Gita Overview Mumbai 16.1-7 Understanding pravrtti and nivrtti

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
So, we started the 16th chapter today. Long ago we had a presentation in ISKCON communications about how not to present Krishna consciousness.
So, there is one devotee who was distributing Bhagavad Gita and he said, here take this Bhagavad Gita. You can read the 16th chapter. You will find yourself in it.
You will find yourself in the 16th chapter and the first three verses you will find me. It is a very self-congratulatory way of preaching. It is very alienating.
But actually the divine and eponymic natures are present in both of us. Nadeva Asura Sampada Vibhaga Yoga is called as. So, it is interesting the Sanskrit word is Sampada and Prabhupada in general keeps the English usage is simple and conventional.
So, Sampada is not exactly nature. Nature is Prakriti. So, Prabhupada, the word Sampada actually is related with our Sampatti, the same root.
So, it is not just that these divine and demonic people have a divine and demonic nature. Actually, they consider those qualities as their treasures. So, the demoniac people consider lust, anger, arrogance, harshness as treasures.
They look forward to increase it more and more. People who are ungodly, people want to become more and more lusty, people want to become more and more sarcastic, people want to become more and more harsh. So, it is not just the qualities that we have, but also the qualities that we cherish that defines our nature.
We may have any ungodly qualities right now, but if our goal is to develop godly qualities, then we are on the right track. So, in the Vedic culture, especially in the Bhakti path, where we are is not considered as important as where we are looking. Where we are, somebody might be in Tamoguna or beyond Tamoguna also, but Lord Maharaj says, Swapacham Varishtam.
He says that even a Swapacha is better than a Vipraad, Vishadguna, Duryodhana, Dharmendra, Nabha. He is better than a Brahmana. Why? Because the Brahmana has turned away from Krishna.
On the other hand, the Swapacha is devoted himself to Krishna. So, where we are is not as important as where we are looking. And that is the lament of Lochindas Thakur’s song also.
He is saying that I was right in the next lake, but I stayed thirsty because I never drank from that lake. He is talking about how the mercy of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was available, but I didn’t get it. So, the theme in this chapter, as connected with the previous chapter is that Krishna is talking about the upper and the lower parts of the upside down banyan tree.
And that’s why the emphasis in these verses will be Jatasya, Abhijatasya in this verse as well as the next verse also. That these people are born with these qualities. Now, born doesn’t mean that they’re destined to be like.
All of us are products of our past, but we are not prisoners of our past. The difference between the two. We are products means, yes, we have been shaped.
If we have had Tamasic lives, we might have Tamasic tendencies, but we are not prisoners. So, that’s what this whole chapter will talk about. And it will conclude with Tasmachastram Pramanam.
So, what frees us from our past is Shastra. The Shastric guidance enables us to act in a way by which we become free from our conditionings gradually. So, Krishna will start with Abhijatasya, that people are born with these kind of qualities.
So, first there are the divine qualities. Abhijatasya Bharatah So, Bharatah, they are born with these. Bhavanpi, Sampadam, these are the divine Sampadam.
Now, it’s interesting that these qualities, the list actually refer to all the four Ashrams and all the four Varanas. Prabhupada will elaborate that later in the purport. But the point is that even Shudras can be godly.
If the Shudras are trying to live according to Dharma, then they are considered godly. So, they are Abhijatasya, they are born in Shudra family. But it’s not that Shudra birth itself is doomed.
Even among Shudras, there can be Shudras who want to go down and Shudras who want to go up. So, actually Prabhupada explains that Abhayam Satosham Shuddhi, this is the characteristics of Sanyasi. You know that Sanyasi is very fearless in travelling to all parts of the world and experiencing Krishna’s creation and sharing Krishna’s wisdom with the world.
So, Sri Prabhupada himself is a personification of this, how he went all alone in old age to America. And Narada Muni also, even when he was a small child, at the age of five when his mother passed away, he just went through the forest in search of a suitable place for meditation where he will find God. Abhayam Satosham Shuddhi.
So, the Sanyasi’s goal of existence is purification, Satosham Shuddhi. And one aspect of purification is cultivation of knowledge. Jnana Yoga Vyavasthiti.
Systematically cultivate knowledge. So, now like this, I won’t go into all the qualities because that will take a long time here. But we will focus on the principles.
Prabhupada has elaborated all these qualities in a nice plainish purport. So, Dhanam, Dhamascha, Yajnascha. So, Dhan, Dhamma and Yajna are qualities for the Grihasthas.
And Swadhyaya, the father characteristics of Brahmacharis. This you can read in the purport. The important point here is, everybody, whatever be their ashram, if they cultivate these qualities, then they can become Daivi Prakriti.
Now, it’s interesting, you will see there are some contrary qualities. See, Achapalam. Achapalam means what? Not having any fickleness.
Chapala is chanchala. So, Achapalam is determination. So, Prabhupada explains that this Achapalam, Tejaha, these are qualities of a Kshatriya.
And in a sense, they contrast with the earlier qualities I described, Ahimsa. Ahimsa is non-violence. Ahimsa is not a quality for a Kshatriya.
It is for a Brahmana. So, let’s look at one, two important points of Prabhupada’s purport over here. So, Prabhupada talks about an ashram.
And then he describes how Chitendra Mahaprabhu was so strict in avoiding the association of women. And then, after that he describes. So, Prabhupada talks about those who don’t perform tapasya.
The theory that there is no need of austerity in life, that one can go on speculating and everything will be nice is recommended neither in the Vedic literature nor in Bhagavad Gita. So, it’s interesting that Prabhupada categorises Bhagavad Gita as separate from Vedic literature. He says neither in Vedic literature nor in Bhagavad Gita.
So, when we say that is the Bhagavad Gita a Vedic book? Yes and no. See, in terms of technical categories, it is not. If you want to have technical categorisation, then the Bhagavad Gita is not exactly a Vedic book.
It is not Shruti, it is Shruti. But in terms of essential message, actually it gives the same message. So, Shrila Prabhupada often talks that Bhagavad Gita is a Vedic book, Vedic literature.
So, even when we present people, we have to recognise the difference between essential similarity and technical categorisation. So, most of the technique from the technical categorisation point of view, the Gaudiya literature will not be considered Vedic. It is considered to be Bhakti literature.
Bhakti is the conclusion of the Vedas. So, in that sense, it is Vedic. That’s why in our offences to the holy name, we have Vedic literature and literature in pursuance of the holy name.
So, in the presence of the Vedic version. So, but he is saying that austerity, not doing austerity is not recommended anywhere. Because it is only by austerity that there is purification, just as by some sort of discipline a person gets cured.
So, this is a very systematic purport. And Shoucham means cleanliness not only in mind and body, but in one’s dealings also. So, Prabhupada, this is for the mercantile people.
Now, when Shila Prabhupada talks about Naati Maanita, Naati Maanita means mana is honour, Naati Maanita, one should not expect honour. So, you know, in Vedic culture, today there is a propaganda that the Shudras were looked down upon, untouchables were treated as worse than humans. Now, it has definitely happened in some cases, but that was not the Vedic model.
The Vedic model is that every living being is respected according to his capacities and his nature. And the person is in that position, that person becomes satisfied. Because the whole modern focus has always been on how Varanashram created discrimination.
But actually, Varanashram not only separated people, it brought people together also. The people of the same Varanas would come together very strongly. And basically, there are even before the colonial motives took over in the British government of India, there are many things where many Western visitors who came to India and they actually searched around, they observed India and they said that the Indian economy and Indian society is so well structured.
So, basically, Varanashram provided, the whole system of Varana provided for an extended family. Now, beyond one’s own family, if one Varana was like an extended family and people would come together based on that. So, naturally, when one group of people come together, we can look at it two ways, or you know, you’re getting alienated from others, or you’re coming together with others.
Now, as devotees, we come together. Now, when there is devotee association, somebody may say, oh, when you become a devotee, you’re going to be disconnected from the rest of the world. So, by becoming a devotee, you’re creating fracture, friction and fracture from society.
But that is not the essence. The essence is that there is a larger family, larger community to which you belong. So, the Shudras, they will be satisfied in their position.
See, the great problem in modern society is that we have practically the whole world for comparing with, and that is a recipe for dissatisfaction. All of us, when we practise, when we do anything within the social circle that we are in, we want to have a sense of belonging, and we want to have a sense of respectability. For example, if I’m a Brahmachari, then I want to become known as a say, I want to know if I’m a writer, if I’m a preacher, if I’m a counsellor, whatever, I would like to do that service well.
And in that circle that I am in, I would like to have a sense of belonging and a sense of respectability. This is not in terms of ego, this is a natural human requirement. We need acceptance, we need to be valued.
But when the circle with which we are comparing is not a small circle, but it is the whole world. For example, today, people see the whole world through the media, through the television, through the movies, and no matter what kind of new car I have, new dress I have, new house I have, I’m comparing with the whole world. So, there is a fish, and the fish has its own pond.
And when the fish becomes big in its own pond, it will be satisfied. But take that fish, which is quite big in its pond, and put it in the ocean, and there are big sharks and whales in that, and the fish becomes insignificant. So, actually the way to be satisfied is to find a small pond and become a big fish in that small pond.
On the other hand, if you just try to go into a big ocean and then try to become big in that, no matter how big we become, there will always be somebody bigger than us. You know, even if I want to become big, I say I want to become the wealthiest person in my community, say I am in Marwadi community in Mumbai. Then I become, then I think I want to become the wealthiest person in Mumbai.
Then I want to become the wealthiest person in Maharashtra. Then the wealthiest person in India. Then the wealthiest person in Asia.
Then I want to become the wealthiest person in the world. Then I want to become the wealthiest person in the history of the world. And by that time, I become history.
So, this is an endless quest. So, now, why am I talking about this small fish in a big fish in a small pond? The whole Varanashram created small, small ponds for different communities. So, every Varanah would be like a pond, and every member of that Varanah could strive for respectability within that.
And that’s why the word Krishna uses is na-atimanita. He is not saying na-manita, na-atimanita. So, every person gets a sense of respectability and value in their own community.
But when people are comparing, when Shudras start comparing themselves with Brahmanas or Kshatriyas, now they may superficially feel, oh, the Brahmanas are living in luxury, they are not doing hard work like us. But then actually they can’t, they are told to do that they can’t do it because their nature is different. See, when people are not engaged according to their nature, there are two results.
One is that they themselves are not satisfied. And when they can’t act according to nature, then because they don’t feel inspired to do what they are told to do. So, they often get into nonsense.
So, that’s why sometimes people who, people from cities, when they go to villages, think how do you people live without television? How do you live without internet? How do you live without technology? Life must be so boring. But actually, people who live in the cities, their life is, no matter how much technology they have, their life is boring. Why? Because they have disconnected themselves from the realities of life.
And when they start living in an artificial way, as I told earlier, the stimulus has to keep becoming higher and higher and higher and higher. The shock, the stimulation. So, similarly, when you put yourself, when people put themselves in an artificial situation and try to become great in that, there is no end to that.
So, na athi maanitha doesn’t mean na maanitha. It means that they had respectability. But it was not that, the injunction is that they should not crave for a disproportionate respect according to their nature.
So, when, why do people feel bored to a large extent? It is because people are forced to do the things that they don’t like to do. You know, most people, they just get into jobs which just pay them more. And then they are not really happy doing those jobs.
They would have preferred to do something else. And they do that for the sake of work, but that doesn’t give them much satisfaction. So, they have to get satisfaction somewhere else.
And that’s why they become so wild about, wildly passionate about entertainment and things like that. So, these are all qualities which Krishna talks about. Apaishunam means no fault finding.
It’s a very striking word. Prabhupada translates apaishunam as not just no fault finding, he says aversion to fault finding. Aversion to fault finding means person doesn’t have any joy in finding faults.
We may still find faults as a duty if we are in the position of teaching someone and to guide that person. But one doesn’t get any joy in fault finding. To the extent we don’t get joy in fault finding, to that extent, we are qualified to find faults.
To the extent we get joy in fault finding, to that extent, we are not qualified. Why is that? Because in a sense, if we see from a spiritual vision, whatever faults a person have, they are all the results of the conditioning of the person. And all conditionings are essentially bhava roga.
So, when a doctor is treating a patient, the doctor doesn’t get joy in seeing the sickness of the patient. The doctor may have to tell, okay, this is your disease and this is what you have to do for treating. But the doctor doesn’t get joy in that.
So, if the doctor starts delighting in seeing the sickness of the patient, the doctor cannot do his job properly. Similarly, we may have to tell people their faults. And one of the things that happens is if people see that we are delighting in telling their faults, then their faulty also goes into the defence.
And then they can’t learn from this. So, this is how Paishvinam is striking. Any questions about this? Let’s move forward now.
So, here Krishna is describing the qualities, dambha, darpa and abhimana. So, pride, conceit, arrogance, they all seem similar. There is a slight difference between the two.
So, you remember I explained amanitta, madambitta. What is the difference between the two? Do you remember I discussed that? And still you parade, yeah. So, which is dambha is seeking a praise for qualities which you don’t have.
So, that is basically pretence. So, dambha, darpa and abhimana. So, actually dambha basically refers to showing off, what one doesn’t have also.
Darpa refers to okay, I have qualities and I want praise for that. Abhimana means ostentation. I deliberately want to display.
The focus is different. In darpa, it’s like I want to be praised. In abhimana, I want to parade.
Parading and praising, getting praise is the same overall in terms of psychology, but in terms of practical emphasis. Now, there are people who are egoists and there are people who are egotists. What is the difference between egoists and egotists? Ego, yeah, yeah, egotist, that D means talk.
Talk, talk, talk, talk. As soon as you tell them, you know, Prabhu, last time I had such a sickness. Last night I was feeling so sick, I couldn’t sleep all night.
Oh, you know, six years ago, I also had a sickness, the whole night I could not sleep. And before you can complete your sentence, that person will speak for 15 minutes about his sickness. So, that person’s tongue has a perpetual autobiographical board going on.
Everything that starts, the person starts speaking about himself. Just as there is a difference between egoists and egotists, like that there is a difference between Darpa and Abhimanyu. And krodha, parushya me vacha.
So, now again, krodha and parushya is the reference of action and speech. Krodha is anger in terms of physical aggression, parushya is harshness in speech. Parushya me vacha.
So, a person may be angry in terms of having a short temper, but parushya means the person likes to speak in a cutting way, likes to be sarcastic, likes to be basically harsh. So, Chanakya Pandit says that one of the qualities of a spiritualist or of even a pandita is what? Atmavat sarvabhutesh. This is everyone like oneself.
So, actually, one of the reasons why the demoniac do not, are not sensitive, are not respectful is because they actually can’t connect with others. Now, they don’t think of others as human beings only. They think of others basically as objects in their enjoyment.
And because of that vision, they just treat them okay. If I want to treat them harshly, I will treat them harshly. If I want to use them, I will use them.
So, this attitude. So, this is the Asuri Sampada. And when Krishna talks about this, he will elaborate this a little later.
So, in three verses, he is talking about the Devi Sampada. In one verse, he is talking about Asuri Sampada. Now, he will say that the general characteristics in the next three verses and then he will start describing the Asuri Sampada.
So, he has described these two Sampada and then he immediately describes the consequences. Devi Sampada, Vimokshaya. It will lead to liberation.
And Nivandhaya Asuri Mata. The Asuri Sampada will lead to bondage. Now, when Arjuna hears this, he becomes anxious.
He thinks that I am going to fight a war. And just now, Krishna has said that the Devi Sampada people are Ahimsa. And Kshatriyas, when they fight, they speak harshly, they challenge each other.
That is Parushya. And anger, the violence is because of Krodha. So, I am angry, I am aggressive.
So, I am an Asuri Sampada person. And therefore, I will become bound. Krishna immediately assures him.
Where does Mahashucha come again? 18.66. The same thing. Do not fear. Do not doubt.
Do not lament. Sampada is Daivin. Actually, your Sampada is Daivi.
Why? Because Kshatriya, as per dharma, has to fight on occasions. So, when one is acting according to dharma, that is not considered to be Asuri. Even if that activity involves some violence.
Now, after describing this, Krishna talks about the general principle. 18.66. So, there are these two kinds of living beings, Daiva and Asura. Now, just now Krishna talked about two kinds somewhere.
They are different. They are the bound and the liberated. Here, even the godly and ungodly, both are bound only.
They are both are Kshara, but one is on the way to liberation, the other is on the way to further bondage. So, it is like that is a meta category and this is a subcategory within the meta category. So, Kshara, Akshara.
Among the Kshara, there is Daiva and there is Asura. Now, Krishna uses the significant word Vistarashah. Vistarashah means elaborately.
So, I have spoken elaborately about Daiva Prakruti. So, where has he spoken? He has spoken three verses. So, why is it considered elaborate? Yes, he has spoken about the godly qualities repeatedly, starting from the 9th chapter when he talks about devotees, 10th chapter when he talks about the qualities that emerge from him, then again 12th chapter when he talks about a pure devotee, about those who are dear to him, 13th chapter when he talks about the characteristics of those in knowledge.
So, all those people are godly people. Daiva Vistarashah Prakruti. So, Krishna is not referring just to the three verses that he has spoken earlier.
He is speaking about the people, all the earlier references are there. So, all those references had specific contexts. Daiva Vistarashah Prakruti.
So, the character summary of the chapter is 1 to 9 gives qualities. There are qualities which lead to activities. Qualities are more of inner features, which are more study activities come and go.
So, lust is a quality, sex is activity like that. So, first Krishna will talk about the qualities of the divine and demoniac people, that is 1 to 9 and then 10 to 18 we will talk about the activities of the demoniac. And then after that 10 to 18 we will talk, then 19 to 22 he talks about the consequences.
And in a sense we could say that the causes of their activities are their qualities. But actually it is not just the quality, it is their attitude, it is their worldview. So, we will look about those causes, causes of demoniac activities.
And then Krishna will conclude by a choice between the divine and the demoniac, two verses, Yajastham namah srujya and Asmachastham namah. So, this is how the 16th chapter 24th verses are divided. Right now we are in the first section of talking about the demoniac qualities are about to start.
So, Vistarasya haprao, Krishna has spoken about all this earlier. Now when he is going to speak about the demoniac, he prefaces that by one more description. Pravrttimcha nivrttimcha jananavidur asuraham na saucam naapichacharo na satyam teshu vidyate So, pravrttimcha nivrttimcha.
So, what is the normal meaning of the word pravrtti and nivrtti? Pravrtti marg and nivrtti marg. What does it mean? Leading towards, leading backwards. Something more? It’s true, leading towards and leaving.
Pravrtti basically means, pravrtti means inclination. So, pravrtti is what is one’s inclination according to which one should act. So, how the Vedic scriptures work is that, yeah, it’s okay.
So, pravrtti refers to two things here. Pravrtti is our inner inclination and the corresponding scriptural injunction that guides us for acting according to our inclination. So, when we are referring to our inner inclination, yeh meri pravrtti hai, yeh meri pravrtti nahi hai.
So, a brahmana will have a sort of scholarly intellectual pravrtti, will not have a money making pravrtti. How is it pravrtti is considered? Yeah, I’ll explain. Pravrtti basically means to do action according to one’s nature.
So, lobha pravrttirarambha means that according to one’s nature, one’s acts. So, in general, the pravrtti marga, as we talked about, the scriptures of the karmakanda are called as pravrtti marga. So, pravrtti scriptures are concerned with action and nivrtti scriptures are connected with withdrawal from action and they are referred to the jnana marga.
So, bhakti is not related with either pravrtti or nivrtti. It is actually beyond that because that is we act according to the transcendental principles. So, of course, to some extent the Bhagavatam description of bhakti is inclined towards nivrtti in the sense that it focusses on Parikshit Maharaj announcing the world and focussing only on hearing and chanting and the Bhagavad Gita’s description of bhakti focusses on pravrtti.
So, although both talk about bhakti, there’s a difference because the context of the Bhagavad Gita is to inspire the hearer to get into action. The context of the Bhagavatam is to get the hearer out of action. So, although both are talking about bhakti, the emphasis of both is different.
The emphasis of both is different because the context is different. So, bhakti may be the same. It’s like somebody just wants to say I want to chant 64 rounds constantly and you say no, don’t do that.
You should travel around and preach and somebody says now he’s become old and he’s been diagnosed with some paternal disease and that person says I want to keep travelling and preaching. So, no, come to Adham and stay and focus on your chanting. So, depending on the context that is there, the same, both are practising bhakti only.
Both are being taught about bhakti only. But depending on the context, some person may be told that you preach and you will draw. There is a famous pastor of Prabhupada that one devotee told Prabhupada, Prabhupada, I am so fallen.
Prabhupada replies to him that I need many fallen souls like you who can help me to share Krishna consciousness all over the world. The devotee was saying that I am so fallen, I cannot preach Krishna consciousness. No, I need fallen souls like you.
Another devotee wrote to Prabhupada saying that Prabhupada, I want to assist you in delivering the whole world. Prabhupada went back, delivering the whole world is good, but first we should deliver ourselves. Then the whole letter was about how to do sadhana nicely.
So, although it is the same spiritual master, but depending on the person’s context, the person may give different instructions. So, in every scripture, there is a contextual side and there is an eternal side. So, the Bhagavad Gita practically sort of derides the Gyanamarga only because Gyanamarga is not to be recommended for us.
On the other hand, I discussed earlier, Uddhava Gita strongly recommends the Gyanamarga because the purpose is to get Uddhava to renounce the world. So, if that idea is if you cannot practise Bhakti, at least practise Gyana, but get out of the world. So, the context will vary the purpose, vary the emphasis of the message.
So, now let me explain this. Pravrtti generally refers to Karmamarga and this is to some extent related to the Gita’s Bhakti and Divrtti refers generally to Gyanamarga and this is rather related to Bhagavatam’s Bhakti. So, every scripture has its own flavour of Bhakti also.
Now, in the Bhagavad Gita, there is not much description of Nagar-Sankirtan and chanting and dancing and singing. In Bhagavatam, there is little bit description. Sita is filled with that.
So, although all of them talking about Bhakti, the progression, the emphasis will be different. So, now when Lobha-Pravrtti-Arambha, that refers to when a person is in the mode of passion, the person acts in the Karmamarga and does Karma activities to get the results. That’s what refers to Pravrtti over here.
Now, but here when Krishna uses the word Pravrtti and Divrtti, in general, the Pravrtti is filled with Do’s. You are a Brahmana, you should do this. You are a Kshatriya, you should do this and Don’ts.
Gyanamarga is about Don’ts. Don’t get entangled. Basically, you know, Pravrtti is related with the minds.
The mind has two primary phases. There is Sankalpa and there is Vikalpa. Sankalpa means I want to do this.
I want to enjoy this. Vikalpa, no, I don’t want to do this. So, the Sankalpa of the mind is expressed in the, is given the leeway, given facility in the Karmamarga.
And the Vikalpa is given facility in the Gyanamarga. Now, when Krishna talks here about Pravrtti, Divrtti, Janana, Vidura, Asura. So, the Asuras, they do not know what is to be done and what is not to be done.
That means that they do not follow scripture. This Pravrtti and Divrtti doesn’t refer to one’s own nature. If it were referring to one’s own nature, then they are simply acting according to their nature only.
Their nature is lusty and they are acting according to that nature. So, Krishna is not referring to that over here. Krishna is referring to the scriptural injunctions connected with what one should do and what one should not do.
Pravrtti, Divrtti, Janana, Vidura, Asura. They don’t know about it. They don’t care about it.
And Na Shoucham, Na Pichacharu, Na Sathyam Deshu. They don’t have cleanliness. They do not have proper behaviour and they do not have truthfulness.
So, actually, these purports are from the point of view of today’s thinking, politically very incorrect. Now, Prabhupada talks about women’s liberation and how it’s all a farce and these were the purports which got our Bhagavad Gita into the court case. So, in today’s context, in today’s situation, to say that women are less intelligent or women should not be independent or anything like that is extremely sensitive and it can lead to a lot of severe reactions.
In America, there are these two parties. There are Republicans and there are Democrats. So, modern education is artificially devised, a puffed up concept of womanly life and therefore marriage is practically now an imagination in the society.
So, Prabhupada is here talking about two kinds of future predictions. There is utopia and there is dystopia. Utopia is a good future.
Dystopia is a bad future. So, both are extremes. So, for example, the predictions about Kalyuga which are there in the 12th canto of the Bhagavatam and in other places, they are dystopian.
They are talking about a very dark future. On the other hand, they talk about the 10,000 years of golden age. They are utopian.
Now, utopian doesn’t necessarily mean impractical. It can be impractical. Utopian means some future prediction, future prophecy which is good.
Dystopian is that which is bad. So, Srila Prabhupada often spoke in terms of extremes to drive home the point. So, now this is not a literally true point.
It is not that marriage is an imagination. Marriage is very much an institution. But Prabhupada is talking about a future that will come, the way the society is going on, the course that it is taking, then marriage is becoming more and more devalued as an institution.
And even as compared to 10, 15, 20 years ago, now the whole concept of there is living together. Even in legal terminology now, when people are not asked about their spouse, the word that is used is significant other. Who is your significant other? Significant other means the person with whom you are living.
Because if you may not be married to that person, that person may not also be the opposite sex. So, they just use the word significant other for that. So, what Srila Prabhupada is telling over here, although it’s not happened, Prabhupada is giving a dystopian vision, which can happen if society keeps going the way it is going.
So, now a puffed up concept of womanly life. And then he says, nor is the moral condition of women very good now. So, actually I have a power point on this.
How the sexual revolution, sex revolution in America became a disaster. And as compared to even 50 to 100 years ago, the condition of women is much worse. Now, this is not to say that in the past the condition of women was good.
If you contrast it that way, whenever there is a bodily conception of life, there will be exploitation. So, if the males are in the bodily conception of life, then they will try to, they are quite likely to abuse women. That has also happened.
So, when Prabhupada is talking about women, he is not directly essentially condemning the present and simplistically saying we should go back to the past. Actually, even in the past, there have been many years. And in general, the Bhakti path has been a path of, which has been more inclusive.
Krishna himself has said, even the Sthriyas are included in the whole of Bhakti. Many great saints were females. So, here, these sort of statements of Shri Prabhupada, if we do not present them properly, then we will unnecessarily alienate people.
As Krishna conscious devotees, we are neither male chauvinists nor feminists. No, we are transcendentalists. But from the cultural point of view, the traditional cultural model was more suitable for the practise of Bhakti.
And as it is possible, Shri Prabhupada wanted to implement that. But we do not want to get lumped with people who are male chauvinists. That is extremely undesirable.
Actually, Prabhupada was actually very practical. Although he said that a woman should be under the protection of men and whatever he said, he actually made sure that even the Mataju disciples were happily engaged in devotional service. The most important point is that any soul who is coming to Krishna, that soul should be happily engaged in devotional service.
So, we have to present Krishna consciousness in a way that is inspiring people to come towards Krishna, not pushing them away from Krishna. There is a CC per code. So, the point which I am making is Shri Prabhupada wanted, he favoured a particular social model, that was the traditional Indian social model.
But at the same time, he did not insist on that. Shri Prabhupada writes in one CC per code as well as in Lalila Amrit, that he says these western women are very different from the Indian women. You know, they are independent and they can go out and they can preach and they can distribute books and they can open centres and they are very dynamic.
Shri Prabhupada is appreciating their dynamism also. So, the point is, whoever, whatever way they can be engaged in devotional service, they should be encouraged to be engaged in devotional service. And wherever there is a insensitive presentation of Krishna consciousness, at one level, it discourages people, outside people from coming closer to Krishna.
Another level, even devotees become disheartened in the practise of devotional service. Here is a story, Prabhupada gave an interview and there were two reporters, both of them were females, one photographer and one interviewer. And then Prabhupada was saying that women are less intelligent.
And then after that, when he said that, it was very inflammatory. And then after that Vishakha Mataji came to Prabhupada and said, Prabhupada, you know, the Prabhus are telling us that women are less intelligent because our brain is smaller. So, Prabhupada said, when you chant Hare Krishna, your brain becomes big.
What does that mean? Now, Prabhupada is talking here, Rameshwarapura has given a whole series of lectures on Prabhupada hermeneutics and how to understand Prabhupada’s statement and position. So, he says that this happened in his temple only. He was the Philadelphia president.
So, in Philadelphia only, this was in front of him only. He says, Prabhupada, when there is a war going on, in a war, whatever weapons work, we may use that. But that doesn’t mean that we have to use those same weapons all the time.
So, certain weapons may work, certain weapons may not work. So, the theory that women’s brain is smaller than men’s brain, that is an outdated theory. Nowadays, researchers don’t support that theory.
And it is not that that theory has come from Shastra. Now, Prabhupada in his Scottish Church College had a Christian professor who used to talk about the theory and Prabhupada simply repeated that. So, it’s not coming from Shastra.
So, we don’t have to emphasise points which are not coming from Shastra, which Prabhupada himself acquired from incidental sources. So, the point here is that the demons do not know what is the proper standard of behaviour. Is the 10,000 year coming from Shastra? Yeah, it is from, yeah, yeah, it is from the golden age prophecy.
It is from the Brahma Vivaad Purana. Prophecy of the golden age. Yeah, the whole thing is here.
Krishna is speaking to Ganga Devi. Yeah. So, that is definitely given in the scriptures.
Now, any further questions? Any questions about this? Okay, good question. Can pravrtti and nirrtti be extended to other religions? Because in the conversation between Chandrakasi and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, there is a reference to this. See, the Vedic scriptures talk about broad principles that often extend beyond the Vedic scriptures themselves.
For example, the difference between Sharira and Atma. That may be taught in the Vedic scriptures and that may not be taught in Bible and Purana so much. But it is a principle that extends beyond.
Similarly, the principles of karma, jnana and bhakti. These three are principles that are universal and they are present in all religions. And Roland Ressler has written a paper about this and he interestingly says that generally scientists are thought to be as intellectuals.
So, if you wanted to compare scientists with somebody from the Vedic culture, most people would like to compare the scientists with jnanis. But he says no, the scientists are karmis. Why? Because the principle of karma is control of material nature for the sake of enjoyment.
The principle of jnana is detachment from material nature. So, scientists, what are they doing? The whole purpose of science is control of material nature so that people can enjoy better. And that’s why if we want to correlate karma, jnana and bhakti, karma is the activity, is the whole set of activities by which material nature is controlled so that people can enjoy.
So, the specifics of how the control is achieved may be hidden. In the Vedic culture that may be through namakarma and mamasa, certain yajnas are performed and the devatas are appeased and by which the material nature is controlled for getting certain things. On the other hand, in modern science, we just separate out the whole higher dimension and just try to control matter artificially.
But that doesn’t matter. The method may vary but the principle remains the same. So, like that there are rituals even in other religions.
By which you decide, okay, you do get this. So, those are karma rituals. And in the Quran, relatively speaking, see, if you look at Christianity and Islam, the difference is that in Christianity, Jesus was more Brahminical and Saint Paul was more of Kshatriya.
Jesus gave just teachings and he preached. But Jesus never sort of did any organisation, any structure, any system. But Saint Paul did the whole thing.
And Saint Paul is the person who spread Christianity far and wide. And the most of the Bible is actually the instructions of Saint Paul to various groups of Christians. And of course, Saint Paul was a person who was, Pope Paul was initially a person who was opposed to Jesus.
And he never met Jesus. And he was a persecutor of Christians. He was a Roman who was persecuting Christians.
He was an administrator from Rome and he was persecuting Christians. But after Jesus was crucified, when he was continuing his persecution, he apparently had some miraculous vision. Temporarily became blind and he saw Jesus and then he got back his eyes and he became converted to Christianity after that.
And then he propagated Christianity. Now, some people say that he did not propagate Christianity. He propagated his own ideas in the name of Christianity.
Others say that he propagated Christianity. The point here is that there was a division of the Brahmin and the Kshatriya. So, on the other hand, in Islam, Mohammed was supposed to play both the roles.
Mohammed was this Brahmin who got the revelation of the Quran and Mohammed was also the warrior who went around conquering. So now, if you look at the people around Mohammed, most of them were of the Kshatriya nature. Not Kshatriya in terms of guna necessarily, but in terms of karma.
They were all warriors. And to a large extent, from Mohammed’s example, his associates took primarily the Kshatriya side and powerless the Brahmana side. And that’s why within the Quran, the context of the Quran was also people who were warriors, who were to be taught.
And from his teachings also the Kshatriya ethics are taken over. And the Kshatriya ethics are ethics of action, of aggression, of violence, of domination, of control, Ishwarabhava. So, that’s why Islam today is largely a search for political power in the garb of religion.
In fact, the idea is not that Islam is not spiritual. There are spiritual aspects in Islam. But Islam as it has come down historically, has largely been the political search for political power.
And the whole idea is that the more political power one acquires, the more successful Muslim one is considered to be. Because that was Mohammed’s standard of success also. The more he conquered the kingdom, the more Islam was spreading.
So, what Chaitanya Mahaprabhu tells over that Chand Kazi is that, actually even in your scripture there is pravrtti and nivrtti. But your teachers don’t know about nivrtti so much, they focus only on pravrtti. And then he says that even in our scriptures there is a gomatha yajna but that is very much under restriction, it is only in the context of yajna.
So, the pravrtti and nivrtti are broad categories which apply to all religions. Any other questions? Okay, sankalpa and vikalpa. Vikalpa basically means alternative.
Sankalpa means I decide to do this, I give it up and I take up something else. So, in a sense for most people, the vikalpa is also another sankalpa only. The vikalpa is just another form of sense gratification.
Another form of sense gratification, they may give up this, you are watching TV and you find that India loses a cricket match, so what do you do? Change the channel and watch some other TV, some other channel on the TV. So, what the alternative is also a form of mental enjoyment. But in general, when it talks about from philosophical perspective, when one gets fed up with sankalpa, then the vikalpa is that one gives up mental enjoyment and seeks something else.
So, here sankalpa and vikalpa are like bhoga and tyaga. When one gets into bhoga and one gives it up, then one goes towards tyaga. No, I don’t want all this.
But then neither of them is stable. After tyaga one will come back to bhoga. It’s like bhoga is one side of the pendulum, tyaga is another side of the pendulum.
One just keeps oscillating. So, bhakti is the steady stage. Anything else? Yeah, so what I meant by it is Bhagavatam’s bhakti, I said that the Bhagavatam is talking more on disentanglement from the material world, both for Parikshit Maharaj, for Shukadeva Goswami.
It’s focussing more on that. It’s not exactly identical, but it is similar. So, we will continue the remaining verses in the evening.
Thank you very much.