From ritual to spiritual 2 – Analysis of Krishna’s pastime with the ritualistic brahmanas – Understanding the brahmans

[Seminar at Community Hall, Melbourne, Australia] Video:

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

I'll come back in the second session on the pastime of Krishna with the ritualistic brahmanas, talking on the theme of ritual to spiritual. I put to a recap what I spoke yesterday. I talked about how the Bhagavatam emphasises the essence of devotion by showing how devotion can invert all social hierarchies.

And that theme is continued in this particular pastime where the yagik brahman patnis are shown to be much higher than even their husbands. And yesterday I focused on the gopas, the three main characters or sets of characters in this pastime apart from Krishna, the gopas, the brahmanas and the brahman patnis. So, yesterday I talked about the brahmanas, the gopas and how they went on a service for Krishna and yet they failed.

They, we discussed with the Brajwasis, know that Krishna is God. They know but their centre is serving Krishna. So, that knowledge is like the stars in the sky during the daytime.

So, what is the sun for them is their love for Krishna and their desire to serve him. And if for the service of Krishna, the knowledge that he has got is useful, they will accept, they will use that knowledge. Otherwise, they will go to the background.

And then I talked elaborately about how we need to be, when Krishna consoled and solaced the gopas after they failed in their mission to get food, we talked about how we need to be purpose driven, not goal driven. The world looks inside out, sees the results, which are often not in our control, but Krishna sees inside out, he looks at the endeavours. And thus, by focussing on Krishna and trying to serve him, we keep that purpose, it is empowering, because there in the result is what is in our hands.

Now, after this, let's try to look at this past ten from the point of view of the yagi brahmanas. Now, all of us need a sense of social identity. Any society that we belong to, we need to get a sense of identity by our particular role and position within that.

And the Vedic society was such that the brahmanas had a particular position. Now, broadly speaking, Prabhupada talks about the brahmanas in two terms, that they are priests and they are teachers. Now, for people in general, the role of the, in Christianity the word is clergy.

So, if we have the church, the clergy, the fathers, the pastors, they do some rituals and they give sermons. Now, if we see, in any religion, these two are the roles. And for people in general, it is the priestly role that is more important than the teacher's role.

Because, in general, wherever there is a religious culture, people want to have the activities that comprise religious culture. In fact, now that I think about it, I was born in the brahmana family and we had so many rituals which we performed as a part of the brahmana family. But, actually, the first lecture that I heard from a brahmana was from a scorned devotee.

So, all the brahmanas that I knew over the previous life, they came and performed my thread ceremony, my brother's thread ceremony, some relative's marriage, somebody's final rites, but there were no talks given at all. So, in general, among these two roles, the role of a teacher and the role of a priest, the role of the priest is what matters to most people. Because people are not so much interested in philosophy.

But most people, especially if they have some sense of culture or tradition, they want to keep doing the things which bring to them a continuity of culture and tradition. So, they respect the priest for that purpose. And when that is the purpose, what is the purpose? Oh, the priest should be able to come and perform the rituals nicely.

Light the fire, do the yajna, and chant the mantras, and by this, consider, oh, the priest is doing the duty very well. In fact, one of my friends, he was at a marriage, he was a brahmachari, senior devotee so he had gone to, he was invited as like a guest to a friend's marriage ceremony. And while the priest was performing the marriage ceremony and was chanting mantras, actually, that priest was chanting entirely different mantras only.

That priest was actually chanting the mantras that are to be chanted when the person dies. He said, what are you doing? What mantras are you chanting? And, you know, the other people, at that time, some people knew that he was a devotee, some people knew that he was not a devotee. So, he did not have that spiritual authority.

So, he told them, you know, okay. See, they're chanting wrong mantras. He said, don't bother him.

Let him complete the ritual. So, they considered what he was doing a botheration. Let him complete the ritual and we'll continue on.

So, for them, the chanting of the mantras, what the meaning is, is not very important for most people. Just do the some rituals. So, this is the, because in society, in general society, most people are not intellectuals and they want some conformity to traditional culture or continuation of tradition.

So, they often see the brahmanas more as priests than as teachers. And, because of this, the brahmanas themselves may start self identifying themselves as more as priests than as teachers. The way the world sees us, that also becomes a part of our self identification.

Say, most of us, before we came out of India, the consciousness that we are Indians is just an assumed fact. But, it might not be something which you are always conscious of. Maybe at the time of patriotic rallies, yes, I am Indian.

But, other times, everyone is Indian. So, what is the great thing about being an Indian? But, when we come to another country, the Indian becomes a part of our conscious identity. It is a part of our identity, but it may not be a part of our conscious identity.

So, the way people see us, also shapes our identity. So, when society sees the brahmanas primarily as priests, then the brahmanas also start thinking of themselves as priests primarily. And then, for them, the priestly role becomes more important than the educational role.

So, they become expert in chanting mantras. But, they may not be very expert in the philosophy. They may not be teaching the philosophy at all to anyone.

So, the Bhagavatam challenges this idea also. When it describes how Shukadeva was Swami, or Rathasuta was Swami, he, it is said, was not very perfect in the recitation of the Vedic mantras. And yet, he was respected by the greatest of sages and Sona Krishna and others, they asked him to speak.

So, for some people, if somebody can recite mantras very nicely, oh, must be a very learned person. Yes, it could be. It may not be.

As a devotee who had gone to Kumbh Mela, he told me he saw one of the most shocking sightings at the Kumbh Mela. There was this long bearded sadhu, who was chanting mantras and doing an elaborate yajna. And beautifully reciting mantras.

And very, sometimes when people do aarti, they are not just worshipping the Lord, their aarti is also performance. How they move their hands. Now, of course, the performance can also be for the pleasure of the Lord, but they do everything very artistically, aesthetically.

So, this priest was like that. He did the whole yajna, very artistically, aesthetically, very sweetly reciting the mantras. And then, as the yajna got over, and people started walking away, he took out a bidi from his pocket and he actually put the bidi in the fire, sacred fire and lit the bidi and started smoking.

So, there is no sense of being a devotee actually speaking. So, what happens for them, it's a ritual and you have to perform the ritual very well, so that people will be impressed, but there is no spiritual consciousness in it. So, generally, if we are not careful, if we start self-identifying too much with the role that society gives us, it's important that we do that role responsibly, but we can't self-identify too much with that, or we can't self-identify with only one role that we may have.

So, what happens, in general, for the brahmanas, they tend to identify themselves more as priests, and then they do priestly duties very well, but the spiritual purpose of all the priestly duties that they are doing, that often gets overlooked. And this is what happened to these brahmanas. They were very expert in doing their priestly practises.

And they were so caught in doing the things right, you know, this ceremony has to be done properly, this has to be positioned like this, this has to be done like that, that has to be done like that, very, very careful and precise in doing all that, and they were thinking, all this is so important, we are busy doing important work, what are these kids, what are they coming over here, we don't have to pay any attention to them. So, because they started considering the specifics of the rituals, the rituals that they were doing, that as the primary thing. So, because of that, they completely overlooked what is the ultimate purpose of all this.

In the Vedic tradition, performing yajnas was a central part of the way of worship. And even in the Mahabharata, Ramayana, and the Bhagavatam, we saw the serious culture of yajna. Elaborately, kings performed yajnas, and the Brahmanas, the kings sponsored the yajnas, and the Brahmanas come and perform those fire sacrifices.

So, these fire sacrifices, they have a dual purpose. At one level, they are meant for getting something material. At another level, this mic is too humble.

So, the fire sacrifices serve two distinct purposes. One is material, and the other is spiritual. Materially, the idea is that we are a part of a interconnected cosmos, and our existence depends on beings or factors beyond ourselves.

And therefore, we have to harmonise with that. So, Shri Prabhupada explained that yajna is like tax. When we live at a particular place, then we may say, I have got my needs, and I am working hard to take care of my needs.

That's true. But we get water supply, we get electric supply, and for all this, we have to pay some bills. So, similarly, we get the universal utilities, air, water, heat, light, and we don't produce these.

They come by some higher arrangement. And in the third chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, 3.9 to 13, Krishna talks about this. It goes on to 16, but that's where he talks primarily about this.

And he says that… So, in this verse, Krishna is talking about both the material and the spiritual purpose. If you satisfy the devtas by the performance of the sacrifices, then they will satisfy. In this way, parasparambhavayantah By cosmic cooperation, shreyaparamavapsyatha, you will attain the supreme perfection.

You will attain ultimate auspiciousness. Shreyaparam. So, the idea is that when we perform yajnas, at least the way they were performed at the time of when the Vedic literature, primary Vedic literature are written, at that time, the idea was we harmonise the higher forces of the universe by offering sacrifice.

Now, when the sacrifice is offered, there are multiple levels. It's like we offer that which is dear to us to the sacrificial fire. Devanam paramo Vishnu aumo agni tadanda sarvadevata In the Rig Veda, it is said that the supreme amount of the gods is Vishnu.

The lowest amount of the gods is Agni. Vishnu and between tadanda sarvadevata. Now, the lowest does not mean the least powerful.

Here, lowest means the most accessible. Vishnu is at the highest abode and Vishnu normally is not accessible even to Brahma. All the devatas, when they go to the milk ocean and they pray, they don't see Vishnu.

Vishnu speaks in a mystical way and Brahma hears. So, devanam paramo means he is the most inaccessible. But Agni is the most accessible.

And Agni becomes the vahan, the medium. Fire becomes the medium by which our offerings are taken to the gods. Here, sometimes we say, what is this nonsense? You know, you get ghee, you get grains, you get silk and put it in the fire.

It all becomes ashes. Why waste so much? It's not a waste. If we understand the principle of exchange, there are higher beings which are providing us something and we offer something in return to them.

The specifics of how the exchange happens will vary according to time, place, Say, in a traditional economy, maybe a barter economy, we give goods and we get goods. Later on, when we have our currency economy. So, we, somebody who doesn't know anything about currency, you get, you, a farmer takes a huge block card full of grains and goes to some businessman and that businessman just gives a handful of paper.

He says, what is this? You have been cheated. The principle is give and take. The specific mechanism requires a certain level of understanding to appreciate it.

Or today, nowadays, we have digital currency. Somebody who is from a village background, they say you take a big pile of notes, go into a bank and you come out with one card. What is this? Or sometimes you don't even come out with a card.

You just give it and it's gone. What did you get? But, there is a subtle and sophisticated mechanism by which that money is utilised. It is transferred to wherever we are going.

Similarly, yajnas are a subtle mechanism by which our offerings are transported to the higher agents within the universe. And, the specific sacrifices that we do for particular devatas, that means those devatas are satisfied by that. There are different levels at which these sacrifices are considered successful.

The one is just the sacrifice is completed without any interference. That itself is a success. Because, by that the performance and sacrifice get punya and the whole atmosphere becomes auspicious.

And, that's why many times the asuras, their akshanas, they try to disrupt the sacrifices. Because, if they defile and disrupt the sacrifices, that means the godly influence on the earth will not increase. And, then their influence can increase.

So, just the successful completion of the sacrifice is itself remarkable. It's significant. But, even more successful in the sacrifice, the devatas come and receive the offerings.

So, generally it is understood that devatas, they have subtle bodies which are invisible to us. So, they come and receive the offerings, but most of us can't see them. But, in some cases, the devatas are especially pleased.

At that time, they reveal themselves. And, if the sight of the devatas happens at that time, that means that the sacrifice is very successful. And, almost never does Vishnu himself appear in the sacrifice.

Although, he is Yageshwar, he is the ultimate goal of the sacrifice, but he almost never appears. But, if he appears, that is like the supreme success of the sacrifice. So, the sacrifices, of course, sometimes the devatas appear, devatas may give some benedictions, the yajna has to be performed for a particular purpose, they may give some benedictions, and that is also another, if the benediction is given, that is also another level of success.

So, the yajnas are performed for material well-being as well as spiritual well-being. However, like in everything else, the material side is what is most prominent to most of us. The spiritual side, it is very easy to forget because it is not visible.

Therefore, even when the yajnas are performed, most of the performance of yajna focus on the material aspect. Okay, we want to get this. If we get it, it's fine.

The yajna is successful. And most people, even when they do yajnas, they forget the spiritual purpose of yajna. Although that is the ultimate purpose, because that purpose is so lofty that it is not so easily perceived ever, Vishnu himself almost never appears.

And the spiritual side of life itself is not visible so much. So therefore, the material side is what is focused on. And in some ways, mantra is like technology.

Yajnas, mantra is like technology, yajna is also like technology. When there is a technology, if somebody knows a mathematical equation for doing something, you know E is equal to MC square. Okay, you convert this this must match, this much energy will come.

Now, whether somebody is using that energy for good or for bad, that is up to them. But if they know the equation, they apply, get the ingredients, they do the process, they will get the result. So in that sense, many of the yajnas, they are value neutral.

Value neutral means they can be used for moral purposes, they can be used for immoral purposes. So, technically speaking, the word for this is they are amoral. Amoral means not immoral, but not moral also.

Morality is not a factor in that. That means, that of course, when the person is doing a yajna, they have to follow some rules of purity, some rules, strict rules they have to follow. But the power that they get from the yajnas, for what they will use it, that is entirely up to them.

Sometimes demons may also perform yajnas by which they will get formidable power. So, again, something similar to Tapasya. So, Hiranyakashyapu would do a lot of austerity for the purpose of killing Vishnu.

Ultimately, the Bhagavatam says everything is for Vishnu. Tapasya is also meant to satisfy Vishnu. But he performed austerity to try to kill Vishnu.

So, these are technologies and technologies themselves don't have any morality intrinsic to them. If a young teenager studies a science textbook, he can come to know that if he has a grandmother who has a big inheritance, if he puts arsenic in her breakfast, he can get the inheritance quickly. Now, whether he should do it or not, science will not tell him that.

He will not do it if he has a moral sense which he has been brought up with. Or he may do it if he is just mercenary, he is just interested in money. So, science is in many ways the modern version of mantras and yajnas.

They are also technologies, this is also technology. The exact mechanism by which things happen are different. But the purpose is the same.

The principle is also similar. So, just like technology. One of Einstein's biggest regrets was that actually the biggest insight of his life.

It is testimony to the irony of modern technological progress that the person who is considered the greatest scientific brain of the previous century, his greatest insight led to the greatest disaster, technological disaster of the last century. Einstein is considered the greatest brain. His greatest insight was the interconvertibility of matter and energy.

And that led to the development of the atom bomb which was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So, Einstein regretted later on. The letter which I sent to the US president by which the Manhattan project started, by which the atom bombs were developed, he said that I should not have done it.

But my fear was if Hitler does it before us then that would be a big problem. So, the point I am making here is that in the start of the 20th century, science and technology were widely seen as sources of unmitigated good. Oh, by this we will progress, life will become comfortable, life will become happy, we will control nature.

But now, although people use science and technology widely, they recognised that this can have many harmful effects also. So, science and technology are themselves value neutral. It depends on who uses them for what purposes.

So, the power of yajnas is also value neutral. It is amoral. And, these brahmanas, who were the yagi brahmanas, they were very good at performing the rituals.

But, they forgot the purpose of performing all this. Because, the spiritual purpose is so lofty, they were caught in material consciousness. And, they performed the rituals and when the gopas came, they felt, what is this? What is this? No need to pay any attention to them.

Just neglected and went on. They neglected and continued and they thought, we are doing very important work. And, they completed their work and just before that, I will complete this part of the story and then from the yagi brahmana patni's point of view, I will talk about it later.

Their wives, when they heard that Krishna is calling them, at that time, they immediately went with much of the food that was to be offered in the yagya. And, the husband tried to stop them but they didn't listen. And, they were annoyed.

How are they so disobedient? They were upset but then the yagyas have to perform at a particular time in a particular way. So, they went down and performed the rituals. And, at that time, the devatas came.

And, Vishnu explained in his commentary, that the devatas told them that, what did you do? He said, Krishna is a yageshwar and he came to you to offer you to ask for offerings from you and you rejected him. So, when they spoke, then it registered with them. What have I done? And, yet, even after that, because although they were brahmanas, they were still materialistic.

So, they did not go to Krishna to ask for Because, they were fearful of Kamsa. Now, Kamsa, for the brahmanas, Kamsa was their main pattern over that area. So, sometimes, it happens that, if we become financially dependent on someone, then, even if we understand something is right, it becomes difficult to do that.

So, both the fear of displeasing Kamsa and the fear of losing their livelihood, that stopped them from going. Even when they understood, oh, they made a big blunder, oh, this is Krishna. But, their attachment still remained.

Of course, the result of knowing that, actually, their husband, that, this was Krishna, this was Krishna and Yageshwar, the result was, that when their wives came back, they did not chastise them. They appreciated them and they condemned themselves, you know. What is the use of our sacrifice if we neglected Vishnu, who came to us? But, although they condemned themselves, they did not change themselves.

They could not go to Vishnu. They could not go to Krishna. So, the nature of materialism is that it makes one attached.

And, the more we become attached, the more the fear of losing the object of attachment is what defines our life. So, generally, today, we will use the word materialism. We usually talk in terms of gross sense gratification and we usually use it in the sense of, sinful materialism.

All kinds of wrong rules we put. So, yes, there is irreligious materialism, but there can also be religious materialism. So, the brahmanas were not irreligious.

They were religious, but they were still materialistic. So, religious materialism means that people are interested in religion to the extent it promotes their material life. And, if their material life is threatened, then they don't want to take religion beyond that.

As long as religion helps the material life, that is good. So, there are three results of this. One result is that if religion offers you something more than material life, then they are not interested if it risks their material life.

Second result is that if their material life is fulfilled by any means other than religion, then they feel what is the need for religion. And, the third result is that people become very attached to the external forms of their religion because they self-identify with that. So, religion becomes a part of their material consciousness.

So, I'll do a brief analysis of these three and then I'll conclude. You can have question answers. So, the first result of religious materialism is that people think that religion is meant only for materialism, for material improvement.

Krishna talks about this in the Bhagavad Gita. He says that He says He says there are these people who perform elaborate rituals and they think going to heaven is the ultimate goal. There is nothing else in the Vedas apart from this.

And, Krishna says they are not very discerning. They think just go to heaven and be happy over there. That is the purpose of life and there is no higher purpose.

And, most religions whether it is Christianity or Hinduism or Islam, most operate at this level of Karmakanda. Karmakanda is not just a Vedic categorisation of certain rituals. It is a level of consciousness where we do religion for worldly purposes.

So, most people function at this level. And, they think there is nothing more to religion apart from this. So, in the Christian tradition, there is a certain difference between the kingdom of God and heaven.

The kingdom of God in our understanding is Vaikuntha, the spiritual world. Heaven is Svarga. But, for all practical purposes, in the biblical literature, most Christians don't see that difference, don't focus on that difference.

So, most people, when they are asked what is their conception of heaven, they think heaven is a place of perpetual reunion with all lost family members. That is their conception. Oh, you are this uncle, this friend, this cousin, this grandfather, all of them will be reunited with it.

And that is what they think the purpose and perfection of life is. So, when Prabhupada was asked by a professor, I think Thomas Hopkins, he asked, Swamiji, if somebody wanted to study a very small sample of your teachings, what would you recommend to them as the essential message that you want to give? So, Prabhupada quoted 1.2.9 and 10. He says, So, Prabhupada said that dharma, generally there are these four purusharthas.

Which are these four purusharthas? Dharma, artha, kama and moksha. So, most people think this is what dharma is to do, right? Then you have artha, then you can fulfil your kama. And then after that, maybe in a long, long future, you can look for moksha.

So, but these are what people think is the purpose. But the Bhagavatam says, no, dharma is not for kama, artha. Dharma is meant for ultimate liberation.

Artha, wealth is not the purpose of dharma. And if somehow one gets artha on its own. So, people think of this as linear.

Dharma, artha, kama and moksha. Dharma, this will lead to this, this will lead to this, this will eventually lead to this. But the Bhagavatam says, all of these four are meant to happen.

Dharmasya apavardasya na artha artha ayopakarta. Na arthasya dharmai kamasya kamao labhaya hismita. You get artha, artha also used for the ikanta, for the ultimate purpose.

Don't use artha for kama. Then kama can specifically, at a specific level, it can refer to lust, at a generic level it can refer to desire. You all have the power to desire.

So, desire can in a more broad sense can say ambition, aspiration. So, Bhagavatam says, kamasya na indriya priti labho jivet yavatah. Don't use the kama to do indriya priti, to gratify the senses.

Rather, use it for understanding the truth of life. Labho jivet yavatah. Use your senses for whatever is the basic need for survival.

And after that, jivasya tattva jijnasa nartho yashcheha karma. The purpose of existence is to know the purpose of existence. We exist to know why we exist.

And, jivasya tattva jijnasa. So, Prabhupada said, this is his most important teaching. The purpose of existence is to know that.

That is the purpose of existence. And, that is what the Bhagavatam focusses on. Sometimes, when dharma, artha, kama, people get caught in the horizontal level, not growing vertically, not growing spiritually, then religious materialism leads to people getting attached to materialism and considering religion only to the extent that it promotes their materialism.

Like, many people tell you, yes, many parents may tell their children, if they're not devotees, they're general pious Hindus, yes, you know, go to temple sometimes, in the morning, evening, a few times, take the names of God. But, if somebody starts chanting japa regularly, starts going for classes regularly, this is not the time. You can do it in the old age.

Don't do too much. Have a sense of balance. Now, for them, they just don't understand they're in another worldview.

They don't understand that dharma is meant for upper work. Dharma is meant for Artha, so just focus on that. So, that is one result when people are religious materialists, then the materialism can become prominent and religion becomes simply a tool to that.

And religion which talks about anything bigger than that, that is not what people are interested in. Most of the lectures that Shri Prabhupada gave in Hindi, in India, they had a common theme. The theme was to rise from aparadharma to paradharma.

To rise from material religiosity to spirituality. From doing our dharma at a material level to doing dharma at a spiritual level. So, doing dharma at a material level means, most people think, you know, if I take care of my family, if I take care of my children, if I make sure they are educated, they get married, they get settled, if I provide a good inheritance to them, then I have lived a good life.

I have done my duties. Yes, these are duties which we are meant to do. But that alone does not make us spiritual.

That makes us pious. That is material religiosity, there is nothing spiritual to it. Srila Prabhupada says that as far as providing for the bodily necessities of our offsprings, even the animals do that.

It is natural and it is necessary. It is not to be undermined. It is natural, necessary, but it is not spiritual.

When does it become spiritual? When we start caring for the souls of others and we help their souls to grow. Secondly, second result is that if the materialism can be provided for without religion, then religion becomes dispensable. If people can get artha and kama without dharma, then what is the need for them? So, Prabhupada used to talk about this Christian prayer, O father, thou art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, give us our daily bread.

So, Prabhupada would say that at one level it is good that people are going to God for bread, but it shows their love for bread, not love for God. And tomorrow, tomorrow, if people start getting bread by some other means, then what is the need of going to God? So, God becomes dispensable, religion becomes dispensable, because whatever religion is providing, you can get the other things. So, now, this is what has happened in major parts of the world, where material prosperity comes in, people stop feeling the need for religion and God.

Now, some sociologists they analyse and say, actually, it is only poor people who worship God. When people become wealthy, it is for poor people, God and religion is like a crutch for them, to make them feel good about life. When you become wealthy, you don't need it.

It is not that, like that, everybody needs God, but most people are in material consciousness, and in material consciousness, people feel the need for God to the extent that they need to have their material needs fulfilled. And if their material needs are fulfilled without God, what is the need for God? So, when Artha and Kama comes without Dharma, then Dharma becomes dispensable. So, when people are performing rituals, for the sake of, say, some parents tell their children, you know, before your exam, please go to the temple and offer your respects to God.

When I was in Pune, temple was next to a school, and school was quite buddhistic. So, every year, throughout the year, the kids would never come to this temple, but in the months of April and May, they would all come to the temple. Is it that April and May has the mystical power to generate bhakti? Not like that.

What happens is, they want to pray, oh God, please help me pass in this exam. It's good that they are coming to God and praying for that purpose, but suppose a parent tells the child, you should go and and you will do well in your exam. And that child says, my friend, he never goes to temple, he does well in his exams.

So, that means, you can do well in your exams without even praying. So, what is the need to pray? Now, yes, we should pray to God for whatever purpose. If it is for material purpose, that is also okay, but some education is required so that we understand that material is not everything.

So, if we approach God only for material things and once we start getting those material things by some other means, then there is no need for God. Now, there was this movie PK, which became quite popular and it was a satire on religion. Many points it made were valid.

There is much that is wrong in the realm of religion and it made some valid points, but it was blanket generalisation most of it. Now, it is just condemning all of religion practically speaking. So, one of the point that they made was that actually most people who are fearful, they go to temples.

So, people who get scared of life, people who can't face life, they go to temples. Well, yes, that is one kind of people who come to temples. Maybe that is the majority of people who come to temples.

But then you could turn the argument, I wrote a whole book on this topic called GK for PK. So, GK has three meanings. GK is general knowledge, God knowledge and Gita knowledge.

So, based on all those three, I answered whatever questions were raised in that book. So, you could say that yes, if you say that it is because of fear that people go to temple, you could also say it is because of fear people come to watch PK. What do you mean by that? It is not fear that there is some evil being who is going to kill me.

But people are troubled. This problem, that problem, that problem, I want to forget it all, let me go and watch a movie. Most people watch movies and watch entertainment to get some relief from stress.

Stress is also a form of anxiety, it is a form of fear. So, there are hundreds of things which we do because of fear. Now, we may take pain medication, we may take some tranquillizers because of fear, we may have some entertainment because of fear, we may do so many things.

Now, that does not mean everybody who does that, that is the only purpose of that. So, yes, there are fearful people who may come to religion and God. That's true.

And people feel that I have no fear in my life, so why do I need to go to God? So, as long as in material consciousness, the material needs are fulfilled by some other means, there is no need for God. And the last is that when we are in material consciousness and then we practise religion. So, these first two points, they may not so directly apply to us as sadhakas, because we generally practise bhakti with the understanding that we want to connect with Krishna.

That is the purpose. But the third point often applies to us. The third point is when religion is practised with a materialistic consciousness or a materialistic purpose, then we very strongly start identifying with the externals.

And that can lead to conflicts. Because we think there are three people from three different religions who went to God and they prayed. So, a person from religion A prayed, Oh God, please destroy the followers of religion B. And the person from religion B came and said, Oh God, please destroy the followers of religion A. Person from religion C came and said, Oh God, I don't want anything for myself.

Just fulfil the prayers of the followers of religion A and B. So, for many people, religion becomes a tool to power. It is just a material identification. One of our devotee authors is from a Jew background.

So, he was meeting his family members and he was telling about Krishna consciousness. Now, he is a devotee. So, his uncle said, Are you trying to convert us? He said, No.

I didn't know that you belong to any religion. His uncle was an atheist. I am an atheist.

He said, I didn't know that you belong to any religion. He said, I am a Jew. I am an atheist, but I am an atheist Jew.

Now, the Jews follow the ten commandments and the first commandment is love God with all thy heart, all thy soul and all thy mind. So, how can there be an atheist Jew? So, that means what has happened, Jew is no longer a religious conception. It is simply a racial or a material conception.

It is a part of our material identity. So, when this happens, it leads to sectarianism. It leads to violence.

Now, most people are quite fed up with religion in today's world. Now, there are nowadays many, when census is done, people's religion is to be known, there are different religions and then one option also comes, none. I don't believe in any faith.

It's not that they are atheists, it's just that they don't care. They call themselves nuns, or another word for them is not atheists but apathists. Apathists say, I don't care at all.

Because they feel that religious people, you know, you just, you argue about what is the nature of the other world, and you create fights in this world. So, when this happens, people just get fed up. So, when we don't pursue spiritual consciousness, then religion can become a material marker of identity.

And then, all the materialistic ideas come into it. So, it can become a tool for power, it can become a tool for position, and can lead to conflicts. So, when we start practising bhakti, we may not become ritualistic in the sense that we will perform puja and forget Krishna.

That kind of ritualism we may not have in mind. That may not happen to us. But for us, we may practise bhakti, but we may forget that this is for Krishna's pleasure.

We may start measuring our success in material terms alone. And if others start getting, others who are also practising bhakti, start getting more success at the material level than us, then we may start feeling them as our competitors, as our threats, as our enemies. If I give a class and so many people come for the programme, that person gives class, more people come.

Why is that? I'll see who all came in for his programme and didn't come for my programme. And I'll teach them a lesson in future. I'll abuse my power like that.

So, what happens? Sometimes, when we perform material consciousness, it leads to a materialist, it leads to a sectarian mentality. And the sectarian mentality comes up, then religion rather than becoming a source of elevation of consciousness, it becomes a source of defension, source of conflict. The last instruction that Srila Prabhupada gave was that your love for me will be shown by how you cooperate.

You cooperate means what? That means that all of us are different. Even when we practise bhakti, each one of us have a different understanding of bhakti. We may practise bhakti based on our situation, our psychophysical nature, our inspiration.

We may do different things in bhakti. We don't have to aggravate the differences. We don't have to criticise others.

Yes, if something doesn't make sense to us, we may seek some clarification. But our purpose has to be clear. I have come here to go towards Krishna, not come here for anything else.

If in the process of serving Krishna I get some power, I get some influence, I get some position, I'll use that in Krishna sense. But that is not the marker of my spiritual advancement. That is not the symptom of my spiritual success.

That is incidental. It will come, it may not come, but what is important is I should move towards Krishna. One pointed purpose.

The purpose is to move towards Krishna. So when we have this purpose, then whatever differences may come, okay, this person is doing like this, this person is from this temple, this person is from the disciple of this guru, this person is doing this service, this person is from this nationality, this race, these differences will be there, but those differences will not make a big difference because we all have a common purpose. To the extent we focus on that common purpose, what takes us from ritual to spiritual is the purpose.

The practise itself can create differences. Okay, I am doing this way, you are doing this way, but if I focus on the purpose, both of us are trying to raise our consciousness, both of us are trying to go towards Krishna, then that will avoid the conflict and that's how we will all grow in our bhakti both individually and collectively. I'll summarise.

I spoke today about how the yajnik brahmanas, they got misled. So I started by talking about how the brahmanas have two roles, that of priest and that of teachers. For most people, they are non-philosophical, so the brahmanas role as priests is what is prominent and that can become a prominent part of the self-identification of the brahmanas themselves and if they are teachers, then they will themselves remember and remind others of spiritual knowledge and spiritual purpose.

But the simply priests, they can get caught in the performance of the rituals and they think their success is the precision with which they perform the rituals and when this happens, then, they, I talked about how the yajnas are mechanisms of cosmic cooperation. It's like paying tax. The specific method may be incomprehensible to us but the principle is comprehensible.

But these yajnas themselves are amoral. It's like technology. Somebody knows the formula, they can use the formula to make weapons for good or bad.

So, yajnas are amoral in themselves and when people who do not have a spiritual sense of purpose for their lives, they do the yajnas, they may use it for materialistic purposes. So, the yajnik brahmanas, even when they understood their mistake because the yajnas were one level successful, the devatas came. Devatas did not come because they were so pleased, the devatas came because they wanted to correct, help them correct themselves.

But the yajnik brahmanas, they corrected themselves and then they did not chastise their wives, but they themselves did not go to Krishna because they were attached to their material security, which they felt Kamsa was providing. Then I talked about how when we perform religion at a material level, it can lead to our restricting religion to materialism and then we neglect the other non-material aspect of religion and if we get material things without religion, then what is the need for religion? And then when we are getting material things through religion, we become possessive about those material things itself and we think of those material things as the signs of our success and then that leads to sectarianism and conflict. But if you keep the purpose, what takes us from ritual to spiritual is not the practise but the purpose with which the practise is done.

So when we keep that purpose in mind, purpose of remembering Krishna, serving Krishna, loving Krishna, then we can rise beyond the differences towards the ultimate goal of our life which is attaining Krishna. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Are there any questions or comments? Yes, please. I know this concept of heaven as a perpetual reunion with ancestors but how do we kind of synchronise that with what you have brought in? In the Mahabharata, the conception of heaven as a perpetual reunion with ancestors, I don't think so. The Mahabharata talks about heaven as a glorious destination.

See, the Mahabharata is a book which is primarily at the level of karma kanda. So for most of the characters in the Mahabharata, the goal of their life is to go to heavens. Mahabharata does not focus so much on Vaikuntha as the goal of life.

But it is not that it talks about heaven as somewhere one is to live perpetually. It is, in general, if you see, the devatas are also, Mahabharata also describes many incidents where devatas are concerned. They are concerned, oh, the demons are becoming too powerful.

So if the devatas are themselves immortal, that they can live forever, then why would they be afraid of the demons. So actually there are, it is described that there are different, you could say even there are different words which mean different things. The word amara is often used for the devatas.

But the word amara in a technical sense, generally it is an immortal, sorry, immortal. But in a specific sense, there are four levels. There is a martya, amara, jivanjiva and nitya.

So only nitya is eternal. We are in the martya loka, so we are mortal. We are going to die.

In a very short while we are going to die, a few decades. The amara, they live so long as compared to us that it is like they are immortal. But they also die.

Longer than them is a jivanjiva. Jivanjiva, the word literally means one who lives forever. But again, it is a long time.

Long time means they live as long as the day of Brahma. But only the souls who go to the spiritual world, they are nitya. So heaven is a glamorised goal in the Mahabharata because it is primarily a karma kanda book.

And within that there is bhakti, which is talked about in the Bhagavad Gita. But that is not the thrust of the Mahabharata. Any other questions? What should be our identity? What should be our identity if it is not material? We have different levels of identities.

In the world we have what we can call as functional identity. Functional identity may be say, I am an Indian or I am a man, I am a woman, I am an engineer, I am a doctor. These are parts of our identity.

So these are what we can call as functional identity. And that is the identity that we need in our need for functioning in this world. Now the Bhagavad Gita tells us that we are all souls.

We are all parts of Krishna. At a functional level we cannot address, yellow soul come here. You know which soul? All of us are souls only.

So, for functioning at a practical level, we need to use the functional identity. But beyond or underlying the functional identity is our fundamental identity. Fundamental identity is that we are souls who are parts of Krishna.

So, as a servant of Krishna, I may take up various functional identities. So, as a servant of Krishna, I may be a student. As a servant of Krishna, I may be a mother.

As a servant of Krishna, I may be a professional. So, the Bhagavad Gita does not tell us to reject our functional identities. It tells us don't restrict yourself to a functional identity.

If I think that I am an engineer and say tomorrow if my identity is I am a software engineer and I lose my job and I just don't get any job as a software engineer, then who am I? Who am I? If I am a software engineer, I continue to exist. Software engineers, this is the role that I have handled. Functional identity, functional identity is not there.

My fundamental identity always remains. So, we understand fundamentally we are souls who are servants of Krishna and in his service, we have various functional identities. So, we use the functional identity as a function in the world, but we don't reduce our identity to that.

We don't over-identify with that. So, when our functional identity is challenged, at that time, we need to go down to the fundamental identity. Yes, if I consider myself, my primary identity as a mother, then if my child starts going on the wrong track, I'll start thinking my life is a failure.

What did I do with being a mother? No, the child is also a soul, has own freedom. The child may go on the right track, the child may go on the wrong track. We have to do our part, but if the child goes on the wrong track, we don't have to see that as a personal failure.

We are souls, as a service to Krishna, we did the best in offering the child the right directions, but our fundamental identity is that we are a service to Krishna. How can we develop that fundamental identity? Broadly speaking, the activity is sadhana bhakti. We chant the holy names of Krishna, we come in the association of devotees, we study the Bhagavad Gita and we worship the deities.

We call it ABCD. Association of devotees, study of books, chanting of the holy names and worship of the deities. These are the four things and by that our fundamental identity becomes reinforced.

We start getting realisation that when I do these, I feel so peaceful, I feel so calm, I feel so satisfied. This is what I am meant to do in my life. And that's how that realisation, that conviction comes.

This is who I am essentially. Okay? Thank you. Yes.

Question being asked. Okay. So what is the role of ritualistic activities within bhakti? And if we came from a tradition, say, where we perform several rituals before, should we perform them now or not? In general, devotees try to, whatever rituals are there, we try to spiritualise them.

So, for example, marriage. Marriage is a ritual. It's an important mark.

Now, in today's world, the word ritual has a negative connotation. But ritual itself is not negative. Ritual is simply a particular action that is done to symbolise something.

There are rituals in every walk of life. When we meet people, we shake hands. What is there about shaking hands? When there's a birthday, we blow candles.

What is there in blowing candles? That just becomes associated over there. That's the way celebration happens. When in a cricket match, some batsman gets out, the umpire raises his hand.

Why raise one finger? To do so many other things. Why only that particular thing? That's a ritual. So ritual essentially means a structured form of action that conveys something.

So that's a ritual. Rituals themselves are not bad. So when students graduate, then they often put on a gown, they put on an elaborate cap and they go for graduation ceremony.

That's a ritual. So rituals are simply a fact of life which convey, which is a structured way of signifying something or conveying something, happening. So in our devotee life, there are certain traditional rituals that we are performing, whether it is marriage or whether it is say the name giving ceremony of a child or whatever.

Devotees will try to spiritualise them. Bhakti Swami and of course before that Gopal Bhatta Goswami, they have written books which describe how devotees can perform these rituals in a more Krishna centred way. So devotees when the various devatas are invoked in particular rituals, the devotees invoke various forms of the Lord or various associates of the Lord while performing these yajnas.

That's one way we could perform the rituals, where we spiritualise them. They are not essential but they are also not necessarily rejected. The essence is to remember Krishna.

The essence is to glorify Krishna. But these rituals also should be done. Prabhupada was inaugurating the Vrindavan temple.

He got the priest from Vrindavan to perform the rituals of inauguration and at the same time he said the real inauguration is the chanting of the holy mantra, the Lord will be glorified. So the rituals, they have their importance but they should not be made all important and specific rituals, which ones to practise, how much to practise. Prabhupada did not emphasise anything so much.

Some devotees say the samskaras are very important and should perform all the samskaras properly. Some devotees feel that it's not all that important, we should not divert ourselves from the core practises of bhakti. Both ways are valid.

So when we say following parampara, following parampara is not like one line, following parampara is like whole circle, circumference. And within the circumference there will be different stands which different devotees may take and as long as they are overall in harmony with the broad direction that we have got from the tradition, then that is fine, they are following the tradition. Now the family rituals that we might have been performing before, the primary consideration in doing them is social harmony.

na buddhi vedam janeda jnanam karma sangina Don't disturb the minds of unintelligent people. So, Bhaktivinoda Thakur in his Chaitanya Shiksha Amrita says that a Vaishnava may participate in three different kinds of festivals. Krishna centred festivals is what a devotee's heart is.

Chinna Ashtami, Gaur Purnima, Narasimha Darshi, Ram Navam. These are the festivals that a devotee delights in. But then he says that if there are other festivals which are the worship of the Devatas, a devotee may go there as a part of social custom.

And the devotee goes there, internally the devotee remembers Devata is ultimately a devotee of the Supreme. So, in the fourth cant of Srimad Bhagavatam it is described that Prithu Maharaj performed certain sacrifices in which the mantras of the gods were chanted. He was doing it out of social custom.

That was what he was expected. But internally he was remembering Krishna and he was offering it all to Krishna. And third he says is that basically local festivals.

So, there will be Independence Day, there will be Republic Day, all these festivals. He says we don't have to define them. It is a part of local custom.

That is what we are expected to do. We don't have to be, our heart can be primarily in festivals. Other aspects we do according to what is practically the best.

Sometimes if we are in a community or a family where those traditions are considered very important and we reject those traditions saying that I am practising bhakti and this is the essential. Then that may cause a huge disruption in our bhakti. Everybody gets agitated what are you doing, you are giving this up, you are giving that up.

And then it doesn't matter. It's not a big thing. Just go there, just be a part of the festival, come back.

So, we don't put our heart into it, we keep our heart in Krishna, but at a practical level whatever has to be done we can do it. Some devotees might have been wearing sacred thread before they became devotees. Now is it that after you become a devotee you give up the sacred thread? Well, sometimes if you give up the sacred thread, a family also doesn't care so much, it doesn't matter.

How can you give up the sacred thread? This is your sacred marker. Keep it, it's not a big deal. There's no need to make this and then there's no need to campaign for or against it.

Just do whatever is functional and move on. Thank you. Yes, behind there was a question? Okay.

One question at a time. So, we say that there's a historical evolution of theism from Buddha to Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. But if some people say that how do you know that what Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is giving It may be that, how can you reject great Acharyas like Buddha, Shankara, Ramacharya, Madhava.

Generally, whenever we speak any philosophical point or any point by sharing, we have to understand what is the Pramana that is acceptable for this person. And speak according to that. Pramana means the authoritative source of knowledge.

So, if we are going to talk with new people who have no understanding of Bhagavad Gita, no conception of Dharma and if you tell them you are not the body or the soul, who says so? Krishna in the Bhagavata says so. Let him say. I don't believe him.

If we are going to talk with people who have no knowledge about Krishna, then we have to see what is their Pramana. They believe in science. There is so much scientific evidence of past life memories, so much scientific evidence of consciousness not being material, of near-death experiences.

So, we have to present spiritual knowledge according to the Pramana that these people can accept. Prabhupada says realisation means to speak knowledge in a way that is interesting to the audience. And when will something be interesting? When it clicks with them.

When it makes sense within their worldview. Of course, ultimately we want to change their worldview. We want them to understand Krishna's worldview as given in the Bhagavad Gita.

But right now they have a particular worldview. So, we have to present knowledge within their understanding. So, that means, while speaking with people, you have to speak according to their Pramana.

So, we have these points that there is an evolution in the revolution across the traditions. This is an insight that is given by the Gaudiya Vaishnavacharyas. And that may not be acceptable for those who have not accepted the authority of the Gaudiya Vaishnavacharyas.

So, there is no need to stress this point. In essence, so, if somebody is just at the fringes, deciding whether they will practise this or not, then at that time they have not accepted the authority. So, if there are certain, it's not that somebody says I don't accept any authority.

Nobody lives without accepting authority. Everybody accepts something or the other as authority. If you don't accept, okay, this as authority, you will go on Google.

Then what happens? You accept Google as your authority. I saw one picture recently, Guru Purnima, there is a satire. There is a person who was bowing down to Guru and to Google.

And Google was giving him ashirvaan. Oh Google, whatever I want to know, you tell me. You are my ultimate Guru.

So, the idea is we all accept some authority or the other. So, in general, knowledge has to be presented according to the Adhikar of the people. So, there are certain things.

So, for example, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is the combined manifestation of Radha and Krishna. This is a very important truth of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. But this is not very important for new people to know.

You may say, okay, how do you know it is Chaitanya Mahaprabhu? How do you know that this is this? Oh, it is Chaitanya Chaitanya Amrit. How do you know Chaitanya Chaitanya Amrit is genuine? It is written by Krishnaswamy. But okay, there are so many scholars.

How do you know Krishnaswamy is genuine? So, Bhaktivinod Thakur offers a very non-confrontational way of presenting Gaudiya Vaishnavism. He says that, he has written a book on the life and teachings of Lord Chaitanya. And the introduction he concludes, he says that as far as the Gaudiya Vaishnavas are concerned, they accept Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as God, as Krishna himself.

And for them, the many miracles that Lord Chaitanya has performed, they are testimonies to his divinity. But, Bhaktivinod Thakur himself takes the role of a devil's advocate. And he says, miracles are no proof of divinity.

Even demons like Rao would have performed miracles like changing their form. So, we leave it to our esteemed readers to decide about the position of Lord Chaitanya. But what we request is that he has come with a gift of love of God.

So, if they follow the process for developing love of God, they will experience a flood of ecstasy in their heart. So, essentially, now if somebody comes to you and says, this is the best doctor in the world. Who says so? I say so.

Who are you to say this? Now, that person will say, you know, I had a terrible disease. I took 100 doctors and nobody cured, but this doctor cured. Therefore, he is the best doctor.

Well, that's your experience. That's why you have that conviction. But I don't have that experience.

So, I can't be expected to have that conviction. So, okay, you just tell what qualification of that doctor is intelligible for that person. He has got this degree.

He has got this many patients. He has got this TB. Okay, come and try it.

So, when he tries it, if that patient, if that person gets cured, then the faith increases. So, similarly for us, generally when we are practising Krishna Bhakti, there is no need to get into what we can say as religious one-upsmanship. Oh, Gaudiya Vaishnavism is the highest among all forms of theism.

It's not religious one-upsmanship, but it can be seen by people like that. So, we focus primarily on elevating people's consciousness from where they are. So, focus on how they are not the body or the soul.

How by chanting Hare Krishna, the consciousness can be elevated. How we can move forward and become better human beings. How we can become free from anarthas.

How we can learn to manage our minds. The universal principles which are practically applicable in people's lives. And to the extent they practise that and they get benefited by that, then future things will come.

Prabhupada is the most prominent representative of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. And Gaudiya Vaishnavism centres on Radharani. Radharani is the supreme devotee.

And Srila Prabhupada, who made his foremost book for outreach is Bhagavad Gita as it is. In the entire Bhagavad Gita as it is, Prabhupada refers to Radharani only once. You know where is it? In the introduction, he says, Taptakanchena Gaurangi Radhe Vrindavaneshwari.

Throughout Bhagavad Gita, he doesn't refer to Radharani at all. Because that is not… Radharani is a very elevated concept. A feminine divine.

So, that's not relevant for the audience. So, Prabhupada doesn't get into that. So, in general, there is no use of getting into confrontation with people who do not accept the Pramana that we accept.

So, we have to find out what is the Pramana that they accept. And at that level, we speak to them. And more than the Pramana or along with the Pramana is the Adhikara.

What is it that they need to know right now? What is their level by which they can benefit? Sometimes, some people come and start arguing. Actually, why did Krishna tell Arjuna to kill Karna when he was on this? Tell about how this is this, this is this. And say, how could Krishna dance with so many Gopis? We give all the reasons.

And then you say, Krishna is God. How do you know God exists? So, they are asking only advance questions about Krishna Leela. But they don't even have a clear understanding that God exists.

So, then we can't really do significant outreach to them. So, basically, let's go step by step. And once people practise Gaudiya Vaishnavism, experience the potency, the sweetness of Krishna Bhakti as given in the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition, then the authority of the Acharyas in the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition starts becoming intelligible to them.

And even if you consider for example, say somebody from Shiva Vaishnav family, from Madhava Vaishnav family, if they don't accept this evolution of theism, that doesn't mean that they are less devotees. If they are following their path, they are devoted to Krishna or Vishnu, and they are practising a pure life, a devoted life, they will also get elevated. So, we have to recognise what should be the thrust of our outreach.

And speak those things that help people to rise from where they are upwards. Thank you. There was one question yesterday which Mataji had here.

You must have said, I have asked. Yeah, what was it? Yesterday you had asked a question. Okay, yeah.

Okay, right. So, when I said it should be purpose-driven, not goal-driven, but then new people come, we give them goals, you know, chant two rounds, chant four rounds, chant eight rounds. When we have book distribution, we have goals.

Distribute this many books. There are so many goals that we have. Yes, when I said we should be purpose-driven, not goal-driven, that doesn't mean we shouldn't set goals.

Goals are right. Every day, Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita tells Arjuna, कर्मन्देवादिकारस्ते माफलेशुवादाजु, don't be attached to the results of work. But then, soon after the Bhagavad Gita was spoken, the Kurukshetra war started.

And in every day in the Kurukshetra war, the Pandavas would set goals. Today, we will fight this regiment. Today, you fight this person.

Today, you fight that person. Most famously, on the 14th day, Arjuna set a goal that I am going to kill Jaidat. Krishna did not tell, या अर्जुन्दा, आप माफलेशुवादाजु नहीं कहते हैं। Not like that.

So, he did not tell Arjuna like that. Now, the point is that goals naturally inspire us to act. So, most of us right now are in the mode of passion.

And in the mode of passion, we need some tangible results to feel a sense that I am doing something worthwhile. Without that, we feel, what is it? What am I doing? We want some tangible things. So, set up some tangible goals.

That is not at all wrong. As long as, that does not become the only purpose why we are doing it. So, for example, if you are studying Bhagavatam, you are like, when we were doing, if you are studying Bhagavatam, you say that, okay, there is Bhagavatam, I say, I want to read Bhagavatam.

And then what happens? Your mind says that, okay, for last five years, I want to read Bhagavatam. Last five years, I did not read. Today also, if I do not read, it does not matter.

I will read tomorrow. And another five years will go. But, if we set a goal, okay, we have got this Bhakti Vaiva course, I want to do this course, and in that, in six months, we will complete one thing.

Then, what happens? That gives us a structure, that gives us a purpose. And then we move forward much faster. Now, how many marks one gets in the Bhakti Vaiva course, how many courses one completes, it is not that, when we die, at that time, there is going to be some gatekeeper at Vaikuntha.

Did you do Bhakti Vaiva? Did you do Bhakti Shastri? Okay, come in. Otherwise, go. Not like that.

At that time, we will be seeing how much we are remembering Krishna. But, these are means which can help us to remember Krishna. So, otherwise, okay, there is so much scripture.

One day, I will study it. So, when we say, one of these days means, none of these days. It becomes like that.

So, usually, goals give us a sense of a sense of excitement, a sense of achievement, a sense of urgency. So, goals are good. What is not good is, just becoming attached to the goals or reducing our vision of Bhakti only to the goals.

So, yes, if we tell, let's distribute this many books. Then, what happens? Devotees get some excitement. Let me try.

If somebody is not able to distribute, that doesn't mean that they are bad devotees. Or that doesn't mean they have failed. If goals inspire us to bring out our best, if goals inspire us to rise to a higher level, then they are uncool to Bhakti.

And because they are favourable for devotion, we accept them. But, if goals become all that we are doing, then, in the early days of our movement, it happened that there were two bus parties in a temple and both of them were in intense competition. They wanted to distribute.

And they would wake up in the morning, complete their rounds, and just rush out. All day long, distribution. And one team, they wanted to distribute more books.

So, what happened? One of the very neophyte devotees, at that time, he went, early morning, and he went and punctured the tyres of the other bus. Now, this is devotion, but this is, you can say, destructive devotion. Misdirected and destructive devotion.

So, we don't want to do like that. If, we think that goals are all that I have to achieve, so, somehow or the other, I have to achieve goals. Whatever it takes.

If we become like that, then it's a problem. But, if goals inspire us to remember Krishna, and help us to become more dedicated, then they are favourable to Bhakti. We can use them.

Okay? Thank you. So, can we stop here? Thank you very much.