Gita Overview Mumbai 12.1-11 Progression from Virata Rupa to Impersonal Brahman

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
So we will now today start the last chapter of the bhakti section of the Bhagavad Gita.
This is directly called as the chapter entitled as Bhakti Yoga. So here the connection between chapter 11 and chapter 12 is a little elusive. The basic understanding is that actually you know chapter 12 starts with chapter 12 starts with the question of Arjuna that what is better? Is it better to worship the impersonal Brahman or is it better to worship you in a personal form? So there can be various answers to this question and different Acharyas have answered in different ways.
I’ll give here what is to me the most coherent or logical connection. As I told earlier, this whole section is focussing on establishing the supremacy of bhakti and the supremacy of Bhagavan. So in general when we move from this world towards God, the whole process of turning towards spirituality means that I don’t need to.
That can be fulfilled. That’s all. Okay.
Fine. So the the whole process of becoming spiritual means to turn our attention from this world towards God. So when we are turning our attention, first we see the grandeur, the magnificence of this world and we look at the glory of nature.
Many people become naturalists rather than being enamoured by technological toys and by technical wizardry. They start thinking actually the calmness, the quietude of nature is much more serene. It is much more attractive and that to some extent is an elevation towards the mode of goodness.
So I am not talking this analysis from the specific flow of the Gita’s chapters. I am talking from the overall evolution of spiritual thought and I’ll come to the connection in the Gita chapters a little later. But you remember that overall the purpose of the Bhagavad Gita, the direction in which the Bhagavad Gita is flowing is towards pointing out the ultimate sadhya and ultimate sadhana.
So the ultimate sadhya is Bhagawan, the ultimate sadhana is Bhakti. That’s what the conclusion will be established. So as we move from this world towards God, we move from say ignorance and passion towards goodness.
So in ignorance there are fascinations like say intoxication or nowadays more high tech video games where people go into illusion or movies. A withdrawal from reality as it is in the world to a illusory world. That is characteristic of mode of ignorance.
Mode of passion is trying to make the reality of this world enjoyable. To try to control and dominate it. Centred physically around sex and psychologically around power.
And beyond that, when people come towards goodness, the focus shifts more from control towards observation and appreciation. This world, there is so much beauty already in it. It’s not that I have to control and create beauty according to my plans.
If I just observe and learn to appreciate, I can see so much beauty in this world. So that is goodness. And to some extent, appreciation of nature is more elevated than say, the attempt to dominate nature.
So, the Virata Rupa in one sense shows that nature is ultimately the body of God. And rather than become attracted to nature, one should become attracted to God. And that is demonstrated through two things.
One is showing also the brutality of nature. Many of us who live in cities, sometimes we hear about farm life and we get irritated by the pollution and the noisiness of city life and we think that the rural life is idyllic. But actually, rural life is not just idyllic alone.
There is a lot of physical strain and hard work and austerity. For example, working in the farms under sun is totally exhausting. So, it’s not that it is comfortable.
Material world, no place is comfortable. It’s ultimately whether it is a city or a farm, it is not only city is Dukhalayam and farm is not Dukhalayam. The whole material world is Dukhalayam.
But relatively speaking, the farm can be more conducive for spiritual cultivation. So, what the Bhagavata does is, what the Bhagavata does is, it shows us firstly that, okay, nature may be magnificent, nature is contained in, nature is a manifestation of God’s body. And nature also has its brutal side.
So, rather than looking at nature and getting enamoured by its beauty, we can go beyond it towards God. There, in God there is none of the brutality. There in Him, there is all sweetness.
So, that is the message of Arjuna getting request after seeing the Virat Rupa and getting confused and frightened by it, that this is not what one wants to look. One wants to go beyond this towards God. So, now when one is moving further towards God, at that particular point, in general, people turn towards a sort of impersonal spiritual conception that in Vedic terminology is called as Brahman.
So, okay, one goes beyond nature, nature is temporary, nature is material, nature is non-eternal. So, there must be something beyond that is eternal. And that is the all-pervasive spirit.
And the idea is one has to become one with that spirit. So, in the spiritual evolution, after, say, nature worship or nature acquisition will come, the spirit worship, the attempt to sort of identify with and devote oneself in a more of a conceptual or intellectual sense rather than a personal sense because one cannot have a personal relationship with the all-pervading spirit. But still identifying with that.
So, in that thought, now Arjuna is asking this question, Krishna has told Arjuna that, actually, this Virat Rupa is revealed from me and actually my form as you see it is higher than the Virat Rupa because it is I who revealed it. This is extremely rare. Then Arjuna asks the question, okay, it’s good that, so you are higher, but you are certainly higher than nature worship.
But then what about the alternative? What is the alternative? The Brahman worship. And that’s how this question comes up. So, now, looking at it, is this conceptual thought flow clear? You know, you look at the nature worship as a characteristic of goodness and, you know, within the spiritual realm, we could call, there is transcendental and in the transcendental, you can say, if you refer to transcendental as just beyond matter.
So, in the so, if this is ignorance, this is passion, this is goodness, beyond this is spiritual. So, in the spiritual, there can be the impersonal spiritual and then there can be devotion, where there is personal spirituality. So, the 11th chapter takes us beyond the goodness of nature.
Then the 12th chapter takes us beyond the impersonal spirituality. Yeah, good correlation. Yes, from a historical point of view, we can see the evolution of the understanding of the truth beyond this world.
In Indian history, when the Jains and the Buddhists, they basically rejected this world and tried to focus on a nihilistic, an understanding of spirituality as basically a rejection of matter without any positive conception. Then Advaita Vedanta came in where there was a positive conception, but the positive conception was not entirely positive. In the sense, there was a Brahman, but that Brahman was featureless.
And then a more positive conception comes up with ultimately with the Vaishnava Acharyas, culminating in Achintya Vidhabhira Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Good correlation. Okay.
So, could the Lord not have given the highest directly, instead of through this historical progression starting from Buddhism and Advaitism? Ultimately, Krishna can do anything. At the same time, yeah, at the same time, it is that there are certain historical circumstances, which sort of rule out certain possibilities. That means at particular times in history, there are certain things which people are receptive to.
And certain things people are just not receptive to. And although Krishna can change history and sociology in one strip, generally speaking, Krishna descends and acts or he sends his representatives to act in a way in which they sort of utilise the existing social forces to the propagation of the spiritual cause. So, from a historical perspective, I gave a class on how Prabhupada’s timing in going to the West was perfect.
Now, how Prabhupada, you know, the hippie movement which had started, started as a spiritual movement, a search for something higher beyond routine, mundane life of the American middle class. And that started more or less in 1960s with the flower generation. And it sort of peaked between 1965 to 1970.
And at the very time when Sri Prabhupada was there. And then after that, because they were exploring so much through drugs and free sex, the spiritual urge got lost and it just became drugs and free sex. And within a few years, after the whole counterculture movement died out.
So, Sri Prabhupada, in a historical sense, went at exactly the right time. Krishna could have made Prabhupada successful whenever he would have gone. But the way Prabhupada went, the way Prabhupada presented, now America was more receptive than ever before to that.
At that particular time. Generally, there are the historical circumstances. An expert dancer can dance anywhere.
But if there is a stage set up, then the expert dancer’s full expertise gets revealed in a very excellent way, in a pleasant way for everyone to see. So, just the setting of the stage does not decrease the credit of the dancer. The dancer still has to be expert to win the applause of the audience.
But still, the setting of the stage is also important. So, like that, the historical or sociological circumstances, they are the stage. And Krishna or the Acharyas, they come and perform at that particular stage.
So, that’s why we have to understand the cultural aspect and the spiritual aspect. In any Acharya’s teachings, the cultural aspect can be contextual. The spiritual aspect is eternal.
The cultural aspect, just because it is contextual doesn’t mean that it can be rejected. But it may not be entirely applicable now, as it was applicable at that time. For example, we see in Krishna’s times, Krishna had an extraordinarily large number of wives, 16,108.
But polygamy was quite common. But Srila Prabhupada, he established Krishna’s spiritual teaching in this world, but did not recommend polygamy within his school. So, like that, there are many aspects of the culture which may not be relevant right now.
So, the spiritual message is presented by the Acharyas according to the culture. So, cultural point of view, actually, the exploitation of the lower caste by the higher caste and the resentment against Vedic culture was such that the receptivity to Vedic spirituality would not have been much. In fact, from 5th century BC to almost like 6th, 7th century till the time Shankaracharya came, Buddhism and Jainism was ruling India.
Almost large parts of the world, of the country were ruled by Buddhist kings or Jain kings. So, today they might just seem to be small religions, but they were huge and influential at a particular time. In fact, so much was the influence that even against Chanakya’s wish.
Now, Chandragupta Maurya was made into a king from just a he was born as a, according to certain sources, he was born as a son of a royal society woman and then Chanakya made him into a king. But towards the end of his life, even Chandragupta got influenced by a Jain monk and he renounced the kingdom and became a Jain. And then Bindusar, his son became the king and Chanakya was so disgusted.
He writes that one of the rules that a king should follow is never associate with Buddhists and Jains. He says that why? It is not that he is so much against the doctrine, but Buddhism and Jainism are such passive passive ideas that a Kshatriya has to be positive, he has to be active, he has to be assertive, he has to be dynamic. And in Buddhism and Jainism, the whole idea just forget the world and transcend the world.
Go beyond the world. So that is not at all a suitable idea for a king. So the point which I am making is the particular cultural situation was such that other forms of spirituality were having very difficult to accept at that time.
Who? That was one thousand years later. Shankaracharya came in 6th to 7th century B.C. A.D. Yeah. Oh, because the whole idea is how are impersonalism and Buddhist thought related? Actually, yeah, but first of all, Buddhism and impersonalism they are basically intellectual clones with only the name being different.
Now, whatever are the characteristics of the shunya, basically those are the characteristics of the Brahma. Ultimately, the shunya is nothing. What is Brahman? They won’t say Brahman is nothing.
But Brahman basically doesn’t have any qualities, doesn’t have any activities, doesn’t have any form. It is not material. It doesn’t have anything to do with matter.
So essentially, conceptually, it is the same. And there was a Buddhist teacher, Nagarjuna, who was a very famous scholar in Buddhism. So he had talked about a two-level reality.
At this level, the world seems real. But when we go beyond that, then the world becomes, then we go beyond the world and we realise that it is unreal. It is completely false.
So that was essentially adopted by Shankaracharya in his two-level Brahman idea. There is a parmarthic and there is a vyavaharic reality and there is a parmarthic reality. So vyavaharic is, in the conduct of this world, you and I are different.
I and God are also different. But in the parmarthic law, there is nothing. So another thing that Shankaracharya’s Advaithic teachings did was, it sort of unified the followers of the Vedic culture, whoever they were there, into one rubric, into one banner.
Okay, whatever be the deity you are worshipping, ultimately you have to go beyond that and merge into Brahman. And that way he basically united everyone. So, at that time, that was extremely powerful.
So of course, another way to understand this is that it is not, Vedanta Sutra actually refutes Buddhism. Navivevanda, specifically it takes Buddhism doctrine and refutes it. Yeah, Shakadarshan also, but Buddhism also it does.
Navivevanda, how Buddha came 2500 years ago and Vedanta Sutra was written 5000 years ago. Then how can Vedanta Sutra refute Buddhism? So, the answer is that actually, Buddhist thought predates Buddha. The idea that we have to go beyond this world and there is a void to which we have to merge, that is, in a sense, Buddhism is an eternally reincarnating doctrine in this world.
Atheism is an eternally reincarnating doctrine. Impersonalism, voidism, all these are eternally reincarnating doctrines. They will always be there.
And depending on how influential are the proponents of these doctrines, those doctrines will become prominent or they will stay marginal. So, when Vyasadev is refuting Buddhism, he is not refuting specifically the ideas, specifically the historical Buddha, but the idea that predated the appearance of Buddha. So, they became prominent at that particular time.
And for those souls who want some spiritual seeming excuses to continue their defiance of Krishna, for them, voidism and impersonalism offer pathways for that kind of rebelliousness. So, that’s why they will always be there. And Krishna, in a sense, provides for them.
When we say, एको भहुनाम् यो विद्धाति कामान् That one maintains all others. So, विद्धाति कामान्, he maintains their desires. Those desires are not just the desires for sensual enjoyment.
That includes also the desires for intellectual gratification. So, Krishna only provides all these alternatives, all these various sort of speculative doctrines by which people who want, they can choose to rebel against Krishna. It’s just like a teacher who gives a multiple choice question.
The teacher only gives the wrong answers. I don’t think the purpose is that the student should study and then take the right answer. So, like that, Krishna only gives all, in a sense, all these alternatives.
And in the Padma Purana, it is described where this verse comes, पचिन्नम् भूद्धुमुच्छते मायावातमसच्छास्त्रम् मयाकल्पिता देवि कलो ब्राम्भणमुच्छते मायावातमसच्छास्चरम् पचिन्नम् भूद्धुमुच्छते So, Lord Shiva is telling this to Parvati Devi, मयाकल्पिता देवि, by me, oh goddess, Parvati Devi, कलो ब्राम्भणमुच्छते, in Kalyuga, in the form of Brahmana, मायावातम मायावातमसच्छास्चरम् It is not actually the teaching of Shastra, असच्छास्चरम् And what is it actually? पचिन्नम् भूद्धुमुच्छते It is covered Buddhism. So, he says that he teaches this for the purpose of, to accelerate Kalyuga, to separate the sincere from the hypocritical. Those who want to defy God and still appear to be spiritual, Mayavada offers an alternative for them.
So, you can see the effect of Mayavada in two ways. One is, it brought acceptability and respectability for Vedic culture within the broad Indian situation by refuting Buddhism. So, most people are generally, even if whatever they are religious, they are just culturally religious.
They are not ideologically religious. In terms of, many people come to Janmashtami temple. Now, they don’t have much ideological or philosophical understanding.
They are just culturally religious. So, that cultural religiosity was facilitated by the spreading of Advaitism by Shankaracharya. And that created a setting because even when Shankaracharya came along, Shankaracharya himself, he had his Narasimha Deity and he worshipped Narasimha Dev.
So, he did not entirely reject Deity worship. So, all that sort of Deity worship and Bhakti was facilitated by the broad establishment of the spiritual culture. But there were people who also want to be ideologically defiant.
So, for the general mass of people, the impersonalism sort of created a safe enclave for practising spiritual culture, Vedic culture. But for the sort of ideologues, it became a means for continuing to surrender to God by not surrendering to Krishna while still appearing to the spiritual. So, in that way, that ideology can serve different purposes for different people.
It’s clear? Okay. So, I was making some… What was the point I was making when you asked this question? Okay. So, now I was going to speak about how all this is related with the flow of the Bhagavad Gita.
So, that is centred around one critical verse 9.15 in the Bhagavad Gita. So, in fact, the whole 10th, 11th and 12th chapters are an unfoldment of 9.15. So, 9.15 we will recite before we go to the 10th chapter. So, So, Krishna before this has given the two poles.
9.10 is… I’ll just go a little bit in the flow. 9.10 is Mayadhyakshayaprakriti. And then Krishna talks about the extreme Mayavadis in 9.11 and 12.
Then he talks about the pure devotees. That is he talks about and then he talks about in-between. So, those who defy him, those who devote themselves to him and who are in-between.
So, these people have Jnana and they worship. So, how they worship? Krishna uses three alternatives over here. He says there ekatvena pruthatvena bahudha vishvatomukham.
So, vishvatomukham refers to the virata rupa, to the worship of the universal form. So, Krishna describes that briefly from 9.16 to 19. And he elaborately shows how universal worship of the universal form should culminate in his worship.
Because he is the revealer of the universal form in chapter 11. And another says chapter 10 also does the same thing. Because the vibhuti within the universe is a manifestation of his vibhuti.
Now, the other point of pruthatvena bahudha, that refers to the worship of the various gods, various demigods that is talked about in this 9 chapter itself, in the verses that talk about and then so 9.20 to 9.27 we can say. Where Krishna says that those who go to the demigods they get temporary results and if you worship me, you come to me. So, there basically the later part of 9 chapter is a contrast between demigod worship and Krishna worship.
So, ekatvena sorry pruthatvena bahudha is dealt with after this 9.20 till almost 9.34 where the glory of pure devotional service is contrasted with demigod worship. Then vishvatomukham is dealt with in 10th and 11th chapter. And ekatvena is dealt with in 12th chapter.
So, this ekatvena is not the same as mayavada. Mayavada and brahmavada are two different things. So, 9.11 and 12 talk about mayavada.
That is the option which Krishna has already condemned. He is avajananti mamuna. This verse is ekatvena is not so much the idea that I am god or rather I am the object of worship.
It is more conceptual awareness that say I and absolute are made of the same brahman. Therefore, I can aham brahmasmi. Aham brahmasmi is not necessarily a mayavadi utterance.
It is basically the realisation that I am brahman. And that Krishna has also accepted. Now, tattvamasi, it is a vedic utterance, it is a upanishadic utterance.
Tattvamasi also, what does it mean? It actually means that there is some sort of oneness between you and that absolute truth. The nature of that oneness is not explicitly stated. It is often used by mayavadis.
But the point which I am making here is that ekatvena in and of itself doesn’t convert mayavada. It just conveys the idea of oneness. So, this idea of oneness is what will be explored in the 12th chapter.
So, from the point of view of the Gita, this is the connection. So, these three alternatives between the two extremes of mayavan and pure devotion, three alternatives are demi-god worship, vishwaroopasana, and brahmanupasana. So, these three will be explored as intermediates between these two poles.
And, in exploring this, Brahmavad Krishna will see that he will not condemn or reject. He will not say this is moghahasa, mogha, karmanup. He will say that in 12.6 he says, klesho dhiktaras teshu.
It is troublesome. See, mogha means it is futile. But klesha means it is troublesome.
But still, they will also come to be gradually. There is a difference between the two. So, this is the connection from the textual flow of the Gita.
The immediate impetus for this question is that Arjuna is basically exploring and understanding various concepts that are familiar to him from the culture that he was living in. So, there is nothing directly in the preceding discussion in the Viratrupa which prompts this question. But now Krishna has said, okay, I am higher than the Viratrupa and my form is very rare.
Then Arjuna has this question, okay, you have told that we should worship you. Vat paramo. So, now what is better? Is it better to devote yourselves to you or to worship the impersonal Brahma? So, it is not a specific question originating from some specific statement that Krishna has made precedingly.
But this generic question arising from the culture in which Arjuna was living. So, let’s move forward now. What happened? Arjuna vacha evam satatayuktaye evam satatayuktaye bhaktas tvam paryupasate bhaktas tvam paryupasate ye capyaksharam avyaktam ye capyaksharam avyaktam tesham ke yogavittamaha tesham ke yogavittamaha So, evam satatayuktaye evam, evam means thus.
So, thus is referring to what was earlier. Those who worship, as you have mentioned earlier, So, those who always engage in bhaktas tvam paryupasate, they worship you like this. And on the other hand, ye generally refers to these.
In Hindi, they are loka. And on the other hand, ye capyaksharam avyaktam Those who are fixed on the akshara and avyaktam, the unmanifest and the imperishable, tesham ke yogavittamaha Who among them is the best? Now, we know the word tamaha is referring to, it is not referring to tamo guna over here. It refers to, like we have tara and tama.
It refers to uptama. It is the best. So, where has Krishna used this superlative sense earlier? Pooja tama, correct, that’s true.
He has used in 9.2. One more very important place, 6.47 yoginam api sarvesham madgatenantaraatmana shraddhavan bhajateyoma same yuktatamo mataha So, here is yuktatamo. So, what it means is yukta, yuktatara and yuktatama. It is the most intimately united with me.
So, that’s superlative sense. In English, we have good, better and best. So, best is the highest superlative.
So, like that, now Arjuna is recognising that both are good but which is, who is most intimately united with him? So, the phrasing of this question itself indicates that he is not referring to Mayavada. Because Mayavada is not at all united with Krishna. Krishna said avjananti and mauhasha.
So, the phrasing of the question is itself referring to people who are on the spiritual path and who are moving forwards. So, now let’s move forward and look at Krishna’s reply. Shri Bhagavan vacham Shri Bhagavan vacham mayy avaishyamano yema mayy avaishyamano yema nitya yukta upasate nitya yukta upasate shadhaya parayo petas shadhaya parayo petas teme yukta tamamataha teme yukta tamamataha Krishna’s answer is quite unambiguous.
mayy avaishyamano yema mayy is very clear unto me mano yema nitya yukta sevam yukta nitya yukta parayupasate upasate So, Krishna is clearly referring here to the first category of people. shadhaya parayo petas with transcendental faith parayashraddha What is the significance of parashraddha? Actually, even the Mayavadis have shraddha in bhakti. But that shraddha is not transcendental.
It is utilitarian. They do believe that by bhakti one can rise from the lower modes towards goodness. And one can even touch transcendence by that.
But ultimately to go completely beyond one has to give up bhakti. But that is not transcendental faith. That is just material utilitarian faith.
Krishna is telling shadhaya parayo petas and he says teme yukta tamamataha They are the most intimately united with me. So, after describing this now Krishna will explore the alternative. What has Arjuna said? What is the status of those whom Arjuna has referred to? yetvaksharama nirdesham yetvaksharama nirdesham avyaktam parayupasate avyaktam parayupasate sarvatragamachintyamcha sarvatragamachintyamcha kutasthamachalamdruvam kutasthamachulamdruvam sanyamendriyagramam sanyamendriyagramam sarvatrasambuddhaya sarvatrasambuddhaya te prapnuvantimameva te prapnuvantimameva So, Krishna again uses the two same words which Arjuna has used in his question, avyakta and akshara So, again it is clear what he is referring to yetvaksharama nirdesham and he gives further characteristics of that object of Arjuna nirdesham, sarvatragamachintyam and he says te prapnuvantimameva they will also attain me So, now in Krishna’s Prabhupada adds they at last achieve me there is no direct at last in the verse itself is this an imposition by Prabhupada? No, it is indicated in the next verse where is the klesho diktharasthesha So, Prabhupada is giving us what is the next verse over here at last they will come to me what he is saying is they will come to me imameva te prapnuvantimameva but what all they have to do So, Arjuna when he talks about the bhaktas he itself gives the sadhana evam sattva-yuktaye for the impersonal brahman what they have to do sanyamendriya gramam sarvatra samabuddhaya they have to become equipoised towards everything and they have to sort of become benevolent towards all living beings so basically they have to become equipoised in everything equipoised towards sense objects equipoised towards people equipoised towards situations and by that they can go beyond this world So, Ramanujacharya in his commentary analyses this section differently differently he he says this verse doesn’t necessarily refer to brahman and Arjuna’s question is not necessarily referring to brahman at all actually if you look at these characteristics these are all characteristics of the soul that are given in the second chapter of the Gita you know if you see 2.24.25 sarvatra gam comes achalam comes dhruvam comes achintya also comes like that there are 2.24.25 you see, these verses talk about these qualities achintyoyam so these are all qualities of the soul also so what Ramanujacharya says is that the question is at Krishna now you have described two ways of getting spiritual realisation one is directly devoting oneself to you that means fixing the mind on you and devoting oneself to you the other is by cultivating atma gyan so when he says the question of Arjuna is evam satyataye bhaktas tam parivartate ye chaapya aksharam avyaktam tesham keyo guptaram so ye chaapya aksharam avyaktam this refers to those who meditate on atma gyan rather than focussing on Bhagwan, they focus on oh I am not the body, I am the soul I am the soul and in this way they try to detach themselves from the material world and they try to gain spiritual realisation so which of these two paths is better so and Krishna says even by meditating on the soul by contemplating on spiritual identity, one will attain because how will that happen? first one understands that I am not the body I am the soul and then gradually one can over a period of time recognise that the soul is spiritual so the soul has to come from somewhere and then there must be some spiritual nature from which it is coming and there one can aspire to return back to the spiritual nature and they can also attain me so this is also a valid understanding so Prabhupada doesn’t give this understanding Baldevidya Bhushan uses this a little bit in his purport I have not referred to Baldevidya Bhushan’s commentary too much because he uses a technical categorisation of the sadhakas into three categories and then he analyses the whole Bhagavad Gita more or less from that framework so it gives a very coherent and excellent understanding of the Gita but then Shri Prabhupada does not use that categorisation of the sadhakas into three categories that’s why I have not used that over here because we would like to just stick to the text of the Gita and to Shri Prabhupada’s purpose and then have the Prithvacharya’s insights to illuminate as much as possible so here we will not go into this understanding of the Atma but it is also a valid understanding Krishna’s answer still remains valid actually the next person will refer to that okay actually when meditating on the Atma if you try to become spiritually perfect it is a troublesome process because the object of meditation is not necessarily very pleasant it is relatively static I am going to fix the mind in Krishna when Krishna is a person who performs so many pastimes and fixing the mind in Krishna and devoting oneself to Krishna is easier but if I just have to fix my mind on Atma what do I actually do isn’t it just while I am doing all my activities I am not the body I am the soul I am not the body I am the soul I am not the body I am the soul that is not a very pleasant meditation so in that sense this sort of meditation will be troublesome and normally Aham Brahmasmi is not necessarily accompanied with the idea that the Atma is a person we understand that I have I am right now a person but the idea could also come that okay my personality is just a product of illusion so even the Atma is not considered a person Atma is considered to be some spiritual existence the nature of that existence is also not very clear that is why the epithet Avyakta is also used over here and it is very difficult to make spiritual advancement with this kind of conception so that was mentioned by Krishna in the next verse so so and actually there is a Klesha when the mind is fixed on Avyakta there is Klesha because as I said again the object of meditation is not very satisfying Avyakta Hi Gatir Dukham the progress on that Gati can refer to destination Gati can refer to speed so moving forwards is Dukham so Krishna uses the word twice again the Avyakta comes twice and the unpleasantness the troublesomeness is also described twice Klesha and Dukham so it is very clear Deha Vad Biravapite so for the embodied soul which has become completely inactive is extremely troublesome it is not at all pleasant so the Jnana path where the one tries to meditate on the Brahman it does not offer a very satisfying object for meditation and it does not allow one to perform activities because all activities are material and all activities have to be given up that is why it is not easy to practise this path now after describing this again Krishna will contrast so first he said the devotees are better in 12.2, 12.3, 4, 5 he describes in Padmanabhava so there the path is troublesome and then why is this trouble not present in the devotional path Krishna will answer in 12.6 and 7 ye tu sarvani karmani ye tu sarvani karmani mai sanyasyam atparaha mai sanyasyam atparaha ananyenaiva yogena ananyenaiva yogena mam dhyayanta upasate mam dhyayanta upasate tesha maham samuddhartha tesha maham samuddhartha pruthyu samsara sagarath pruthyu samsara sagarath bhavaham inachirat partha bhavaham inachirat partha mayyameshit chetasam mayyameshit chetasam so he is describing the activity that a devotee should do and the reciprocation that the devotee will get from me ye tu sarvani karmani devotees they offer all their activities to me they make me the perfect God this matparaha is the same as 11.55 what matparamo its clear what Krishna is referring to again and then ananyenaiva yogena mam dhyayanta upasate ananyenaiva yogena the same word was used in 11.54 what was that my na tu mam shakya se drishtu, no no, what are the words bhaktya tu ananyaya shakya am evam vidho arjuna so ananyaya is also the same so the correlation is very clear, there is no ambiguity there is no scope for misinterpretation this is referring to this and this is referring to this, its very clear so what happens to such people, those who meditate on me tesham aham samudhartha I deliver them personally from material existence I extricate them mrutyu samsara sangherat so we know the picture of Krishna coming on Garuda Vishnu coming on Garuda and extending his hand and lifting the soul from material existence so in the Vamanapuram it is said that when a devotee devotes himself to Krishna actually the more and more the devotee devotes himself to Krishna Krishna finds separation from that devotee intolerable and that’s why Krishna personally comes on Garuda, picks up that devotee and takes him back directly to the spiritual world so tesham aham samudhartha and when will this happen nachirat partha it won’t take a long time, as contrasted with klesha over there and dukkha baddhirati, here it is nachirat partha it will quickly happen let the mind be fixed on me and by this one will attain I’ll come and rescue such a person so now here Krishna more or less completes the answer to Arjuna’s question over here and from here onwards now Krishna will describe how bhakti can be practised so Arjuna’s question in 12.1 extends from 12.2 to 12.7, he very clearly establishes that bhakti should be what is practised now practically how can one practise bhakti, that will be described from 12.8 to 12.12 so in a sense, Krishna first mentions bhakti in 7.1 you know mayya asakta manah partha so then the sort of the flow of thought ascends upwards upwards upwards till it reaches so the flow of thought moves from 7.1 till here 12.7 where the glory of bhakti is fully established all other conceptions are subordinated and harmonised ultimately with bhakti now when Krishna has taken his development of thought to its summit then he sort of drops a ladder of love a ladder of mercy ok this is the glory of bhakti but how can you come to that level so he gives multiple options so he will give various levels at which one can practise bhakti in the next series of verses so first he gives the highest level and then afterwards he moves downwards to lower and lower levels so let’s discuss these levels now so Krishna tells so Krishna tells fix your mind on me and let your intelligence be devoted to me fix your resilience also on me so when you do these two things what will happen actually what to speak of coming to me you will be residing in me only so you are as good as back with me only you are with me only so this is talking especially about offering subtle boy to Krishna actually Prabhupada writes in the introduction of the Bhagavad Gita that the art of Krishna consciousness is to fix the mind and intelligence on Krishna ultimately we are where our mind is if our mind is thinking about cricket we might be sitting in a college classroom but we are actually in the cricket field imagining what is happening over there so if our mind and intelligence gets attached to Krishna then wherever we are it doesn’t matter externally we can be doing various activities and this is essentially the instruction that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu gave to Rupa Sanatana Goswami now sir like a paramour now the idea is not becoming moral but as a paramour physically she may be in her a woman who loves the paramour she may physically be in her husband’s house but her mind and intelligence her heart are with her lover so like that Krishna says act like this you know just give your mind to me then you will reside in me this is the way to practise bhakti offer our heart to Krishna now this is the level of pure devotional service and when somebody cannot practise this pure devotional service then Krishna gives one level lower he describes … … … … … if it is not possible for your chitta to find samadhan in this you cannot fix your mind on me then abhyasa yoga practise, abhyasa is in the practise so the yoga of practise this is sadhana bhakti so practise sadhana bhakti and it is very significant Krishna says what is the purpose of sadhana bhakti it is … … by the practise of sadhana bhakti our attraction to Krishna increases our desire for Krishna increases so every day when we chant Hare Krishna, every day when we take we are taking darshan studying scriptures the purpose of all this is to increase our attraction to Krishna and even he says the same thing … … Prahlad Maharaj when he describes … … … … … the best education is that which involves offering the activities to lord Vishnu by which one’s attraction to him increases so the purpose of sadhana bhakti is to increase our attraction to Krishna.
And how does this happen? It’s basically a revival of our dormant love for Krishna which is presently misdirected. Now all of us as souls naturally have attraction to Krishna. So, we are all sort of suffering from amnesia where we have forgotten Krishna.
So some people ask this question, if you have a father and you want something from your father, you won’t chant Papa Papa Papa Papa. So why should you chant Krishna Krishna Krishna? So if you want chocolate from Papa, you won’t chant Papa Papa. Actually we don’t want any chocolate from Krishna.
The purpose of chanting the name of Krishna is not to get something from him. It is to revive our memory of him. And if some scriptures, some rituals, talk how you chant this many names and then your son will get married or this will happen or this, your health will get recovered.
Those are fringe benefits. Just like the parents may tell a child that okay you take this medicine, then you will get this chocolate. Now the child may think that okay the real thing is to take the chocolate.
And for that okay if I don’t take this medicine, I will take the medicine. But actually when a parent is perfecting, the real thing is the medicine itself and the effect that the medicine will put. That is curing the child.
And chocolate is just a fringe benefit. So like that sometimes even chanting of the holy names will be associated with some material benefits. For example, at the end of Vishnu Sahasranam there is an elaborate phalashruti.
And then it is described that the Kshatriyas will always be victorious, the Vaishyas will always have lots of cows and the Brahmanas will become knowledgeable. The phalashruti is given for everyone. That is true.
But then the phalashruti is also mentioned that one will go beyond material existence. So this is the actual benefit. They will go beyond the miseries of material existence.
That is also mentioned, but people don’t highlight that so much. You can highlight other things. Bhagavatam also gives these benefits.
For example, at the end of Putt Maharaj’s pastime, at the end of Bani Maharaj’s pastime, then it is told, okay those who hear this, they will get this benefit. Those are fringe benefits. The real benefit is the development of love for Krishna.
So that is the purpose of Abhyasa Yoga. It is maam icchaptum dhananjaya, to become devoted to Krishna. And now somebody may say, actually this is also not possible for me.
Then Krishna gives one more alternative. He says, work for me. Abhyasepyasamarthosi, abhyasepyasamarthosi, matkarma paramobhava, matkarma paramobhava, madartham apikarmani, madartham apikarmani, kurvan siddhima vapsisi, kurvan siddhima vapsisi.
So that there is a progression and this ladder is clear because it is abhyasepyasamarthosi. You cannot do abhyas, then what should you do? Matkarma paramobhava, make my work the most important thing of your life. And by doing your work for me also, you will return to me.
Kurvan siddhima vapsisi, you will actually come back to me. So I write these small articles in the Bhagavad Gita every day. So I wrote an article about this, locating ourselves on the Gita’s ladder of love.
So, what is happening over here? So the first level is 12.8. Offer the mind energy to Krishna, entirely live in him. Practise sadhana bhakti and fix the mind on him. Then actually this matkarma paramobhava, it has two sub-levels in it.
So the first level is direct, just do his work, that is render service to him. And second level is indirect, offer him the fruits of our work. So, in a sense we could say, this matkarma paramobhava is the level where brahmacharis and grahasthas work in these two levels.
Brahmacharis are doing Krishna’s work, and grahasthas are offering the fruits of their work to Krishna. Actually, offering the fruits of their work to Krishna is not Karma Yoga. Because in Karma Yoga, the ultimate goal is not very clear.
If the ultimate goal is known to be Bhagwan, then it is bhakti yoga, although it is presently being practised in the Karma Yoga stage. The idea of Karma Yoga primarily is that, one is more attached to one’s work than one is attached to Krishna. I’ll do it for Krishna, but I’ll do what I like to do.
Okay, I like to sing, I like to write, I like to manage, I like to do this, I like to speak, I’ll do this for Krishna. But other things, I don’t like them so much, I won’t do this. Yeah, whatever it is.
No, if I’m doing it for Krishna, then it is no longer Karma Yoga. It is actually bhakti, practised at the level of Nishkama Karma Yoga. See, generally speaking, how do you define a particular path? Is it just by the external activities? If it were only by the external activities, then we are using computers, we are travelling in cars, we are living in cities, we would be karmis actually.
So, actually the level of a person is determined ultimately by the motivation, by what the goal of the person is. So, if the goal of the person is beyond this world, that person becomes a yogi. As long as the goal is material, it is a karmikandi or a karmi or a vikarni, whatever, depending on how much that person is adhering to or defying scriptural morality.
Once the goal becomes beyond this world, then it becomes Karma Yoga. And once the beyond the goal is clear and it’s Krishna, then it is actually bhakti. But it is bhakti practised at the level of Karma Yoga.
So, all of us also, we cannot say that we are shuddha bhaktas. So, in a sense, in our Krishna conscious practise, our morning programme is like we are practising at the level of 12.9. We are doing sadhana bhakti. And the rest of the day, we are working for Krishna.
So, we are living at 12.10. So, in this way, Sri Prabhupada has given us a facility through the Krishna conscious movement by which we can fit ourselves at a ladder, at a rung on the ladder that is compatible, that is suitable for us. And by this, we can gradually rise to the higher levels. Krishna reassures, by doing this also, you will come to me, you will attain me.
So, in that sense, Krishna gives the assurance. So, we will just discuss the next words. And the words after that will be a little complicated.
We will discuss that two more elaborately. So, now, if you can’t work for me, then just pronounce the fruits of your work. And by that, get Atmavan.
Atmavan means, like dhanavan means possessor of dhana. So, Atmavan means possessor of the soul. What does it mean Atmavan in that sense? It means that become spiritually conscious, become possessive of your soul, become the doer of your soul.
At least, if I’m attached to material things, I want this, I want that, then those things possess my consciousness. I try to possess them. So, become, if we renounce our attachment to those things, then what happens is, we can stay in spiritual consciousness.
So, become Atmavan. So, Krishna doesn’t directly talk about, say, just doing Nishkama Karma Yoga exclusively in terms of offering the fruits of work to him. So, he includes that in the previous verse itself.
Work for me, that’s why I said, when work for me, there are two levels implicit. Matkarama Paramahamsa directly work for me, or offer the fruits of your work to me. And the level below that is, okay, if you cannot, Prabhupada writes in the Parpot over here, okay, if you cannot offer the, because of certain circumstances, if you cannot offer the fruits of your work to Krishna directly, then at least offer them to some good cause.
By offering them to a good cause, we at least develop selflessness. If I’m using all the fruits of my work for my own enjoyment, then I’m becoming selfish. So, at least I’m becoming selfless.
So, when, for example, we had a midday meal or food for life programme, and people do charity for that. Now, what is objectionable is, if the charity that they could directly have given to Krishna, they give that to such programmes. That is objectionable.
Because what is happening is, they could be practising Bhakti at a higher level, but they’re being relegated down to a lower level. But those who are anyway not going to do charity directly to Krishna, let them give some charity to a humanitarian cause that is connected with Krishna. So, what is objectionable is, in a sense, if not desirable, if in the temple people come, and in the temple there are big, big advertisements of midday meal and food for life.
And people think that, okay, instead of giving money in the hundi to the temple, to Krishna, giving some donation for Krishna’s deity or some direct devotional service, actually both of these are equivalent, and this is much better. Because people are being fed over here. So, if the two are portrayed as equivalent, and people are given alternatives.
It has happened in some temples. In some temples, when you come out of the temple, I’m talking about ISKCON temples only, you come out of the temple, one side has become an ISKCON life member, other side has donated for food for life. So, now, from the people’s point of view, both of them are equal.
And you think, oh, this is much more. If something tangible is happening, people will get fed. So, if we portray both of them as equal, then we are not actually representing Krishna’s teachings properly.
But if we just outlaw the other, say that this cannot be done by ISKCON, then also we are not representing Krishna’s teachings properly. Isn’t it? Because Krishna also accommodates this as one of the levels. But it should be clear that that is a lower level.
That is a lower level. But those who cannot practise at a higher level, we should be able to accommodate them and give them a facility. So, that way, humanitarian work is not against the principles of devotional service.
It becomes against only when it is portrayed as an equivalent substitute. Because when we portray it as an equivalent substitute, people immediately take it as a superior substitute. This is much better.
Something practical will be done for people. So, they will start seeing it as not only equivalent but superior. That’s where it becomes wrong.
But in the hierarchy, sarva karma phalak tyagam, try and sacrifice the fruits of the work. And most people, they will be ready to sacrifice it more for humanitarian cause if they don’t have philosophical understanding or devotional attraction. So, gradually they become connected to Krishna, they will develop the philosophical understanding, they will develop the devotional attraction also.
And then later on, they may give to Krishna’s cause. And this happened with many influential people. They were introduced to Krishna consciousness through such charitable programmes.
And then they got connected with devotees. And then they started practising devotional service. And then they contributed devotional causes also.
So, what is a lower level on the ladder should not be rejected or outlawed. But at the same time, it should not be made as an equivalent level. So, now after this, Krishna will give the, in the last verse, he will actually give four levels.
And those four levels are probably among the most confusing levels. So, 12.12 is probably one of the most complex verses of the Bhagavad Gita. So, we will discuss this tomorrow early morning fresh, tomorrow morning.
Yes, yeah, good question too. Yeah, that is both a donation for deity and donation for Krishna. They are both devotional services only because it is directly connected with Krishna only.
Generally speaking, if somebody is a person who, if you know a person is say earning money by immoral means, then in general, it is best that we do not use that donation directly for our devotional service. See, the money gets purified. But ultimately, we have a certain level of consciousness and we will not be pure enough to absorb it.
So, we may become contaminated. So, if somebody is earning money by immoral means, and that person wants to do donation of a part of it to Krishna, we do not have to refuse that. Of course, we should not just accept that and tell him continue your immoral activities and give money to Krishna.
We should also try to educate him. We can give him some books. If that person is receptive, we can also give him higher understanding of life.
But if money is coming from sort of dubious sources, then it is best to offer directly to Krishna. But otherwise, if there is a person practising average level of morality, then both are from his perspective equivalent, whether contributing to feeding the Vaishnavas or serving the deities, both are equivalent. So, that person can be, according to his own inspiration, that person can be.
The purificatory potency of both from his perspective is equivalent, because both are being offered to Krishna. But from our perspective, how much can we absorb? We have to see our Adhikara and accordingly decide that. Clear? Thank you very much.