Detachment in the Three Modes ｜ Bhagavad Gita 12.15 ｜ Perth, Australia

So, essentially, it's interesting what Krishna is saying in this particular verse. The normal course of life is such that when we interact, I do something that disturbs you and you do something that disturbs me. And this happens in every relationship.

And together, as we disturb each other, we create a disturbed world. So, this is how the world becomes not Vaikuntha, but Kuntha, a place of anxiety, a place of agitation, a place of disruption. So, what Krishna is saying as a fundamental principle for working in this world is on one side, he says, don't disturb others and then don't be disturbed by others.

Yasmana no dvijate loko. By whom other people are not disturbed and by whom and who is not disturbed. Such a person, Krishna says, is dear to me.

So, it's interesting in this section of the Gita, which is the 12th chapter, the last section is 13th to 20th verses, where Krishna is talking about who are the devotees that are dear to me. All the verses are in that theme, yo madh bhakta same priya, bhakti manya same priya, that such devotees are dear to me. And he is talking more of behavioral qualities rather than devotional qualities.

What I mean by that is that if we are here in this world and then Krishna is above us. So, at one sense, we talk about bhakti as how we relate with Krishna. And that's undoubtedly important, no doubt.

But here, in this particular section, Krishna is talking about our achar in the world, our behavior in this world. This achar is not what we eat. This achar is our behavior.

So, all the verses are about this and this is the central verse in that. We try to function in the world in a way that we don't disturb others and that we are not disturbed by others. So, what does this mean and how can we do this? And it is in this concept that I'll be here for four days and I'm going to take four classes.

But each class will be independent in itself. But that's what broadly we'll be discussing. So, who would like to read the next paragraph? We try to come to this level where we try to not disturb others and not be disturbed by others.

Who would like to read the next paragraph? And the question is here, please. When people do things that trouble or hurt me, O Almighty Lord, grant me the vision, through your wisdom, so that I can see them not merely as difficult people, but as people in difficulty. What they do is largely shaped by their conditioning.

They are often hurting because of many things that have happened in their life, most of which I may know nothing about. When they act in ways that wound me, it is more a function of their own hurt than a deliberate intention to harm me. Yes.

So, one of the reasons why often small relational issues become very big is the tendency of our mind to take everything personal. Now, concepts often have different opposites. At a philosophical level, what would be the opposite of personal? Okay, that is personal and public is a very interesting, unexpected.

So, this is a personal business, public business. So, we could talk about it from a social perspective. That is true.

And the opposite could be impersonal, isn t it? So, nowadays, when we have some, we apply to customer, call customer support, most of it is an AI voice pretending to be human voice. And you get irritated, I want to speak to a person. And then the AI transfers us to another person, which turns out also to be an AI.

So, it feels when you say impersonal, it is cold, it is objectified. So, we could say, at a relational level, an object, opposite of personal could be impersonal. Now, if somebody we thought we are very close to and we meet them, and they tell us, I am very happy to see you.

There is no life or energy. What happened? Why are you treating me so cold? Why are you treating me so impersonally? So, at a relational level, the opposite of personal would be impersonal. But at a psychological level, the opposite of take things personally is to take things objectively, be objective.

So, quite often, hurt people hurt me. When somebody is hurt, they hurt others. And understanding that when people are hurting me, somebody gets angry with me, somebody else gets angry with me, somebody does something which annoys me, irritates me, angers me, then many times it is not about me.

So, that does not mean it is never about me, but many times it is not about me. Once I was in New York, and we were waiting for a transit airplane. I was sitting and I was standing and I was talking with another person and suddenly, somebody just hit me on my jaw.

And I was standing on my crutches and almost fell down. Now normally what happens, I need a crutch more on my left side, because I have my left leg polio. So, if they had knocked me on the right side, then my crutch would have been supported me.

But here it is like the leg and the crutch both support, here also only the crutch supports. I almost fell down. And then I studied myself, the person next to me grabbed me and then after I studied myself, I looked around.

So, normally in India, places are very crowded and somebody people push each other. But in the West, this sort of thing does not happen so often. It is that things are not so crowded and people also are a little more discreet and polite.

So, I turned around, I was about to yell at that person, and he is a very hefty, well-built kind of tall person. And then he turned around. And as soon as I saw his face, just from the face, I understood that he had something like a down syndrome or something.

And there was some girl, young woman with him, probably it was a sister or something. She said, I'm so sorry. I tried to restrain him, but he just can't control himself.

Now, as soon as I saw that he had not intended to hurt me, so much of the anger just disappeared. So, the anger was replaced more by understanding. Not that when I was hurt, the pain immediately disappeared.

But the pain was there, it took some time to recover. But the pain and the anger are not the same thing. So, what happens is, when somebody does something hurtful, it will cause us pain.

But when the pain leads to anger, then we want to cause hurt back to the other person. But once we understand, okay, this person isn't really going to hurt me. So, when others disturb me, how do I avoid disturbing them back? One of the ways is to understand that it's not about me, that what they are doing is not about me.

So, here, if somebody does something to hurt me, then if I feel angry because of that, now when they do something hurtful, I will experience pain. But when the pain goes inside, it comes out, it can become anger. When it becomes anger, then I will want to hurt them back again.

So, now that is something which often makes small things very big. Now, when Arjuna came to fight on the batting field, at that time, the fact that he had to fight against the Kauravas in general, that was not pleasant. Although the Kauravas had hurt him terribly, but still they were his relatives.

That was difficult. But what was especially painful was that he had to fight against Bhishma and Drona. These were not just elders.

If we consider in that case, the pain that Arjuna was going through, so fighting against relatives, that is painful. Now, if we don't fight, fighting against relatives is painful, then something is wrong with it. Isn't it? We like to fight with our relatives.

Then there's something wrong fundamentally with the relationship. So, fighting with the relatives, life involves fighting. But if they are not a part of my group, professionally, we have some competition and we have to compete with others.

That's okay, we have to do it. This is Australia, the one place I was telling the same incident. Fighting against the relatives is difficult.

So, after that, sorry. Not fighting against relatives is difficult. So, anyway, I was told, I was giving this talk to an Aussie audience primarily.

After that, one person came and told me, are you interested in cricket? I said, yeah, I was interested in cricket. So, he gave me an example. Long ago, there were these two brothers, Steve Waugh and Mark Waugh.

Were they twins? So, it happened and both of them were trying to get into the Australian team. And then Steve Waugh was selected first. And then Mark Waugh got selected.

And he was very happy that he was selected. And then he asked who was dropped. And Steve Waugh was dropped.

So, it was bittersweet, isn't it? It's like, okay, I want to win but not at the cost of my brother. I want to get into the team. So, in general, if we have relatives whom we care for, it's difficult.

But then if they are our elders, it becomes even more difficult. Now, Bhishma and Drona were not just elders. They were elders who were his teachers.

The teachers means that they had taught him archery. Bhishma had been the first person after Pandu to teach him archery. Arjuna's archery ability had not been really that outstanding when they were in the forest.

They were all very small. His archery ability was discovered when Bhishma was training him. But Bhishma had a lot of royal responsibilities because Dhritarashtra could not basically be the king.

So, he was on the throne. So, Bhishma said that we need somebody special to train. And then Drona came.

But both of them were his teachers. As in life, we may have many teachers but they teach the subject and then they move on with their life. In school, we may have had teachers.

In college, we may have had teachers. But there are some teachers who become our mentors. Mentors means what? We have an ongoing relationship with them.

We connect with them. So, now Bhishma and Drona were not just people who had taught him archery. These were people for whose pleasure he learned archery.

It's like say somebody had a physics teacher in their school and that teacher kindled love for physics in them. And then later on that person becomes a PhD in physics from a famous university. They'll go back and tell that teacher, you kindled this love for me.

So, there's a special bond over there. So, like that for Arjuna is a very special bond with Bhishma and Drona. Is there a problem there? So, now fighting against them was extremely painful and he was hoping that maybe something will happen in his fight.

But now when actually they came in the middle of the battlefield and he saw that everybody was dead serious, the war was actually going to happen, he just became overwhelmed. So, now from the bigger perspective, Bhishma and Drona were fighting not to hurt him. They were fighting because they were obligated because of many circumstances.

So, the one aspect of the Bhagavad Gita is to, the way Krishna and Arjuna is, don't take their actions personally. And even when you are fighting against them, you are not fighting to hurt them. So, although they are hurting you and you may have to take action against them, but don't make all this so personal.

So, one way we avoid disturbing others and avoid being disturbed by others is don't take things so personally. Let us look at the next verse. Who would like to read next paragraph? Yes, please.

Where those blows can be minimized or avoided, help me establish holding boundaries so that I can stay safe and not be shaken by the action. Yes. So, when they disturb us, we don't get disturbed.

But at the same time, we try not to disturb others. Does that mean we stay passive? No, not necessary. So, here we'll talk about how spiritual knowledge changes our understanding of relationships.

So, at one level, we could say there is attachment. Now, what exactly is attachment? Is attachment good or bad? What do you think? It's good for spiritual things. It's good for Krishna and good if it's with Krishna.

Okay. It's good, but it's not good. Okay.

So, practical one, it is good. Now, you cannot attach to your family. Exactly.

Yeah. So, we'll talk about it. See, attachment, the word has different meanings.

So, we have to stop being attached to our meaning of attachment. So, let us look at what attachment means first. So, it can mean many different things.

But I'll start with one categorical differentiation. And then we will move, attachment is not the same as affection. So, I'll talk about what the words mean, because as I said, each word can have many different meanings.

So, generally speaking, if we have any relationship with anyone, where there is emotion involved in the relationship, where there is a responsibility involved, where we care for the other person, then, in general, if they ask us for something, we don't like to say no. If a child says, okay, I want this new toy, I want this new set of clothes, I want to eat this food. When there is affection, generally, we don't like to say no.

So, because we care for the other person, we don't want to displease the other person. And saying no means we will be displeasing the other person. So, affection, one characteristic of affection is we don't like to say.

Once I was doing a mediation between two people, two devotees, one devotee approached the other devotee, why do you dislike me so much? The devotee said, I don't dislike you, I just don't like you. And now what happens, if you consider A and B, B is saying, I don't dislike you, I just don't like you. But from A's perspective, both seem the same.

Why don't you like me? That's like disliking me only. So, the thing is that in any relationship, if there is no emotional investment at all, I just don't dislike, I don't like you means, I don't value you, I don't care for you, don't occupy any mental space in my head, that doesn't, it's not conducive for any healthy relationship. So, affection generally means we don't like to say no.

But attachment in this context means we can't say no, that if that person requests, if that person insists, if that person demands, we just can't say no. Now, that is sometimes or many times not healthy. Why? Because sometimes what they ask may be harmful for them, may be harmful for us, may be harmful for the relationship.

So, many times, it's a part of life that everyone has to learn to take no for an answer. That is a part of growing up in life. And say, for example, children were too pampered, and they never had no for an answer.

When they grow up in life, the parents may always try to say yes, but life is going to say no to them. And if they are not, they have not learned how to handle no, it will be very difficult to face life. So, it is not that we can just say, oh, I want to train you in life, so I will say no to you.

Not like that. But in general, life will say no to us. And we can't always force life to say yes, no matter how much we try.

So, the idea is that one attachment means, at least in the context when we often say asakti is maya or it's unhealthy, it is where we just can't say no to other ones. And this will be damaging each time they pressurize us, you know, they request, they insist, or they demand. Three things, you know, we just can't not just get rid of the person, we can't get rid of it from our own mind.

And so, in the Mahabharata, there is a classic and tragic example of attachment. Who is that relationship dynamic? Dhritarashtra and Duryodhana. Yes.

So, Duryodhana would make outrageous and obnoxious demands. And he just could not say no. It's not visible, is it? Now, in that sense, attachment, if it leads us to never be able to say no for the other person, that is not healthy.

So, affection is necessary for any relationship. Without that, you can't have any relationship at all. But when affection grows into attachment, it becomes a problem.

So, over a period of time, ideally speaking, in a relationship, what should happen is that we do something for the other person, the other person does something for us, and there's reciprocation. By that reciprocation, we all come closer to each other. But sometimes when there is attachment, what happens? We do a lot for the other person, and the other person does very little.

They do only enough to extort us, pressurize us, manipulate us. And after some time, we feel, what is the point of doing anything at all? And then, when that happens, the attachment goes towards its opposite. So, when attachment is is unfulfilled, or it is frustrated, there are different things.

But basically, here there is, we can say healthy reciprocation. We do something for the other person, other person does something for us. This doesn't have to be simply transactional.

It doesn't have to be simply, I scratch your back, you scratch my back. Not, it can be like that, but it doesn't have to be like that. See, reciprocation can be of two types.

One is simply transactional. Transactional means we go to a shopkeeper, we give money and they give us a product. Now, sometimes a person, somebody wants some alcohol, and they are not of a drinking age also.

But somebody just pretends and gets some false ideas on me. The person doesn't even care. You had an idea, I will give it to you.

So, there is no caring at all. So, transactional reciprocation is not necessarily good for a deep relation. Sometimes functional is required, but there is transformational reciprocation.

Transformational means what? Say, we meet someone and we talk with someone and then that person talks with us and we come to understand each other, become closer to each other. That is a reciprocation, but it is transformational. This is good.

So, in general, we want reciprocation, but when there is no reciprocation or there is low reciprocation. So, at that time, what do we do? So, that is the time when we often go from attachment to its opposite. So, let us look at what is the opposite of attachment.

So, this is where, as I said, we wanted to avoid attachment to our conception of attachment, like attachment can be unhealthy in the form of attachment or we can, if you want to really clearly differentiate it, this is almost like obsession or fixation. So, it is, again, I was just a few days ago in Australia and I used this word obsession and after that when Aussie came back, have you watched that movie called Obsession? Apparently, it is a movie about something, you told me, some ghost possessing someone and woman gets obsessed with the man or whatever. So, obsession is basically excessive, fixation.

So, we could say attachment can be healthy or unhealthy. The healthy version of attachment is affection. The unhealthy version is obsession, fixation, excessive focus.

So, now, just as attachment can have many different meanings, when we talk about the opposite of attachment, it can go in many different directions. So, when we are disappointed or frustrated in attachment, so at that time we will go towards the opposite side. So, when attachment is there, no or no, that means what happens is either we are disappointed, I invested so much in this relationship and this person, you know, the reciprocation is so little, what am I doing here? Or sometimes we just be frustrated, that person does not care for us at all.

So, in one sense, disappointed is bad, frustrated is far worse. But when that happens, we may go in different directions. So, this is going to be the, in one sense, the heart of the class over here.

If we consider attachment, when attachment is frustrated or disappointed, as it will happen for everyone at some time or other in their life, the response to it can be in Tamas. Tamas is the mode of ignorance, Tamoguna, that it can be in Rajas, it can be in Sattva, or it can be in Bhakti or Shuddha Sattva. So, basically, the four classes that I am going to take, they are going to be about the responses in each of these.

So, now, today's class, I will give the whole framework, but I talk about this specifically. So, when attachment is frustrated, at that time, so how do we define attachment? Attachment is basically too much emotion. Like when you say, I can't say no.

That means, we are not thinking with our head. Say a child says, I want chocolates. Okay.

Oh, I want my birthday. I want a cake for the birthday. Okay.

But I want to make the whole cake myself. No, that's not healthy. That's only greedy, but it's also not healthy.

Okay, you want to eat it, you eat it. Now, what happens is when we think with our feelings. Now, feelings are important in our life.

But we think with our feelings, then our feelings become our feelings. Our feelings can become our feelings when they dominate us. So, when there is too much emotion, that is attachment.

So, the opposite of too much emotion can go in many different directions. One is in tamas, it can go to no emotion. I just stopped caring for that person.

That is apathy. The Sanskrit word for it is nirveda. The word nirveda can mean many different things.

In rajas, it can go towards the opposite emotion. Opposite emotion means that the same person who we had a lot of attachment to, we go towards aversion. So, in rajas, it becomes aversion.

So, too much emotion can become no emotion, or too much emotion can become too much opposite emotion. One person says, I love you, I can't live without you. I hate you, I can't live with you.

So, what has happened? Raga has become dvesha. So, attachment, its opposite can be nirveda. It can be apathy, I don't care at all.

Or it can be aversion. Now, the opposite of attachment in sattva is, it can be regulated emotion. So, regulated emotion is actually detachment.

Detachment, but detachment plus commitment. So, detachment with commitment. So, I'll explain what that means.

And in bhakti, it is not just regulated emotion, it is redirected emotion. So, regulated emotion means, for example, it may happen that sometimes in a particular relationship, everybody feels that the wife or the mother may feel I'm doing so much for the family, but nobody cares for me. The husband or the father may feel that I'm doing so much for everyone, but nobody values me.

But then, still there is a sense of dharma, that this is my responsibility, I'll do it. I may be disappointed, but I don't let my emotions lead me to abandon my dharma. So, that is, to some extent, in sattva guna.

It's not just that, but that's one aspect of it. We regulate our emotion, and we still continue in the action, that's commitment. Now, when there is regulated emotion, it leads to divine attachment.

Now, divine attachment, what does that mean? It means not that our attachment to the other person becomes divine. It means our attachment to the divine develops. And then we see our relationship with the other person through the light of that relationship.

So, this is what I'm going to discuss on Sunday, the idea of divine attachment in the Sunday Peace Class. But today, let's focus on attachment and attachment, detachment, commitment. So, basically, this whole dynamic, which we've discussed till now, this is itself quite complicated.

I'm working on a book on Bhagavad Gita on relationships. Hopefully, by next year, when I come, the book will be ready. But at this point, we can probably look in our lives and see people who have gone in different directions.

Like some people, maybe they had a bad relationship, and he's become very cold or pathetic. Sometimes the parent may care for the child a lot. And then the child afterwards doesn't care for the parent at all.

Doesn't even respond to the phone call of the parent, doesn't send any messages, doesn't stay in touch with them at all. So, then what happens? Then the parent may also become very empathetic. They're not going to become detached.

They become disappointed. They, especially people who live in, what is the word, nursing homes, old age home, what is the word for it? Age care, okay. Nursing home, or is it age care? There's a more politically correct word for that.

Retirement manager. Old age home is not a polite word at all. Nobody likes home.

Nobody likes to be called old. I came to know that recently, there's a really political correct way of referring to old people. They are chronologically gifted.

But anyway, so whatever it is, that sometimes people over there, they just become apathetic. If none of their family ever comes to talk with them, nobody cares for them, then it is by no means an attachment or renunciation. It is not that they have become interested in God or they've been interested in spirituality.

They just become apathetic. And that's not healthy at all. So, when there is absence of, when attachment is disappointed or frustrated, when one's consciousness is overall influenced by Tamoguna too much, one just stops caring at all.

One just becomes cold, unfeeling, uncaring, apathetic. And so, when people think that this is what detachment means, then that can become very dangerous. Why? Because detachment is not apathy.

Detachment is not rejection of responsibility because of frustration or oldness. It will lead to a lot of chaos in society if everybody becomes cold and apathetic. So, let's focus today on this point of, so that detachment is not, this is clear.

So, detachment is not aversion to commitment. I don't care. So, I will, I don't care at all.

I'm just cold and apathetic. I become detached, become detached actually. Just become commitment averse.

So, let's try to understand what detachment is. So, this, there's an excellent example of this in the relationship, in the Mahabharata itself between Vidura and Dhritarashtra. So, let's try to, I look at three incidents from the Mahabharata to illustrate this dynamic of how Vidura is detached but is still committed to Dhritarashtra.

So, wherever you are, let's do a short guided meditation. So, wherever you are seated, you can close your eyes and go to sleep. You can close your eyes and let us take three deep breaths.

Wherever you are seated, try to be as comfortable as possible and continue breathing deeply. So, as you keep breathing deeply, just let your thoughts flow along with my words. Our very breath, as it comes in and goes out, that breath is the sign of Krishna's living loving presence in our lives.

The external availability of air to breathe and the internal capacity of our lungs to breathe that air, neither of these are in our control to arrange. It is that, it is Krishna who arranges these at every moment. As we breathe in and breathe out, let that remembrance of Krishna elevate us and transport us to an arena thousands of years ago.

This is the, we find ourselves seeing the vast sky spreading across as far as we can see and then in the distance appears a majestic palace. In that majestic palace, there are towers and archways, there are domes. As we enter into that palace, we see a majestic throne and we see many thrones all around.

There, high up, invisible to everyone, we observe, there is Draupadi in the middle of the assembly, calling out to Krishna in complete dependence and her hands upraised, tears have flown down her eyes but has turned away from those tears. With eyes closed, she's calling out to Krishna. In the background, we can see Bhima, Yudhishthira, all of them anguished.

Vidura has cried himself hoarse trying to get Dhritarashtra to stop. Dhritarashtra's face is cold. Duryodhana is laughing, mocking and then suddenly in that horrible atmosphere, it's almost as if a comforting breeze comes.

The whole ambience changes and above we see Krishna smiling, one hand raised in blessing, from the other hand streams an endless set of cloth that covers Draupadi and Krishna through all the drama and the trauma that is going on, Krishna is smiling. Nothing is outside Krishna's plan. As we behold the beautiful face of Krishna, his peacock feather fluttering in the wind, the serene smile on his face, reaching the deepest anxieties and sorrows and fears in our hearts and removing them all, we behold that smile of Krishna that is capable of removing all anxiety, those big, broad, lotus-like eyes that cannot be disturbed by anything.

Behold that beautiful Krishna. That Lord is also there with us within our hearts. He was always there.

He is always there. He will always be there. Let us behold that beauty of Krishna, drink in that beauty of Krishna and draw him into our hearts that he may reside and preside there.

Let us take three deep breaths and then we can gently open our eyes. That Krishna whom we cannot yet see in our hearts, we can sense his presence by the air that he gives us to breathe, by the sunlight, by the water, everything that we need for our daily sustenance. That Krishna who was with Draupadi is also with us always.

You can open your eyes now. Thank you. So after this incident where Krishna miraculously intervened and saved Draupadi, but still the adharma in the assembly went on and the Pandavas were defrauded of everything.

The Kauravas were so enraged. The Pandavas were so enraged. They vowed to destroy Duryodhana, to destroy Dushyasana, to destroy all the Kauravas.

That night Dhritarashtra could not sleep. Dhritarashtra was so overwhelmed with anxiety, remembering the fearsome vows taken by Bhima, dreading the fate of his sons. He woke up with a start from his bed and told his attendants, call Vidura.

And when Vidura came in the middle of the night, Dhritarashtra said, oh Vidura, my mind is extremely disturbed by what happened today in the assembly. My heart is afflicted with fear considering the danger to my sons. Oh Vidura, please speak some words that will make me peaceful.

Vidura was shattered by the events that had happened in that assembly. He knew that Duryodhana was vicious, but the extent of the brutality of Duryodhana in what he had done to Draupadi was shocking and scandalous beyond words and that Dhritarashtra had allowed it to happen. He had enraged Vidura.

Vidura could barely control his rage and said, oh king, what hope is there for your sons' survival after you allowed them to dishonour Draupadi? How can the water be brought back after the dam is broken and the water is blown away? There is no hope for your sons' survival. Vidura could see that Dhritarashtra's face and body trembled in horror. Feeling pity for his brother, he said, there may still be some way, that one way might be there.

Get Dhritarashtra, Duryodhana to right now go to the forest, fall at the feet of Yudhishthira and beg forgiveness. That king is virtuous and forgiving. If he forgives Duryodhana, he may be able to prevail on Draupadi and Bhima.

And Bhima may let go of his vow to take revenge. On hearing these words, Dhritarashtra recoiled in shock and anger. Oh Vidura, how can you expect Duryodhana to demean himself before Yudhishthira? For a long time, Duryodhana was telling me that you are not his well-wisher.

You are partial to the Pandavas. I did not want to believe, but today your words have exposed you. Your partiality towards the Pandavas makes you useless for me.

I have no need or desire for your counsel. Go wherever you please. Saying this, Dhritarashtra dismissed Vidura.

Vidura felt stung by this accusation and rejection of the brother that he had served for so many years. Not wanting to stay in that assembly of Adharma, not wanting to stay in that city of Adharma, not wanting to stay in that kingdom of Adharma, Vidura that very night left. He decided, I would rather stay with Yudhishthira.

And late into the night, he reached Yudhishthira's camp and Yudhishthira welcomed him graciously. And when Vidura told what had transpired, Yudhishthira said, oh uncle, it will be our honor and pleasure to have your company during our exile. Please stay with us.

Vidura could not but compare the warmth with which this prince, this king had welcomed him. Although he had failed to protect him, although it was he who had invited him for the gambling match, it was he who had not been able to stop his kingdom from being lost. He could not but compare the warmth of Yudhishthira with the coldness of Dhritarashtra.

In one moment, that brother whom he had served for life, had just receded. And yet, the next morning when Dhritarashtra woke up, Dhritarashtra was, he suddenly had a mood swing and a moral swing. See, Dhritarashtra was not a bad person.

See, there are people who have goodness and there are people who have wickedness. So, Vidura was a good person. Duryodhana was a wicked person.

And in between are people with weakness. And Dhritarashtra was a person with weakness. So, he had this, he had some bond with Vidura, but his bond with Duryodhana was much stronger.

And when he would hear Vidura's words, he would say, yeah, what you say makes sense. But when Duryodhana would pressure him, yes, what you say, that's what I need. So, now when Vidura had gone to the forest, when Vidura had challenged him to get Duryodhana to do something, he rejected Vidura.

But next morning, he woke up and said, oh dear, what have I done? Vidura is my well-wisher, he is my brother, my friend. Oh Sanjay, please call Vidura. Sanjay said, Vidura has left and gone to the forest.

He said, oh no Sanjay, go to the forest and get Vidura to come back. And Sanjay went back. Sanjay went to the forest.

Vidura heard. Vidura agreed. Now his brother had rejected him, accused him, abandoned him.

Why did Vidura go back? Because Vidura still had hope that Dhritarashtra could be saved. He had that sense of responsibility that if I am there in the kingdom, Duryodhana's influence can be minimized. That I will at least be one voice of sanity for Dhritarashtra.

Duryodhana is the voice of insanity for him. And I will be the voice of sanity. So, he went back.

And at that time, Dhritarashtra spoke. Oh Vidura, he gave a half-apology. Apology is, what I did was wrong and I am sorry.

Half-apology is, actually, you know, I was very disturbed, so I spoke like that. So, not agreeing that I did something wrong, I am giving an explanation. And there is an apology, non-apology.

What is that? You know, I did not want to hurt your feelings. It's like, not that I did anything wrong, but you are such a snowflake, that your feelings get hurt. I didn't want to hurt your feelings.

So, anyway, he said, actually, I was very disturbed by what might happen to my sons, so I spoke those words. Vidura accepted his apology, half-apology and he said, okay, I have affection for both your sons and Pandu's sons. I care for both of them.

If ever it seems that I am partial to Pandu's sons, it is only because I feel a special sense of responsibility towards them, because their father is no longer with them. But I desire the welfare of both your sons and Pandu's sons. In this situation, if you felt that I was taking the side of Pandavas, it was primarily because it was not they who were provoking and aggravating the situation.

It was your son who was provoking and aggravating. So, Vidura came back and he stayed on. In the entire exile of the Pandavas, he tried to make the Dhritarashtra cease.

But eventually, just before the war was about to end, when Krishna himself came as Vishwanthi Dhritha and Duryodhana rejected him and Dhritarashtra remained silent. Dhritarashtra tried to say, Krishna, I fully accept whatever word you are saying. But Duryodhana doesn't listen to him.

Please persuade him. The king openly admitted that he was not the decision maker. Duryodhana was going to decide.

And then Duryodhana tried to arrest Krishna. Krishna, of course, could not be arrested. Krishna was in universal form and went back.

And when war became inevitable, Duryodhana became very, very angry. He said, I will crush all of them. And Dhritarashtra, at this particular time, before the war, Dhritarashtra was caught between two things.

There was hope for the impossible. Impossible is that his sons will live. And there was fear of the inevitable.

Inevitable is his sons will die. So, he was torn between these two. And when Dhritarashtra made one last ditch attempt, he spoke very strongly.

And at that time, he said, get Duryodhana to listen to you. Stop the war. Otherwise, your whole dynasty will be destroyed.

Duryodhana exposed Dhritarashtra. He said, at a time when the war is about to happen, instead of encouraging our warriors, you are discouraging them. You are not our friend.

You are an enemy in the guise of a relative. Get out of here. We do not need you at all.

Our traditional Indian society, our traditional society in general, were quite hierarchical. Generally, nobody speaks insultingly to their elders. So, when, especially in Kshatriya circles, nobody can tolerate insults.

Dhruva was a small boy, but when his stepmother insulted him, he could not tolerate it. And since she was his elder, still she could not tolerate it. Now here, Vidura was the age of his father.

Duryodhana s words hurt Vidura terribly. But what hurt him even more was Dhritarashtra s silence. See, the harshest words of our critics do not hurt us as much as the silence of our friends.

And when Dhritarashtra remained silent, Vidura decided there is no point in being here. He left. But unlike Vibhishan, who went on to Ram's side, Vidura did not do the Pantava side.

Vidura went on Pankravich. Why? Because he knew that if he fought on the side which killed Dhritarashtra s sons, Dhritarashtra would never consider any of them to be his relatives. Dhritarashtra would never hear any good advice from them.

So, Vidura simply went on Pankravich. And the war happened and the inevitable happened. And eventually, when Duryodhana was no longer in the picture, at that time Vidura came back again.

When Vidura returned, Vidura could have abandoned and rejected Dhritarashtra. But he did not. Vidura came back and at that time when he spoke words of wisdom, as I described in the first Canto of the Srimad-Bhagavatam, there Dhritarashtra became detached.

He left his home and he focused on his spiritual growth. So, Vidura, because of his spirituality, because of his devotion, because of his commitment, did what he could and he could So, we conclude this, the last paragraph and the last point of commitment, who decreed the last paragraph here? The last paragraph. Yes, please.

Ultimately. I pledge to the overlord lord, the more I observe myself in you and find higher happiness in the absorption, the more protected I will be, more from being disturbed by others and from disturbing others myself. Yes.

So, Vidura realized that my speaking words to Dhritarashtra is not going to change him. I am only disturbing him, but I am not transforming him. And he is disturbing me, but that disturbing me is not doing any good to me or to him.

So, commitment has two distinct aspects. One is internal and the other is external. So, internally, it is not that there is no emotion, but there is regulation of emotion.

So, internally, we can say there is a pendulum. So, emotion in relationships. So, at one extreme is attachment, where there is too much emotion.

The other extreme is apathy, where there is no emotion or too little emotion. So, in between is detachment, where there is regulated emotion. So, with that regulated emotion, that means we care for the other person, but we do not care so much for the other person that we cannot care for anything else at all in life.

That would be fixation. We care for the other person, but not at the cost of everything else, that is the regulation. And externally, sorry, this is not commitment.

This is detachment. So, detachment has an internal aspect and external aspect. So, the internal aspect is that emotion is regulated.

And the external aspect is that there is commitment. Commitment means that we want to do our duty. But how much can we do our duty? So, commitment means what? That is, in this case, ultimately what happens? Commitment without entanglement.

So, we are not entangled because our emotions are regulated. So, what happens? So, we do when we can, what we can. And when we cannot, at that time, we move on to our other dharmas in life.

What does other dharma mean in this context? See, we do not just play one role. We are not just parents. We are not just husbands or wives.

We are not just children. We are not just siblings. We do not have one role or one relationship or one response.

So, if we cannot do one dharma, that does not mean we reject that dharma or we reject that relationship. Or that does not mean that we have become failures because we cannot do that. Okay, this one thing is not working.

What else will work for me? Which other dharma can I do? So, the detachment means we can engage in a particular responsibility when it is required, when it is working. And if it is not working, we can disengage ourselves from it and wait. We do not have to reject or abandon or condemn that person.

But we wait. Maybe the door opens in the future. So, that way, what happens? We keep moving forward in our life.

So, Vidura when he went to his forest, he focused on his spiritual dharma. He performed austerities, he associated with sages and through that he became purified and Dhritarashtra also gradually became humbled. He also became, he realized that his attachment had been frustrated.

So, with time things changed. So, detachment is essentially commitment without emotional entanglement. And when we practice bhakti, our relationship with Krishna enables us to be detached, not in the sense of being apathetic, not in the sense of becoming irresponsible, but in the sense of not becoming obsessed.

I will summarize one diagram what we discussed and then conclude. Our topic was today about detachment broadly. So, I talked about three points.

First was we started by talking about how attachment is not the same as affection. So, our theme was, in general, we do not disturb others and do not be disturbed by others. So, how do we come to this level? We were exploring that.

So, attachment is not the same as affection. Attachment is undesirable, affection is essential. As you remember the key difference, affection means we don't like to say no.

But attachment means we can't say no. And who is the example of this? Dhritarashtra and Duryodhana. So, in any relationship, if we become attached, say we have friends, normally everybody needs friends.

But if our friends say, okay, tomorrow is your exam, but forget your exam, let's go for a party. I like to have fun, but not now. So, we have to be able to say no.

So, in that sense, attachment is not a thing. We have to differentiate between that. And then when there is the opposite of attachment, this was the heart of the class, attachment is opposed, it can go in four different directions.

So, in its opposed, in tamas what happens? Apathy. So, attachment means too much emotion. So, too much emotion we can go to, its opposite is going to be no or low emotion.

Then in rajas, what may happen? Aversion. That means too much emotion that attracts us to that person, but it becomes too much emotion that repels us from that person. So, in that sense, its opposite emotion.

So, raga can become dvesha. So, here it becomes nirveda. And then after that in sattva, what happens? Detachment.

It becomes detachment. Now detachment means anasakti. So, here what happens? Its not that no emotion it is, regulated emotion.

And at the highest level, in bhakti what happens? There is a redirected emotion. Redirected is like divine attachment. So, this we need to explore, we will explore this later in a Sunday class.

This is redirected emotion. And then through the Vidura story we discussed, Vidura Dhritarashtra story, what was the last point that we discussed through the example that detachment has two aspects. One is the internal and the other is the external.

The internal aspect was that we have, no, not we avoid, too much we avoid attachment, we avoid apathy, I will put it this way, not too much, the role of emotion in relationship, not too much, but not too little also. So, what would Vidura do? He cared for Dhritarashtra. That emotion was there, that's why he came back because he cared for him.

But when he saw that my caring is not doing any good, then he didn't stay on over there. He went away. So, externally what happens is there is commitment, but without entanglement.

Because one is not controlled by emotions, so what happens is we can engage as much as is possible when it is helpful and desirable and we can disengage. So, disengage does not mean we have to reject the relationship. We have many roles to play in our life and some roles we can play at some time, some roles we cannot play at some time.

So, accordingly, we disengage ourselves from some roles and focus more on engaging in other roles and other dharmas in our life. In this way, we don't disturb others. If they are not listening to us, there is no point in disturbing them more and more.

And we don't get disturbed by others. We focus our energy in an area where we can make some positive contribution. Thank you very much.

Hare Krishna.