So when we are doing other services, the mind says, I want to study shastra. I want to chant the holy name. This service is taking so much time.

I don't have time to study. I don't have time to chant. But then if suppose we are given a whole day, do nothing but chanting today.

Now after one, two hours, we'll think, when can I do other things? It's not easy to absorb ourselves in direct devotional activities. So when we take up responsibility for Krishna, that is the easiest way. It's not easy in the sense of, it causes anxiety.

So in that sense, it's not easy. But easy in the sense that it is practical for us. We may think, I want to have a very peaceful life.

I want to have a very peaceful life. And doing services, taking up responsibility for Krishna, that causes me anxiety. What is this? I thought after chanting Hare Krishna, I'll become happy.

I'll become peaceful. But I am having more anxiety over here. But we should know that if we are in Rajoguna, we will have anxiety.

So it is the nature of the mode of passion to be associated with anxiety. So if we do not take up anxiety for Krishna's service, then for satisfying our mind and senses, we will create anxieties. We'll think, maybe I have to get this, maybe I have to get that, and we will create anxieties over there.

So actually speaking, even big responsibilities, we can do them without getting into hyper-anxiety if gradually we are situated in the mode of goodness. But till we come to the mode of goodness, we shouldn't keep running away from responsibility, thinking that this causes anxiety. We take up responsibility for Krishna's service.

That is the way we absorb ourselves in Krishna. And by absorbing ourselves in Krishna, we become purified. We rise above passion, we come to goodness, and we rise towards transcendence.

In the same responsibility, we will be able to take up, yes, we will take up anxiety, but we will not be too troubled by that anxiety, because our shelter will be with Krishna. And as Sri Prabhupada said, by your anxiety for serving Krishna, you will go back to Krishna. So we take up anxiety in the sense that we take up responsibility for Krishna.

And that absorbs our mind in Him. And that is the purpose and perfection of bhakti. Make your mind attached to me, Krishna says.

So I'll summarise. I started by talking about how in this verse Krishna has given the definition of Maya. To see anything as separate from Krishna, that is Maya.

And we discussed how Maya is not a particular person. How for Ravana, the goddess of fortune was Maya. Why? Because he was seeing her separate from Krishna.

So now Sita is definitely not Maya. It is Ravana's conception of Sita that was Maya. So like that, it is not that anyone or anything is Maya.

It is our conception that this will make me happy. Without any connection with Krishna, that is Maya. Maya, as Krishna said last, is situated in our own senses, mind and intelligence.

We are not to blame others. We are to purify ourselves. If you are searching for a villain, we can't find the hero.

Bhakti is not about focussing on this is the source of illusion, this is the source of illusion, this is the source of illusion. No, bhakti is about focussing on who is the source of illumination. Focus on Krishna.

And while talking about focussing on Krishna, we discussed about this Krishna centred student who tries to find out what are all the long alternatives. Wrong options, they are infinite. A student who just learns the right alternative, right answer, all the wrong options will be understood as wrong automatically.

Like that if we focus on Krishna, whatever forms in which illusion may tempt us, we will be able to resist it. So rather than seeing illusion, seeing Maya simply as illusion, we see it as Krishna's illusory energy whose purpose is to make us connected with Krishna. Then we focus on connecting with Krishna.

Then Maya is daivi, she is gunamayi, she is mama. So it's not like the Abrahamic conception that there is some independent, some source of evil that is a competitor to God, independent of God. No, Maya is Krishna's energy serving Krishna's purpose.

Vaishnavi, Janamohini. And then we discussed also Maya is not just illusion in perception, it is illusion in conception. Seeing things separate from Krishna.

And when we start practising bhakti, we realise that this seeing jagat or jiva as separate from Jagdish is Maya. And when we see everything is connected with Jagdish, meant for his service, then we become free from Maya. And towards the conclusion we discussed about the impersonalist misconception that our strengths can become weaknesses and our weaknesses can become strengths.

Whatever disconnects us from Krishna, that becomes our weakness. So the impersonalists, by their intelligence and trying to understand what is illusion, they think that everything, even Jagdish is also an illusion. And that is a big mistake on their part.

So Krishna's form is categorically different. It is a source of freedom from illusion. And when we want to serve Krishna, when we want to connect with Krishna, it is not that we have to give up everything that gives us pleasure to give Krishna pleasure.

Rather, we find out what are the things that we are good at and do those in Krishna's service. So the cure for pride is not suppression of talent, it is purification of intent. And when we situate ourselves in this intersection of what we like to do and what Krishna, what is in the scope of Krishna bhakti, then in that, if we take up responsibilities for Krishna, we take up anxiety for doing things for Krishna, then our mind will become absorbed in Krishna.

And that anxiety for serving Krishna will ultimately take us to Him. Thank you very much. Are there any questions, comments? Yeah.

I was wondering if Krishna takes us out, and if you are asking Krishna to take us out, doesn't that mentally imply take us out from pride also? Okay. Yeah. You say Krishna can in a minute free us from illusion.

So if He frees us from illusion, is it not that He will free us from pride also? Yes, Krishna can do that also. But I have to see that it is not that Krishna is the cause of illusion. It is we who are the cause of our own illusion.

It is because we have the desire that we can exist and enjoy separate from Krishna. That's what puts us in illusion. So when Krishna frees us from a particular form of illusion which we are troubled by, if we may pray at that time, Krishna, please free me from illusion.

But if we have not got that realisation that it is Krishna who is doing it for me, then afterwards we will forget that it is Krishna who did it, and we think that I did it. And that's how we fall into illusion. So, you know, devotion amidst trouble is good.

But that is not mature devotion. Because I am so troubled, because I am so helpless, so I take shelter of Krishna. It's good I am taking shelter of Krishna at least at that time.

But then, is that devotion, is that taking shelter of Krishna because I am attracted to Krishna? Or is it because I am just helpless to do anything else, so I am taken to him? Just like it is said in the child in the mother's womb, when the suffering becomes intolerable, praise to Krishna. Krishna, please help me. And afterwards the third kind of says, the child prays that, that actually in this, here I am suffering and I am realising I am suffering.

So better let me stay here and take shelter of you. But the child comes out and again falls into illusion. Why is that? It is not that Krishna is causing that illusion, rather it is that when we take shelter of Krishna amidst trouble, that is not necessarily because of the purest or the strongest motives.

So afterwards, again the mentality of kartaham iti manyate, I am the doer, will come up. That's why when there is adversity, we take shelter of Krishna. When there is prosperity, then also we take shelter of Krishna.

When we take shelter of Krishna consistently, that is steady devotion. So if we are in illusion and Krishna frees us out of illusion, but if we have not, although we may ourselves have prayed to Krishna at that time, but if we have not realised internally, deeply, it is Krishna who has freed us. Afterwards we will start thinking that it is I who have been freed.

What happens to, it is I who have freed myself. See our nature is that with Dhritarashtra, he was never entitled to be the king because he was visually impaired. But just by, because Pandu had died and no successor was there, so he took up the throne temporarily.

And just by being on the throne for a long time, he started thinking I am the king. So like that, what happens is, when we are put in a particular situation, just by being in that situation, we think I am qualified for this. And I am the source of whatever I have got.

So like that, Krishna can free us from illusion, but we will start thinking that, oh, it is I who have freed myself from illusion. That's why when through repeated frustrations, we get the realisation that I need Krishna. Without Krishna I cannot do this.

Then when we are freed eventually by Krishna, we realise it is Krishna who did it. It is Krishna whom I need absolutely. Does it answer your question? Yes.

What makes us wait or what makes us have to go through so many frustrations before getting that realisation? No, realisation doesn't depend on frustration. Frustration can be an initial spur. But if misery alone were the cause of spiritual realisation, then people who work in hospitals, they would all be pure devotees.

They see suffering constantly. But no, they don't. Why? Because the nature of illusion is, even when we see misery, we think I will be an exception.

Maya makes us think that this will happen to others, but this won't happen to me. So we have to take exception to the hope for an exception. I will be an exception.

Everybody else is going to suffer, but I will not suffer. That is a matter of individual choosing. So it's not that we need to get frustrations to learn, but frustrations can impel us to learn.

But it is for us to choose. So when we are in the normal course of life, if we consistently keep choosing Krishna, then gradually our connection with Krishna becomes stronger and stronger. And then the temptations of Maya become weaker and weaker.

So frustrations can prod us, but frustrations are not the source of realisation. It is our own volition. It is our own free will and how we use it.

And of course, we need the blessings of Vaishnavas, blessings of the spiritual master. But in one sense, they are always available. So if we keep choosing Krishna regularly, then the spiritual master, the Vaishnavas are pleased with us.

They also give us their mercy. So we focus on trying to ourselves, make the right choice as much as possible within our capacity. If we do that, Krishna will expand our capacity and we will be able to make the right choices, which are presently very difficult or impossible for us.

Does that answer your question? Thank you. Any other questions? Yes, Madhavi. Yeah, good question.

Yeah, I'll answer the question. So what is the exact difference between Brahmavadis and Mayavadis? Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagwan, these are aspects of the same absolute truth. It's not that Brahman is here, Paramatma is here, Bhagwan is here.

No, they are the same one absolute truth. They are progressively increasing realisations of the absolute truth. Say, for example, after this lecture, there is prasada.

And there is halwa over there. So when we are sitting over here, the fragrance of halwa comes over here. So we are experiencing halwa at one level.

Is that the level of? At the level of fragrance. Then we go from here, we go to the prasadam hall, we are standing in a queue. And we can see in a bucket, there is halwa.

Then we are experiencing halwa at another level, that is sight. And then when we take it in our plate and we eat it, then we experience halwa fully. The smell, the fragrance, the sight and the taste.

So similarly, there is one absolute truth. vadanta-tattva-vidha-sattvam yad jnanam advaya Advaya is non-dual. It's one absolute truth.

When that absolute truth, the absolute truth is sat-chit-ananda. When the seeker experiences one aspect of the absolute truth, that is the satt aspect, that beyond this temporary material world, there is an eternal world. When the seeker experiences the satt aspect, that is brahman realisation.

It's like experiencing the halwa through its fragrance. When the seeker goes further and realises that there is not just eternal existence, but there is eternal cognisance. The absolute truth is conscious.

And conscious in the sense that the absolute truth is actually controlling this world. The conscious controller of this world. So that is like the realisation of the paramatma.

It is like experiencing the halwa through both the fragrance and the sight. And when we realise Bhagawan, at that time we understand the absolute truth is not just satt and chit, it is also ananda. Jiva Goswami explains in the Bhagavad Sandarbha, that in Sanskrit, in English there are two genders.

There is masculine and feminine. In Sanskrit there are three genders. There is masculine, feminine and there is neutral gender.

So, in Jiva Goswami's book called Harinama Amrit Vyakaran, he gives spiritual nomenclature to all the rules of grammar. So there what he does is, he says the masculine gender he calls as Narayan. And the feminine gender he calls as Lakshmi.

And the neutral gender he calls as Brahman. Now why is that Brahman? Because, he explains this in the Bhagavad Sandarbha, that actually, at the satt level, when one realises the absolute truth as just satt, the realisation is, that the absolute truth is simply existence. So all activity is illusion.

And when we go beyond activity to the actionless, relationless, emotionless existence, eternal existence, that is the realisation of the absolute truth. So they conceive of the absolute truth as without any energies. That's why I say it is neutral gender.

But, now, the absolute truth, when we conceive of the absolute truth as having material potencies, as the capacity to control the material world, that is the Paramatma realisation. But when one gets the Bhagavan realisation, one understands that the absolute truth has material potencies, and the absolute truth also has spiritual potencies. That there is, there is, some Vedas, there are various Shaktis, and Krishna performed beautiful pastimes with his devotees in the spiritual world.

Then we understand that the absolute is not just conscious, but is ecstatic, is joyful, is Anandamayi. That realisation, now impersonalists also accept that the Brahman is Ananda. But what is the nature of that Ananda? If there is simply existence, there is no relationship, there are no emotions, what is the nature of that Ananda? That they can't explain.

But, the Vaishnava understanding is, that, actually that Ananda is through the reciprocation of relations, through relationships, through the reciprocation of love. So, now, Brahmavadis are those who have experienced the Sat aspect of the absolute truth. And they are also very renounced, very detached, because they have become, they have turned away from the Asat material world.

That is itself glorious. Now, they are usually not aware of the Bhagavan aspect, or they are not attracted to the Bhagavan aspect. Why? Why are they not attracted? Bhakti Sanjayate Bhakti.

It is by association of devotees that Bhakti arises. So, if they have not been fortunate enough to associate with devotees, then they are attracted to the impersonal conception. And then they become situated as Brahmavadis.

Mayavadis, on the other hand, they are aware of the Bhagavan aspect also. But they consider the Bhagavan aspect to also be Maya. So, Brahmavad and Brahman, these are all bona fide aspects of the absolute truth.

Brahmavad is a bona fide spiritual realisation. Brahman is a valid aspect of the absolute truth. But when Brahman is itself made the highest aspect of the absolute truth, or rather, Brahman is made into the only absolute truth, that is also not bad.

It's wrong, but it's not offensive. When Brahman is made into the only absolute truth, and Bhagavan is considered to be Maya, then it becomes offensive. So, if you think of Brahman as the absolute truth, that is Brahmavad.

But to think of Brahman as the only absolute truth, and to consider Bhagavan as Maya, that is a serious misunderstanding. Krishna also differentiates between this. In 12th chapter, when Arjuna asks him, who are better, the personalist or the impersonalist? So, Krishna actually appreciates the impersonalist also.

But he says, they will take a long time to come to me. In 12.5, he says that, actually the path of impersonal realisation is a slow, gradual path. But he appreciates them.

He says, they engage in the welfare of all living beings, they are detached. Overall, he speaks appreciatively about them. But in 9.11 and 12, in the Gita, he talks about Mayavadis.

So, he says that, this is actually a terrible misconception. Those who have this conception, that my form is a product of illusion, that I am a product of illusory energy, they are doomed. They doom themselves by their misconception.

So, the difference between Brahmavad and Mayavad is, essentially, Brahmavadis are attracted to Brahman as the absolute truth, whereas Mayavadis consider Bhagavan to be an illusion. Is that clear? Thank you. Okay, are there any practising Brahmavadis today? See, in general, it is very, it is difficult to label people in any way, either as Brahmavadis or Mayavadis.

Because, even among, in general, whether it is in India, or after Indian spirituality has been exported, exported to the West, the most people, when they think about the spiritual side of life, they usually think about it in terms of impersonal. And, there are definitely hardcore Mayavadis. You know, they are, they try to use philosophy and logic to try to, and even scripture, they try to somehow juggle it out, to try to prove how Bhagavan is also Maya.

But, most people, even if an organisation's founder is Mayavadi, most of the people who go in that organisation, you see, people join spiritual organisations for many reasons. Philosophy is only one of the reasons. They want a sense of community, they feel there is, the culture is nice.

There are many reasons why people go over there. So, most of the people who, you are even a part of an organisation whose founder may be Mayavadi, they may themselves not be Mayavadis. They may just be under Mayavadi influence.

And, we need to differentiate between these two, because otherwise, you know, if we say, oh, this is a Mayavadi, that is a Mayavadi, and we start criticising them, we alienate a lot of people unnecessarily. Those people are not devoted to Mayavad. But, they may be presently respecting, as a spiritual leader, someone who is a Mayavadi teacher.

And they are respecting that person, not because of, they have studied the philosophy, it's just more of a cultural respect. Yeah, he is a sanyasi, he is a spiritual teacher, I should respect him. And when we start criticising them, labelling them as Mayavadi, and many times the way we use the word Mayavadi is also very derogatory.

We use the word Mayavadi almost like a swear word, you know. So, especially when I am speaking to new people, I avoid the word Mayavad. I use Advaitavad.

Because there is a lot of negative connotation associated. Yeah, the philosophy is bad. But, you know, we are not meant to, we are meant to hate the sin, not the sinner.

So, when we start, when people, people have emotions attached with people, whoever they are attached to. So, if we start labelling them and criticising them, then they get alienated. But if we objectively speak the philosophy and logically explain, see this is what scripture says, this is what logic is, then people understand.

And, people come to Krishna. So, rather than trying to categorise which organisation is Mayavadi, which organisation is Brahmavadi, we can focus more on that even people who are in Mayavadi organisations presently, they are at least spiritually interested to some extent. And how many people are spiritually interested in today's world? Not many.

So, if we can somehow bring their spiritual interest towards Krishna, then, we are doing a valuable service to them. So, rather than, in general, it's not good to label people. And especially when there are subtle philosophical differentiations.

And it's all the more so because many people are innocent. In the sense that, they, they don't have much philosophical understanding. And, they're just attracted to some spiritual teachers because of whatever they, they like the looks or they like something or whatever.

But if you send the philosophy, they become attracted to Krishna. So, we see the spiritual, even in people who are belonging to Mayavadi organisations, rather than seeing the Mayavad, we see the spiritual potential in them. And fan the spiritual potential so that it blossoms to a devotional growth.

Does that answer your question? Thank you. Any other questions? Yes. Okay.

Okay. Okay, good question. Yeah.

Very good question. Is the Brahman aspect also Satchitananda or is the Brahman aspect only Sath? No. See, Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagawan are three names for the same absolute truth.

So, that's why I said, it's not Brahman is here, Paramatma is here, Bhagawan is here. It's the same absolute truth referred to by different names. So, Brahman is also Satchitananda.

So, to give an example, suppose, now I'll give an example of Halwa. Suppose, you know, somebody who has only throughout the life only smelled the fragrance of the Halwa, has never tasted Halwa. That person comes with a new name for Halwa.

Say, something like Suvasi. Something which sells very nicely. So now, the object may be called by some other name, say Suvasi, but it's also, it's Halwa only.

It has all the attributes of the Halwa, but this person's experience is only of the fragrance. So, Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagawan are the same absolute truth. Brahman is also Satchitananda, Paramatma is also Satchitananda, Bhagawan is also Satchitananda.

Because they are the same one absolute truth. Different names are the same one absolute truth. What is difference is that the real level of realisation is different.

Of those who have realised the Brahman level, they have realised only the Sat aspect of the absolute truth. Is that clear? Okay. Thank you.

The question is, here the verse is saying that anything that is connected with Krishna, it has no value. It is Maya. But then there is a system of valuation.

You know, you say some metal is cheaper, gold is a more expensive metal. Or like that, certain emotions are more stimulating than others. And ultimately, Lakshmi Devi is the goddess of fortune, so all fortune comes from her.

So, we have a system of evaluation in the material world. If everything material is Maya, then what is the nature or basis or reality of the system of valuation? There are different ways of looking at things. See, in the Bhagavad Gita, in 6.8, Krishna says, He says, that one who is a person who is spiritually realised, that person sees stone, pebbles and gold equally.

Let's focus on stone and gold equally. Now, a person sees stone and gold equally. Means what? The very fact that the two names are being used, stone and gold, that means there is some differentiation still there.

Isn't it? If they are entirely equal in all respects, there is no need to use two names also. So, in a practical way, if we look at it, different things definitely have different utilities. So, if we say, because anything disconnected from Krishna is Maya, so everything is equally valueless.

That is true from the absolute perspective. But, this is not the complete understanding of either illusion or reality. That everything in this world is Maya is also a form of Maya.

We see this Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's past time, when he was a small child, he was once, he went and sat on the dirty pots. In the traditional household, they would eat in pots and then throw the pots away. So, he went and sat on those pots.

And then his mother called him, you are a Brahmana son, why are you sitting like this? I said, what is dirty? What is pure? Ultimately all this is just a conception. So, he said, okay. Then, his mother said, no, she was also a Brahmana's wife, she was intelligent.

She said, see, if you see everything is a conception, but, within this conception, there are differences. You can say that mud, everything is made ultimately of mud. You can say, but mud cannot hold water.

But if you make a mud pot, mud pot can hold water. You know, so then Nimai said, yes mother, you are right. He says, therefore, now I will not eat mud.

I will eat sweet rice. Give me sweet rice. So, the point is, that there is differentiation in the material world and that is real.

Real means, that, things do exist differently. So, when, means, that independently, none of these things can give us pleasure. In an ultimate sense.

So, gold makes definitely give me more pleasure than stone. But then gold can cause me more trouble than stone also. Now, if I am carrying stone, nobody is going to, you know, if I am wearing, if somebody is wearing a earring, made of some stone, nobody is going to cut the ear to steal the earring.

Isn't it? Now, some thieves can do terrible things if they want to steal gold or whatever. So, then when we say something is a source of greater pleasure in material world, it can be a source of greater misery also. So, from that perspective, the, the fundamental illusion is, that to think that anything can give me pleasure separate from God, that is a mistake.

Once we understand that things have to be connected with God, after we understand that, then we also understand that, different things have different levels of value in connection with Krishna. You know, if somebody says, I want to give stone as donation for the deities. Well, okay, if it's marble for decorating the altar, that is fine.

But stone, otherwise may not be fine. If somebody wants to give gold for donation for the deities, then we take that and we use it to make ornaments for the deities. So, once things are connected with the absolute truth, then different things can have different value.

And that sense of valuation is a part of the ultimate reality. And that comes from Krishna. So, dharma, artha, kama, moksha, these are four purusharthas, artha and kama, both are considered purushartha.

Purushartha means the goals of life, meaningful goals of life. So, it's not that these themselves are illusion. It is when these are pursued, independent of everything else.

When people make only artha and kama, sense gratification and economic prosperity, as the only goals of their life. And that becomes an illusion. But, when our life is spiritually directed, everything can be used in Krishna's service.

And, then different things can be used in different ways. If, say, somebody sings very nicely, and somebody sings very poorly, and, say, we have to choose someone to lead kirtans. We can't say everything is equal.

Isn't it? No. Here, one person sings nicely, we use that in Krishna's service. So, the essence of illusion is the disconnection from Krishna.

But once we see the connection with Krishna, we also understand that different things have different potentials when they are connected with Krishna. So, there are different things which can be used in different ways, and relatively some things will be more valuable than others. And, we do recognise that the system of valuating things, that ultimately comes from the absolute truth.

So, the material world has its counterpart, or rather the material world is a reflection of the spiritual world. And in the spiritual world also there are various things. So, Radharani and the gopis, they use ornaments, which are made of precious metals.

They decorate themselves with that. And that is used in Krishna's service over there. So, the material world is a reflection of the spiritual world, and whatever is of value there, that value is reflected in a distorted way here.

The primary distortion is that we see things separate from Krishna. And, we need to avoid that. And for that, so, that means at the level of illusion, when we are in illusion, we say, this is very valuable, this is useless.

You think of that differentiation. When we come to an impersonal level of realisation, we see everything as illusion. That is all useless only.

Nothing is of any use. But when we come to a devotional level of realisation, so when Krishna is talking about samal ostrasma kanchana, there if you see in the sixth chapter, 6.8, he has not directly talked about bhakti. So, he is talking about more the path coming from karma yoga towards higher levels of realisation.

So, there he is not talking about bhakti. So, he is talking about the yogis who detach themselves from the world. They see stone and gold equally.

But once we come to the level of bhakti, then we start seeing stone and gold differently, not in terms of how much they can give me pleasure, but in terms of how well they can be used in Krishna's service. So, something can be used in Krishna's service. A devotee is very interested in that.

Satsvarupa Maharaj writes in one of his books that when they had first made his corn press, and they had these big, big machines in their printing press to make, to print the books, and Prabhupada was brought to the machine. Prabhupada was looking at all the devotees. Prabhupada did not even notice the machines.

And then, another devotee said, Prabhupada, you know with this machine, we can print so many books in so little time. Oh really? Then Prabhupada immediately became interested in the machine. How does this work? Prabhupada had actually used machine, he had printed books in India, so he knew what the intricacies of printing.

But, Prabhupada was not interested in technology for technology's sake. He was interested in technology for Krishna's sake. So like that, so if we are going to use things, nowadays we have internet, we have mobile, we can use it to communicate very easily with people.

But that communication can be positive, it can be negative. So, it is for us to stay connected with Krishna. And different things, so with some old walkie-talkie, and with a modern smartphone, the number of people with whom I can connect, that is different.

And that is a natural object, that difference is an objective reality. So if you are managing a festival, you can connect with somebody who is nearby, through walkie-talkie. But if some devotee is far away in a different place, then you need a cell phone.

So the difference between things is a reality. But when we think that this difference will be the source of pleasure, that is an illusion. Because I have this old-fashioned phone, so I am miserable.

If I get this smartphone, then I will become smart. That is an illusion. But once we recognise this illusion, and we recognise that it is a connection with Krishna, which will give us happiness, that is what we should be doing, then different things can connect us with Krishna in different ways.

And for that purpose, we do recognise the difference in different things. And use them appropriately in Krishna's service. Does this answer your question? Thank you very much.

Prabhupada Ki Jai, Kantraj Srimad Bhagavatam Ki Jai, Gaur Bhakta Vindaki Jai, Itai Gaur Premanandi.