Gita Overview Mumbai 13.8-12 Role of bhakti in jnana and of jnana in bhakti

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Today we will try to complete the jnana section in the Bhagavad Gita, at least 13.8 to 12. Before that, one small note about 13.1. In some editions of the Bhagavad Gita, the first verse of this 13 chapter, which is comprising the six questions, is absent.
So these are called the recensions, of a book. Recension means, when a book is, a manuscript is written down, at that time, sometimes there are some small alterations which come up in different manuscripts. So these are inconsequential, because there are minor errors that might happen, while the transcribers are copying the manuscripts.
So generally when Acharyas, for example, Srinivas Tirtha is writing a commentary on, a sub-commentary on Bhagavad Gita, on the Vyasa-Viswa-Madhavacharya’s commentary, then he may point out that, okay, we have some 12 Madhava-Mathas, and they all have the copies of Madhava’s commentary in the Bhagavad Gita, and we have found that, okay, some words are slightly different. So normally at the start or at the end of the book, in scholarly books, there is a note on the recensions, that, okay, all these are the books that are there. This is the manuscript at this place, this is the manuscript at this place, this is the manuscript at this place.
And this content, this particular sentence like this, this content, this was like this. And then based on the overall understanding of the teachings of Madhavacharya, say, I’m giving Madhavacharya as an example, and based on the understanding of which manuscript was written when, sometimes they have to infer that this was the original meaning. So this is not a very hazardous thing, because generally most of the mistakes, just like when we are doing proofreading, you know, it’s easy to point out a mistake, because there are certain standard rules that are there in grammar.
And when the one word gets slipped from here, one word gets misspelled, and it can be easily made out. So these sort of recensions are quite common, and Madhavacharya explains that when he started writing his Mahabharata Parinirnaya, he went through many recensions of the Mahabharata. Before he decided to write, before he wrote, and then eventually his conclusion was that at that time itself, it’s almost like 700, 600, 700 years ago, Madhavacharya felt that the Mahabharata is a severely corrupted book, that how much it is interpolated is very difficult to determine.
And that’s why he gave his Mahabharata Parinirnaya, in which he gives broad principles by which to understand the Mahabharata. And then the Mahabharata, once we look at those, those conclusions of the Mahabharata, then we can see Mahabharata accordingly. So the Bandarkar Research Institute in Pune, it’s a, it’s a major oriental research institute.
So they had almost like several hundred scholars working for over 11-12 years to compare all the, all the major available manuscripts of the Mahabharata. You know, it means, for example, if we have in the Adi Parva, in chapter 11, there are say 15, 55 verses. So you get all the Adi Parva chapter 11s, put them in one place, and then look at all the verses say, Adi 1.11, all the verses.
And then compare, okay, this is here, like this is here, like this is like, most of the time they’re not major differences. Especially, there are a lot of differences that can come up when the books are not widely available. But books that have been widely circulated, like the standard books, Bhagavad Gita, Bhagavatam, even Vedanta Sutra, and even Vishnu Puran, to a large extent, those books are like a canonical, they’re important books.
Generally, the variations within them are not too many. The recensions are very minor, even if they are there. So, by this sort of critical analysis, one can find out which manuscript contains what, and then based on this whole analysis, what is prepared is called as a critical edition.
A critical edition means final edition, which, which contains as accurately as possible to know what was there in the original, original book. So, sometimes this requires certain inferences. And if some scholars don’t really understand the heart of the tradition, then they might arrive at some erroneous understandings.
But in general, especially for the important books, there are no major problems. And the Bhagavad Gita as well as the Bhagavatam are relatively very stable books. That means, Sridhar Swami’s Bhagavatam was almost 800 years ago.
Sridhar Swami, we don’t know the exact date when he was there. But he was surely, substantially before Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Because by the time Chaitanya Mahaprabhu appeared, his commentary was considered a classic.
And for his commentary to have been considered classic, it must have been at least 100, 200, 300 years old. And we know that he came definitely after Shankaracharya. That is 6th, 7th century.
And he, so 11th, 12th, 13th century, so that’s almost, so he has commented in the Bhagavatam. And the verses that are there in his commentary are the same that are in Prabhupada’s commentary. So we know that the Bhagavatam is preserved as it is, at least for the last 800 years.
And that itself is significant. Because these 800 years were the years when there was the maximum turbulence in a sense. In the past, whenever there were Muslims, Buddhists or Jains ruling, they did not vandalise the Vedic culture so badly as did the Islamic invaders.
So it’s a remarkable testimony to the continuing integrity of the Vedic texts, that even through such a turbulent period, the texts were not tampered. They stayed as it is. If you look at the Bhagavad Gita, it’s even more so.
Shankaracharya was roughly in the 7th century, and now it is almost 1500 years till Shankaracharya appeared. And even today, the commentary that we have in the Bhagavad Gita is the same as the verses that are there in the Bhagavad Gita, are the same as what are there in Shankaracharya’s commentary. So in that sense, the Bhagavad Gita especially is a very stable book.
And in general, the smaller the book, the more difficult it is to interpolate things in it. Because small books can be very easily preserved. And that’s why in the Bhagavad Gita, there are practically very, very little variations in the recensions.
Very occasionally there are variations. So the only places where there’s a major difference is this 13.1. Apart from that, practically all the Bhagavad Gita that are there today, at the major places, they all contain the same standard 700 verses. So this verse is not present in some versions of the Gita.
And in a sense, this doesn’t matter. Because we say the Vedic scriptures are important, but their importance is not just in the text themselves. The texts have inspired a living tradition.
And it is that tradition that continues on keeping the text alive and relevant. The Gita lives through those who live the Gita. And that’s why, just like a medicine.
If a medicine is given to an original patient, and that has cured the patient. And if today, that medicine has been passed through maybe 100 people afterwards, and it has come to us today. But if today it cures the patient, then we understand it is the same medicine that has been passed down.
So even if there are 100 people in between, we cannot trace accurately whether through all those 100 people it was preserved accurately or not. But what we do know is that if we got the medicine today, and the medicine acts and cures people today, then it is the same medicine. So like that, if you look at the effect of Bhagavad Gita on Arjuna, and if you look at the effect of the Bhagavad Gita on people today, it will be remarkably similar.
What happened to Arjuna at the, what was his understanding, and what was his action? His understanding, we know at the middle of the Bhagavad Gita, after the Chittu Shloka Bhagavad Gita, 10.12.13.14.15.16, he says, param brahma param nao pavitram paramam bhavan, that you are the absolute truth. He accepts Krishna as the Supreme Personality of God. And what was his action? We know at the end of the Bhagavad Gita, we also know from the Mahabharata that he surrendered and served Krishna as his devotee.
So accepting Krishna as Bhagwan and taking up the path of bhakti, this is what we see in Arjuna’s life. And this is what we see today in the lives of practitioners of the Bhagavad Gita. So in that way, we can understand that the Vedic literature in general and the Bhagavad Gita in particular is given for curative purposes, for correcting people’s conceptions, and for correcting people’s actions, for curing them in both ways.
And the same cure that happened thousands of years ago is happening today. So in that way, we can understand that the essential integrity of this text is also maintained, even if there are some issues over certain verses getting slightly changed. So now some people say that, those who say that this 13.1 is not there actually in the Bhagavad Gita, their argument is that there is no reason for Arjuna to ask a question about certain words.
There is no connection for Arjuna to ask questions about these six points, because there is no precedent for this. However, if that is the logic that is used, then we could say there is no precedent directly for the 12 chapter questions also. We could use that for many places.
And more importantly, that doesn’t still solve the problem of why Krishna starts suddenly speaking on this topic. And Krishna’s answers are very pointed. Even if somebody doesn’t consider 13.2 to be an answer to a question, what Krishna speaks is very pointed.
It’s like a clear definition. This is called Kshetra, this is called Kshetrajna, this is called Gyan. So it is almost like Krishna is very specifically defining and explaining precise terms.
And it would seem very relatively, very incoherent or not in the right flow for someone to just start explaining terms without giving any context at all. So Krishna doesn’t give any context. So the context that can be understood is from the words of Arjuna.
So even from the flow of the text, the presence of the questions fits better than its absence. And we don’t have to take up kajals with those who say that the question is not present. Some people may say like that, okay, that’s fine.
At the end of our life, what will matter is not how many verses there are in the Bhagavad Gita, but how many verses are there in our heart. Isn’t it how much we are remembering Krishna? So that’s why there is Bhaktivinoda Thakur talks about Saragrahi and Bharagrahi. So sometimes getting caught in the details can just be an unnecessary burden.
So that’s why our Acharyas generally have talked about Arjuna’s question and they also acknowledge in some places that okay, some people say that this verse is not there. That is also fine. If those people want to take that position, that is also okay.
That’s the position they want to defend. The general position of Prabhupada was that don’t squiggle too much over the details. There’s no need to split hair.
Move forward and focus on the essence. Is that clear? Yeah. How many years back can we trace the manuscripts? Generally in the Indian weather, manuscripts don’t last for long.
Even if you make manuscripts with, nowadays we have paper, in the past there were leaves. So actually manuscripts which are written on leaves, leaves don’t last for more than a few decades. Few decades is difficult.
And that’s why we will hear in that story of when Gadadhar Pandit wanted to teach Srimad Bhagavatam to, who was it? Srimas Acharya? He went from one devotee, Srimas Acharya. You know he came to Gadadhar Pandit and he wanted to, was it Srimas Acharya? And he said because of the tears, the Bhagavatam had got completely wiped out. And then he went to Vrindavan and he got the Bhagavatam.
No, he was in Puri, he wanted to study in Puri. Then he came to Bengal. And when he came back from Bengal to study the Bhagavatam, Gadadhar Pandit had disappeared from the planet.
And then he was just devastated. And then he thought I’ll go to Vrindavan. And when he went to Vrindavan, he got a vision that he’ll go to Vrindavan and study under the Goswamis.
When he went to Vrindavan, he heard people crying in great sorrow and he said, Rupanathan Goswami has disappeared from the planet. And one after another and finally, he eventually studied under Jiva Goswami. So, the point I was making is, this may not be because of old age, but just tears.
If tears are one way that can sort of wipe away the text, then water can wipe it away, the weather can wipe it away. So, that way, actually, Indian weather may make it worse, but no other books also, and it is not the Bible or the Quran, or even Shakespeare’s works, which are only 700 years. No manuscripts are available, practically speaking.
So, only recently have we got technology by which we can keep manuscripts for long. But then, so that’s why a few months ago, Harish and Haripu were taking a seminar on how in the Bhaktivanta library over there, they’re preserving the manuscripts. So, generally, manuscripts are available only of a few hundred years old.
Beyond that, the manuscripts are not available. And that’s why they have this whole system of preserving the manuscripts. So, in the Vedic tradition, they would have what is called a Sangrahalai, not a Granthalai, Sangrahalai.
So, Granthalai is like a library, which is fine where people can come and read books or books are preserved, but also places where books are copied and preserved generation after generation. So, that is an important service in any literary tradition. And those who do this, the part writers, they are actually transcribers, they get special training in how it is to be done.
So, a few hundred years old manuscripts may be available, but beyond that, not much. No, see, if you, Prabhupada clearly told us that if you try to impose a material definition of perfection on spiritual things, it will not work. For example, Prabhupada has asked this question, by Jayadvait Maharaj, you know, how do we understand the spiritual master sometimes commits mistakes.
So, Prabhupada said, the spiritual master never commits mistakes. But we sometimes see the spiritual master quotes the verse half or he sometimes quotes the verse wrong. That was a common verse which Prabhupada quotes differently from what is given in the Bhagavad Gita.
So, Jayadvait Maharaj was asking about this. He told me this personally also when I had met him. So, he asked Prabhupada.
But we see that actually the verse is quoted wrong, as compared to what is given in the scripture. So, then Prabhupada said, that means you have a wrong conception of perfection. What do you mean? Then Satsvarupa was also there in that conversation and he said that.
Prabhupada, that means, what does that mean? Prabhupada said that pure devotee is perfect in the sense that he is perfect in his understanding of Krishna and his guidance for others to serve Krishna. In the siddhanta that he teaches and the instructions that he gives on how a devotee can come closer to Krishna, in that the pure devotee is perfect. But we can’t expect material perfection.
Prabhupada’s English pronunciation may not be materially perfect for the standard of English pronunciations. It may have a heavy Bengali accent. Some things may be mispronounced also.
So, that doesn’t impair. Similarly, we can’t impose material standards of perfection on something that is spiritual. So, the essential texts that have been preserved, as I said, that’s why the books where there are commentaries, it becomes much easier to check their authenticity.
That’s why I said, Sridhar Swami’s commentary, anybody can say this verse is there in the Bhagavad Gita, this verse is there in the Bhagavatam. But how do we know that that verse is there? So, if the commentary that has been written 1000 years or 1500 years ago, so the commentary is there. And if a commentary is there, the verse has to be there, isn’t it? Otherwise, how will you have a commentary? And if there is no commentary for a particular verse at all, and there is no mention to that verse also in the particular book, in that particular commentary, then we can understand why that means this verse was not there at that time.
So, the presence of a commentary for a book makes it very easy, relatively easier to check whether the book has continued without any changes in it. So, that’s why, as I said, in the most turbulent years of Indian history, almost last 1000 or 1500 years, the fact that Bhagavad Gita and Bhagavatam have stayed the same is a significant fact. And that indicates how seriously the task of the preservation of scripture has been taken up in the tradition.
No, we cannot trace back to Vyasadeva. Actually, if we see that way, what are we meaning by trace back? Actually speaking, we can’t even trace back to Buddha also. You know, there’s so much debate about when Buddha appeared.
So, that Buddha was somewhere 2500 years ago, but there’s so much debate with 2700 years ago, 2600 years ago, 2400 years ago. And this is true about everything. You know, Jesus, we know that actually, Christmas is generally considered to be the birthday of Jesus.
But it’s almost certain that Jesus was not born on Christmas. Almost certain. You know, Christmas was actually a pagan festival.
Pagan means the festival of the Roman Empire at that time. And because as the Christians at that time were under persecution, and they wanted to celebrate in a way that would not bring attention to them. So, they adopted a date for the celebration of Christmas that matched the date of the celebration of the pagan festivals.
So, the pagan, the Roman people also think, oh, they are celebrating our festival only. But they were doing their own celebration. So, now it’s all, even Christian scholars also admit that Jesus was not born on Christmas.
So, it may seem a little shocking, but it’s well known. It’s not something which is a matter of dispute. No serious Christian scholar will consider that, actually, the claim that Jesus was born on Christmas.
Yeah, I mean, Jesus was not crucified. Prabhupada said that Jesus was a yogi and he acted as if he died. And then he came, Prabhupada said that he came to India.
But Prabhupada was not a Jesus scholar. And that’s why, you know, we don’t have to make that as an absolute statement. You know, what Prabhupada heard from different sources, he quoted that.
So, Prabhupada, I think I told you about this. There’s a book called the Book of the, not Mormons, what is that book? Aquarian Gospel. Aquarian Gospel.
It is as if Jesus is speaking, it is about the life of Jesus. But it is a very, it is a recent book. It was written a few hundred years ago.
So, when Prabhupada was in America, some devotee gave him that book. And Prabhupada started reading that book. And then in that book, it is said that, and next, a few days later, the Ratha Yatra festival was there.
And Prabhupada said, you are Jesus Christ. He was also a devotee of Jagannath. He came to India and he came to Jagannath Puri.
And he worshipped Jagannath in Puri. And that is said in the book, the Aquarian Gospel. And now, the devotees, they were a little taken aback that Jaravindra Swarup was a scholar.
And he went and asked Prabhupada, Prabhupada, is this book, the Aquarian Gospel good? Prabhupada replied, that part of Jesus going to Jagannath Puri is good. And then, Jaravindra Swarup would explain to Prabhupada that, you know, this is, it’s a recent book and it is this. And Prabhupada started laughing and he said, and he never quoted the book afterwards.
So, the point I’m making here is, the point, actually, there are many things, if you go back into history, they are very difficult to trace. So, major events are difficult to trace. That’s why, you know, that literalist approach can keep us perpetually insecure.
You know, if we, I gave a long answer on my website on this question. One boy asked this question that, you know, is there any one finding, which if it comes out to be true, then the Vedic scriptures will be prone to be false. So, I explained that, so, that actually, you know, falsifiability, this is called the criteria of falsifiability.
Falsifiability means, if this turns out to be, if this statement turns out to be false, then this particular whole concept or theory or notion is all false. So, actually, falsifiability is not used as a criteria even in science. Because generally, all scientific theories, which are considered to be true, are considered true by a converging set of logical inferences.
I’ll repeat, a converging set of logical inferences. That means, okay, so how do I know Newton’s theory is true, or gravitation is true, or Newton’s laws of motion are true? In the future, I may find that some object, I throw it up, it doesn’t fall down. It’s possible.
You know, I mean, who can say that it can’t happen? It seems so illogical to us that we will feel it’s not possible. Everything has to fall down. But how can we say it won’t happen? And this may seem a little too absurd, but there are so many other laws, which are not so intuitively true for us.
So, therefore, actually, whenever science considers, science or some theory is considered to be correct, it is not they have any solid proof for it. Okay, if this theory were true, then this is how it should happen, this is how it happens. If there is theory, this is what should happen.
So, they have multiple inferences, and then all these inferences converge to a particular point, and they consider theory to be correct. And it’s not that because one thing goes wrong, that’s why they say that all this theory is false. They don’t reject it like that.
So, that’s why we don’t base our faith in the Vedic scriptures on the material unfalsifiability of the scriptures. We base our faith in the scriptures on the spiritual transformation that they bring in our hearts. That’s why our focus should always be on this central point of the spiritual potency of the scriptures.
Actually, this is an important point, we may have to deviate a little bit, but where is it? I think I discussed this in a Ishopmishad class. This is the main point I wanted to show. See, by science, generally we are talking about the body of knowledge that is materially available to us.
So, the scriptural wisdom can be classified into these three broad categories. The scriptural wisdom that agrees with science, by science I mean, whether the scriptures have been as it is or not. This is something, how do I know it is? There are three parts in scripture knowledge, that which agrees with science, that which contradicts science, and that which transcends science.
So, actually speaking, our essential interest is neither in that which agrees with science nor that which transcends or disagrees with science. For example, we may say that the scriptures are telling in the Vedic wisdom tradition, there is a Pythagoras theorem that is given long ago, in the Baudhayanti Sutra it is given, or the embryology is talked about in the Bhagavatam, there are many things like that, which are very advanced knowledge, there is Vimanashastra. So now, these are things which agree with science, there are some things which contradict science.
For example, Vedic cosmology might be there, or say, the way the universe came about has contradicted with Darwin’s theory. So, these are agrees and contradicts. But actually, whether there is a spiritual world beyond this world and there is Goloka Vrindavan, which is the highest in the spiritual world, there is something which science can neither prove nor disprove.
It is just beyond the reach of science. So, our essential interest is in that branch of knowledge which transcends science. And that, how do we know that it works? It is by practical transformation that it brings around.
That’s what we focus on. Is that clear? When Madhvacharya met Vyasadev, did he confirm his writings with him? Possible, but again, this is a method of, say, a personal mystical vision. We know that Madhvacharya actually met Vyasadev and Madhvacharya showed, these books I have and this is what it is.
As soon as we open the door for personal mystical visions as the basis of authority, then it raises many other questions. So, it can be used as a praman, no doubt. It is an important praman also.
But this has its limitations. And none of our Acharyas have used that as a source for talking about scriptures directly, personal mystical visions. So, they may be, but that’s not the essential source of authority.
We are talking about a textual integrity and textual integrity is a very literal, tangible thing. Is this verse as it is, as it is, as it is? And suddenly when we bring into that arena, personal mystical vision, it is like we are mixing up two pramanas which are quite different. And then this can open Pandora’s box, it can open a variety of people claiming mystical visions for their own, for their own ideas.
So, let’s move forward. Asante ranabhishvangaha putradarigrahadishu putradarigrahadishu nityam chasamachit tattvam ishtanishtopapathishu maichananya yogena bhaktiravyabhicharini vivikta desha sevitvam aratirjana-samsadhi adhyatma-jnana-nityatvam tattva-jnana-artha-darshanam etad-jnanamiti-proktam ajnanam yadato anyatha So, this describes 20 characteristics of knowledge. Sometimes the Bhagavad Gita may have multiple lists, but every list has its different focus.
So, for example, now till now, where all have we come across lists? 12th chapter was one long list. At the start of 10th chapter, there was a small list, buddhir-jnana-masam-moha. It was only, I think, 10.5 and 6. So, that’s one list.
And before that, maybe 4th chapter, there was a little bit of listing of qualities, starting from 4.19, yasa-sarvasama-arambha-kama-sankalpa-varchitaha. So, 4.19 to 4.23. And now, after this again, in the 16th chapter, there will be qualities list. 16.123 describes the list of the qualities of the, those who are godly, divine.
And then afterwards there are demoniac natures. So, now, the qualities, especially say 13th chapter, 12th chapter, 16th chapter, there are longer lists. So, sometimes we wonder whether these lists are repetitive and if they are, then what is the purpose? Actually, if you look at those lists carefully, we will find that though there are certain similarities, there are some substantial differences also.
In the 12th chapter, the list is talking about the qualities that a devotee, that will endear a person to Krishna. That means the person wants to be a devotee of Krishna, person wants to serve Krishna and then how can he become dear to Krishna? By having these qualities. So, the focus there is on what qualities a devotee should possess.
Here, in this 13th chapter, these qualities are actually primarily the qualities of a person who is seeking knowledge. The 13th chapter to 18th chapter are called the Jnana section of the Bhagavad Gita. And in this section, the focus is on Jnana Marga.
And in Jnana Marga, Bhakti is one element. And that’s why, among these 20 elements, Bhakti will be treated as one element. If you see in the 12th chapter, what was the common thing? Ok, such a devotee is dear to me.
So, that was the common denominator. This is a devotee who is dear to me. So, devotion was like a common underlying point in that list of qualities.
Here, devotion is just one quality. Now, if you go into the 16th chapter and see the list of qualities, there is no mention of devotion directly. Abhayam, Sattva, Shamsuddhi, Jnana, Yoga, Vastati, we will see those qualities when we come to them.
But there is no explicit mention of devotion because generally those who are godly, those who are of a divine nature, their focus is primarily on Sattva Guna. Just like we will see in the 18th chapter when Krishna talks about the qualities of a Brahmana, he doesn’t mention Bhakti as one of the qualities. He mentions Astikyam.
So, Astikyam means faith in the Vedic scriptures. So, yeah, faith in the scriptures. So, each of these has a different context.
And here in the Jnana Sadhana, what are the primary qualities? This has been discussed about. So, we won’t go into each of these qualities, but we will primarily see how they fit into the flow of the Gita. So, Amanitvam, actually, knowledge begins with humility.
Kenopanishad says that one who thinks he knows does not know. One who knows, knows that he does not know. The more we know, the more we realise how little we know.
That actually brings humility. Amanitvam, then Adambitvam. So, Amanitvam means one doesn’t seek out honour.
Dambha means actually, when I have qualities and I don’t seek respect for that, that is Amanitvam. When I don’t have qualities and I still seek respect for that, that is Dambha. So, there is a slight difference between the two.
Sometimes we pretend to have certain qualities so that we can get respect from others. So, that is Dambha. And not doing that is Adambitvam.
And Krishna talks about Acharya Vyapasana. Vyapasana says this is important to actually serve the spiritual master, to worship the spiritual master and to gain his blessings. And then most of the qualities are about how one needs to be detached from worldly things.
Essentially, the path of Jnana Marga is becoming equipoised towards everything material so that one doesn’t get entangled in it. And that is the centre of all these qualities. Anahankaraiva, Indriyarthasivairagyam, all these qualities.
Now, a very important point is, Janmabhrutya Jiravyadi Dukkha Doshanudarshanam. So, Darshan can mean sight. Darshan can also mean systematic perception.
Philosophy, Darshan is called as Darshan in Sanskrit. And what is the purpose of philosophy? Actually, the way of looking at the world. Shat Darshana, six different ways of looking at the world.
A systematic way of looking at the world. So, Anudarshanam. So, it is systematically seeing that these are the miseries of material existence.
And then, actually Prabhupada does a systematic explanation of each of these qualities. So, I won’t go into that here. One significant one is Viviktadesha Sevitvam Aratirjana Samsadhi.
So, these are in general qualities if we see. Viviktadesha Sevitvam means living in a secluded place. And Aratirjana Samsadhi, staying away from the association of common people.
So, in a sense, the path of devotion doesn’t emphasise seclusion or loneliness. It emphasises more of being in association. Because in the path of Jnana, all relationships are considered to be illusion.
Illusion. Illusion. To be causes of bondage.
And that’s why they try to sever all relationships. And the idea is that even the relationship with one’s Guru ultimately has to be given up. Because ultimately we are Brahman and we just have to enter into Brahman.
So, of course, Krishna is not talking about Mayavada over here. But the Jnana Marga is a Sadhana. This is their idea.
That actually, it’s like negative axis, positive axis and zero. So, Jnana is the zero point over there. In the zero point, there is neither material attachment nor spiritual attachment.
And to come to that stage of being free from both, one has to sever all relationships. That’s why people stay in seclusion. This is a good question.
This is in principle that we can stay aloof from people even when we live among worldly people. See, when we study the Bhagavad Gita, there are various ways to study it. In the sense that, you know, we can look at a specific section and see what is that section saying.
That will go into the details. Close up view. What is this section actually saying? And then we can move further away and get the bird’s eye view.
For example, we start a chapter. We say this verse from this verse is saying this. This verse from this verse is saying this.
That’s more like a bird’s eye view. And when you go into each verse and discuss, what does this word in this verse mean? And what is the context by which this word can be assigned this meaning? When we come to a close up view, then from a bird’s eye view, the whole book is pointing towards the conclusion of the Bhagavad Gita. That is of Bhakti.
The whole book is pointing towards that. And specific sections can also have Bhakti applications. But in the specific context of the Gita, they may not be referring to Bhakti.
So as Bhaktas, we consider every word of Krishna important and we can find how it can apply in our life. See for example, in the 18th chapter when Krishna says that, that which tastes like poison in the beginning will taste like nectar. Now he is actually talking this about Satvaguni pleasure.
But we can use it also for devotional happiness. And we can correlate that with how the holy name tastes not so sweet for a jaundiced person. And then we can say that this principle is also talked about in the Bhagavad Gita.
So technically, that verse is talking about Satvik happiness. But that same principle also applies to transcendental happiness. Transcendental happiness may not taste like nectar in the beginning, it may taste something like poison.
But by tolerating the poison, we will eventually come to the nectar. So like that, see the verses of the Bhagavad Gita, you know that there are, when we are asking questions, there can be open-ended and close-ended questions. For example, if somebody is investigating a person, were you at the house at the time of the murder? And the answer is yes or no.
They are close-ended questions. Where were you at the time of the murder? Oh, I was here, I had gone here, here, here, here. So this is an open-ended question.
Open-ended question means the length of the answer can vary. So like that, when we study the Bhagavad Gita, we can study it in a close-ended way, a specific verse, or we can study it in an open-ended way. Close-ended way means look at the context and say what it means.
Such an understanding can help us understand the flow of the Bhagavad Gita. But it may not be so relevant from the practical application point of view. Because every verse may not be applicable in our lives.
So a very good example of this, how this approach to approach can lead to contradictory results. In 6th chapter Krishna says, go to jungle and sit down in a secluded place. Now if I look at this verse from a close-ended way, that verse is telling, go, leave your home, go to the forest.
But Hrishlaprabhupada says in the purport that this method is not practical, therefore one should chant Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna. You say, what is this, a commentator or a canceller of the original verse? But actually, how can a commentator actually contradict what is given? But commentator is not contradicting, the commentator is giving what is the conclusion later, earlier, over there. So for a technical, systematic understanding of the Gita, often we may focus on the close-ended meaning of the verses.
In this context, this means this, this means this, this means this. And for those who want to really go into a scholarly study of the Gita, this sort of close-ended study is also important. But from a broad application point of view, we need an open-ended study.
See, the verse, I can give many examples for this, I will just conclude with one quick example. The verse, which talks about, which we use only for offering food, 3.13. Technically speaking, it comes in the Karmakanda section and it is talking about the performance of fire sacrifices and the fruits that come from fire sacrifices, how they are sanctified. Now, Hrishlaprabhupada doesn’t stick to that open-ended, that close-ended meaning because that would be irrelevant.
How many people are going to perform fire sacrifices? And certainly, how many people are going to perform fire sacrifices before every meal? Isn’t it, you know, in Kali Yuga? So, Prabhupada takes a principle, the principle is of sanctifying whatever we are consuming by offering it to a higher being. And then he tells us, you sanctify it by chanting and offering to the deity and you offer it to the highest being. So, generally speaking, if you want to apply scripture, we don’t stick to the close-ended meaning.
We have used the open-ended meaning. Clear? So, I was saying that, the whole series of verses is talking largely about equanimity, because sadhana of Jnanis is equanimity. So, be equipoised means material gain and loss.
So, this is a significant point. Even in the path of Jnana, bhakti is required. Chakravarti Path makes this point that without some element of bhakti, no path can give it success.
So, even Karmakanda requires some element of bhakti. Ashtanga Yoga also requires some element of bhakti to meditate on the Supersoul in the heart. Jnana Yoga also requires bhakti.
Now, there is a difference between avyabhicari bhakti and ahaituki bhakti. Avyabhicari is undistracted. Ahaituki is unmotivated.
So, unmotivated means I don’t want anything else. So, avyabhicari need not be ahaituki. Avyabhicari means unbreakable, undistracted.
I am practising bhakti and I don’t give up the practise of bhakti. But the Jnani’s bhakti may not be ahaituki. The Jnani’s practise bhakti so that they can get liberation.
So, this is not considered pure bhakti. And we will see the same word Krishna will use again at the end of the 14th chapter also when he is talking about transcending the modes. So, we will talk about avyabhicari bhakti several times.
So, avyabhicari is basically undistracted. So, even the Jnanis have to be determined in the practise of bhakti and be undistracted. Although they are not pure hearted.
And I was talking about Vivektadesha Sevidvam. So, on the path of bhakti is stress association. But even as, especially as brahmachari lives in often solitude, we may sometimes feel lonely.
Of course, we don’t feel physically lonely because we are surrounded with so many people. But you know, loneliness is not just a physical state. It’s more of an emotional state.
People can be in a crowded Mumbai local where others’ bodies are crushing into them and still they may feel utterly lonely, you know, because their hearts are not linked with anyone. So, like that, the same thing may sometimes happen to us in brahmachari life. And we feel that, okay, I am surrounded by so many devotees, but I don’t have deep relationships with anyone.
So, actually, deep relationships don’t grow overnight. There are two points about this. That first is that, because of this loneliness, people feel that maybe I am feeling so lonely in brahmachari life, so maybe brahmachari life is not suitable for me, sort of thoughts may come up.
So, the point is that there is a difference between loneliness and solitude. The solitude is a state where a person is alone but doesn’t need the association of others. Whereas loneliness, where a person feels the need for others but doesn’t get that need fulfilled.
So, solitude can be very helpful for spiritual seekers because solitude allows us to be introspective. You can think how seriously am I practising bhakti? What am I doing right? What am I not doing right? What should I be doing? So, it allows us to introspect. Solitude is helpful.
Of course, it depends on whether certain people are introverts, certain people are extroverts. So, how much solitude people need, that will vary from person to person. Some people gain strength in association, some people gain strength in solitude.
We’ll have to see what is our nature. But we don’t necessarily think that because I don’t have close relationship, that means that I am not suited for brahmachari life or I am feeling lonely. Actually, at whatever times when we are lonely, we can actually turn inwards and use that as an opportunity for introspection.
That’s one thing. And secondly, generally loneliness goes away, not necessarily by forming a relationship based on physical intimacy. It’s not necessary that one has to have a relationship with the opposite sex to give up loneliness.
Sometimes, it’s not necessary that sometimes that may lead to also further problems because the problem may not be just in the problem within us where we are not able to form relationships properly. So, the same problem that we face with other devotees, we may face with a spouse also. So, some people may emotionally and physically need what grahastha ashram provides.
But just loneliness in and of itself shouldn’t be taken as a reason for feeling that the ashram one is improperly situated. In general, even in grahastha life, if a husband and wife are just focused on each other, I like you, I like you and then that likingness doesn’t stay for long. Even in grahastha life, I read an article, romance has a shelf life of nine months.
What that means is that actually, researchers did some investigation. When people fall in love, they say, what actually happens? So, they studied the brain of people and they found that neurology cannot give us a complete understanding of what happens of anything as far as emotions are concerned. But the idea is that, when a person seems to fall in love, some new chemicals start getting secreted in the brain and that’s what starts making people very excited.
But mysteriously, for futuristic people, those chemicals stop getting secreted after a few months, three months, five months, six months, seven months, nine months. And after that, that initial attraction just disappears. The same person is there, but that attraction no longer lasts.
So actually, even in grahastha life, it’s only when the husband and wife come together for some higher cause. For example, even if they’re not religious, if they say, we get children and they think that now it is our responsibility to take care of the children, then that common cause brings them together much stronger than just physically or emotionally liking each other. Similarly, in devotee circles, when we bond with some other devotees for a cause that is greater than our own pleasures, immediate pleasure, then that will actually remove loneliness.
So if I’m doing a particular service, say my service is writing, and then I find some other devotees also committed to writing, and then we come together and start doing some literary project together, then that will lead to a real deep relationship. So relationships, I wrote an article once that actually happiness is never a product, it is always a byproduct. What that means is that if we chase happiness, we will never get happiness.
When we try to do something greater than our own selfish interests, then automatically as a byproduct, happiness results. And to a large extent, that applies to relationships also. If I think, I want to develop a relationship with him.
Okay, that’s fine. I may ask some questions, I may go and talk with that person, I may do something. But how long will that go on? It’s only when I start doing some service with that person, then I can have a regular interaction with him.
And then we come together at a much deeper level. And then the relationship goes deeper. So that way, if we feel lonely, then rather than just looking for something outside what Brahmacharya Ashram offers, we can look for some service which we find meaningful.
This is very important. We should find that service meaningful. Everything in Krishna consciousness is important.
But not everything may seem important to us right now. Okay, I may not feel so inspired about say, book distribution, but I feel inspired about duty worship. So we cannot just choose our services initially.
But at least if we know that this is what my attraction is, and by doing this, we can gain strength from that service. So when even with our relationships, when we start bonding with people for a cause that is greater than ourselves, then that takes the relationship much deeper and that frees us from the feelings of loneliness. So often, that’s the point which I’m connecting with here is that, that actually by looking in words, and when we think about our life, we find out, okay, these are the things which I seem to like the most, even within devotional service.
And that’s not necessarily sense gratification. If we like something within devotional service, that could be Krishna’s mercy to help us connect with him. And that way we can keep steady in our spiritual life.
So, one understands that spiritual knowledge is the eternal knowledge. Everything else, material knowledge is temporary. One seeks philosophical knowledge to understand the actual truth.
Krishna says, this all is knowledge. And everything apart from that is actually just ignorance. So Krishna talks about knowledge in terms of qualities, like we discussed in the Isopanishad purport.
He doesn’t talk in terms of, say, information. So knowledge is not just that which informs. Knowledge is that which transforms.
That’s why Krishna is talking about knowledge in terms of the transformation that it will bring about. That’s why he says, if you have knowledge, then it will bring about humility, it will bring about detachment, it will bring about fixed devotion. It will bring about perception of the evils of birth and death.
And this can be seen another way also as that by cultivating these qualities, we will develop knowledge. The relationship is symbiotic. Those who have knowledge, they have these qualities.
And by cultivating these qualities, we develop knowledge. And that way, Prabhupada explains that when Krishna says this is Jnana, this is, Prabhupada will explain the purport that this is not the interaction of the 24 elements. This is actually the means to get out of the entanglement of those elements.
That is the third and fourth and fifth lines. This is not the interaction of the 24 elements. That refers to the earlier verse, etad kshetram samasena savikaram udhaharutam.
So the previous verse talked of, ichchadasya sukhanduka, we talked of in the morning, that is the transformation of the material modes. Prabhupada is saying this is not the transformation. This is the end result, the means by which one can come out of this entanglement.
So by cultivating these qualities, one can gain liberation. So when Krishna talks, this is Jnana, that is, this is the process by which one can get Jnana. And in the next verse, he will tell us that when one gets Jnana, amrutam ashnute, one attains immortality, one attains liberation.
So we will discuss that tomorrow. Thank you very much.