Gita Study Pune 2013 – 14.1-9 The background for the Gita’s discussion of the modes

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Today, we will continue with the Bhagavad Gita, 14th chapter. The 14th chapter is entitled as the Three Modes of Material Nature. Now, the 13th chapter introduced the Jnana aspect, the Bija Vakya, that is Purusha Prakriti Sthoi, 13.22. Now, there, in that word, that was, there was Prakriti So, the soul wants to enjoy the modes that are born of material nature.
Purusha Prakriti Sthoi is situated in Prakriti. But what is he doing in Prakriti? The Prakriti manifests itself in various modes through the various sense objects. And the soul wants to enjoy those sense objects.
So, without any specific prompt from Arjuna, Krishna moves forward and starts explaining about the modes. 13th chapter ended with Bhuta Prakriti Mokshamcha Ye Viduryanti Te Param, that the Antara, Kshetra Kshetra Gyana Revam Antaram Gyana Chakshushaham. So, the Antara between Kshetra and Kshetra Gyan, between conscious spirit and unconscious matter, that is to be understood and Bhuta Prakriti Mokshamcha, that the means by which one can become liberated from material nature.
Now, these means are, in a sense, described by Krishna earlier in that chapter. When he explains in 25 and 26, Dhyanenaatmani Pashyanti and Anyetuyeva Majanantaha, he talks about the various process Sankhya, Karma, Gyana and Bhakti. So, there, in a sense, he has mentioned Bhuta Prakriti Mokshamcha.
In this chapter, Krishna will elaborate on that process, especially in terms of the three modes. So, 13.22 said that we become bound because we have the desire to enjoy the modes, the products of the modes. And then 25-26 explained that we can become liberated by these various processes.
But whichever the process one follows, one has to understand how the modes entangle and how we can disentangle ourselves from the modes. Just like, if a person is sick, the person may try allopathy, homoeopathy, Ayurveda, naturopathy. There may be different methods of treatment that a person may try, but essentially there is a sick state and there is a healthy state.
And whichever treatment the person is following, the person has to understand what are the characteristics of sickness, what are the causes of the sickness and what are the cures for the sickness. So, especially he has to understand what are the characteristics and the causes of sickness. Then he can apply the cure for that sickness.
So, our sickness is that we are infected by the modes. And whichever process we follow to become healthy, essentially we have to become disinfected from the modes. Now, bhakti is the most expeditious way.
It’s the easiest way by which we can become free from the modes. And that will become clear by the end of this chapter in 14.26. But essentially, every spiritual seeker has to understand how the modes entangle and how one can become disentangled from them. So, that’s why Krishna will speak about the three modes of material nature.
But before he goes into an analysis of the three modes directly, first he introduces how the soul becomes caught in Prakriti. So, essentially, this chapter has two broad sections which have further sections. So, first part is how the soul is conditioned by the modes and then what is the effect of that conditioning.
So, the third part is how one can transcend the modes. So, 1 to 13 is how the soul is conditioned by the modes. Within that, the first two verses will glorify the knowledge that Krishna is speaking in this chapter.
The subsequent two verses will describe how the soul contacts matter in general. Not specifically the modes, but how soul comes in the world of matter. Then after that, the next five verses, 5 to 9, will talk about how the soul is bound by matter, especially through the modes.
And then after that, in principle and in operation. So, 5 to 9 is talking about the modes in principle, understanding the broad characteristics of the modes. Whereas, 10 to 13 is talking about the modes in practise, in action.
When a mode starts influencing us, what are the emotions that we start feeling? That’s what will be described. After that, Krishna will describe. So, the first part is an oral description of how the soul comes in, material nature, under the influence of the modes.
Then after that, what’s so bad about being bound by the modes? Krishna has hinted that in 13.22. You can write it down, then I’ll speak. So, the effect of the conditioning of the modes is, we can have multiple level effects. There is the long-term effect that happens.
Krishna has mentioned in 13.22. So, we take birth in various species. That is mentioned first in 14.15. Then after that, in 16.16, Krishna in one verse describes the medium-term effect. Medium-term effect means the overall inclination that a person develops over a lifetime.
The immediate effect is, as soon as we come under the influence of a particular mode, what are the emotions that come into us? Krishna will talk about that in 17.1 verse. And then in 18.2, He gives a general summary. What is the direction of our journey? That He will describe.
And after that, the last section is transcending the modes. How one goes beyond the influence of the modes by the practise of bhakti ultimately. Arjuna asks three questions and those three questions are answered sequentially by Krishna.
So, it’s quite a linear section. How we get conditioned, what is the effect of that conditioning and how we can become free from that conditioning. So, param, param is supreme or transcendental, highest.
Bhuyah pravakshami, again I am speaking this. Jnananam jnanam uttamam. So, how is He speaking this again? Krishna has not described the modes in so much detail.
But the whole discussion of the modes is ultimately to establish the supremacy of bhakti. And that is what He has spoken earlier. He has spoken that in 9.34, He has spoken that in 10 chapter Chatur Shloka Gita.
He has spoken that in the 11th chapter, in the 12th chapter also. So, in the 13th chapter, there is not such an explicit emphasis on bhakti. Although in the 13th chapter, bhakti comes twice.
In 13.11 and 13.19. Now, param bhuyah pravakshami. Then there is jnananam jnanam uttamam. Among the jnanas, this is the most uttam jnan that I am speaking to you.
And what is the result of this uttam jnan? Yaj jnatva munaya sarve. So, it’s interestingly, it’s said that those who know this, Krishna is not referring to them as bhaktas. Yes, they may become bhaktas eventually.
But cultivating this knowledge requires the tendency of a muni. Muni means, as we know, a person who uses the mind to analyse. So, the muni, if the muni does analysis independent of scripture, that is called as speculation or contradictory to scripture.
And when it is done according to scripture, it is called as vichar. Vichar is shastra moolak anuman. It is reasoning that is based on scripture.
So, yaj jnatva munaya sarve. All the sages, they contemplate on this and by this they have attained param siddhi mitho gathah. So, the word param in its variate as param comes again.
It’s in the first line, it comes also in the fourth line. So, first he says this knowledge is param and by this you will attain the param siddhim. So, in three ways Krishna is glorifying this knowledge.
First he says param, then he is saying that jnananam jnanam uttamam and then he is saying that param siddhim. It will give us the supreme destination. So, it is supreme, it is the best of all knowledge, it will give us the supreme destination.
So, it’s quite a strong glorification. In general, Krishna, where all does he do this kind of glorification before speaking it? Seventh chapter he does it, first three verses. Then ninth chapter also he does it.
idam tu te guhyam rajavidhyan asyad anapurushah And then, now he is doing it. In the tenth chapter there is not exactly a glorification before he describes the vibhuti. There is just a summarization.
He is telling, this is very vast and it is good that you have asked it, hantate kathaisyami, but I will describe it in brief to you. In the eleventh chapter also, there is not so much of a glorification at the beginning. He is just to mention that this is what you will be seeing now.
And there is a glorification at the end of the eleventh chapter. But that is not a glorification of the knowledge, that is the glorification of the extraordinariness of the vision, of both the virat rupa and the vibhuti rupa. Then, in the fourteenth chapter when Krishna does this, the first verse he is saying is, these three characteristics he says.
Now, he will elaborate this again in the next verse. This best of all knowledge, definitely gyan section cannot refer to best of all knowledge, as Krishna said, raj vidya, about devotional service, so what is this best of all knowledge? Yeah, that’s why Krishna is referring, what he is describing, in terms of not just his content, but his conclusion. It is not just the knowledge about the mode that is the best of knowledge, knowledge about the modes which leads one to understand that these modes are beyond my capacity to deal with, and therefore I have to surrender to the Supreme Lord.
Even before Krishna talks about mam chaya vyabhicharya, in response to Arjuna’s question, even before that, in 14.20, there is a verse which Krishna says that, actually you have to understand what is transcendental to the modes. So, gune bhyasya param vetti, even before Krishna talks about mam chaya vyabhicharya, Krishna talks about understanding who is beyond the modes, and seeking his shelter to transcend the modes. So, the gyananam gyanam uttamam is not just the gyan of the modes, but it is the gyan of the modes which makes one realise that one needs to take shelter of the one who is beyond the modes, by which we can transcend the modes.
And in that sense, it is the knowledge of bhakti. You were saying this muneya, so therefore this knowledge is not exactly meant for the devotees. Well, what I am saying, we have Narada Muni also, who is a bhakta.
But the knowledge in its content is analytical. We will not, in the 64 elements of bhakti, in Bhaktasayamsindhu, we will not say gyan of the three modes are the element of bhakti. Although it is a part of the whole world view, in which bhakti is involved, but that is not directly a limbo bhakti.
So, the only point I am making by using the word muneya, by commenting on the use of the word muneya here is that, the knowledge is analytical in its content. So, it leads to devotion, but in its content it is analytical, in its conclusion it is devotional. So, in case there is some doubt, based on the previous verse, paramsiddhimitogataha, that person will attain paramsiddhi.
So, what that paramsiddhi is, is mentioned in this verse. sarge pinopajayante pralayena vithanticha, two things, the person will not take birth again in this material world, but not only that, pralayena vithanticha, even in the time of destruction, at the time of death, at the time of final dissolution, whenever that may happen for that particular person, that will not cause vithanti, because when a person is disentangled from their modes, the suffering that happens is far lesser. It’s far lesser, not vithanti, remember we discussed the difference between inconvenience and suffering.
For a pure devotee, the body breaking down, body having some problem, just like a car breaking down, a tyre getting munchured or something like that. It’s more of an inconvenience. So, pralayena vithanticha.
One significant word Krishna uses over here is, idam jnanam upashritya. So, he is not saying, it is not just that we have to acquire this knowledge, it is that we have to take shelter of this knowledge. So, ashritya is to take shelter.
Upashritya is to take proper shelter, complete shelter. mam hi partha vyapashritya. So, ashritya, another variant of this has come in, 9.32, when he says that, everybody who takes shelter of me transcends, even they be low born.
So, now here Krishna is telling, one should take shelter of this knowledge. idam jnanam upashritya. So, what does it actually mean to take shelter of the knowledge? The word shelter, often we use in sense of seeking protection, refuge.
In literal terms, the word shelter means that, a place where we get protection. So, for example, this roof is our shelter right now. So, that means, if this room is my shelter, that means the room surrounds me.
And the room protects me from whatever is there outside to large extent, the elements of the weather and things like that. Similarly, we let this knowledge surround us. idam jnanam upashritya.
That means, how do we let the knowledge surround us? That means we adopt that knowledge as our functioning worldview. That means we look at the world through this knowledge. That’s how we take shelter of that knowledge.
You know, that knowledge is just in one compartment of our brain that we draw upon just when we have to give classes. And that knowledge, we are not taking shelter of that knowledge. We are simply using that knowledge.
But taking shelter of that knowledge means making that as a part of our operating worldview. So, that’s how we see the world. idam jnanam upashritya.
Surround ourselves with this knowledge. And, mam sa dharmyam agataha. So, Krishna is also going to say that, not only will you not take rebirth again, not suffer at the time of death, but he also says, but you will attain my nature.
mam sa dharmyam. Nature is the same as mind. That means we will return to the spiritual nature.
Now, understanding the modes can also take one to Brahman platform, to Brahma Jyoti also. So, that is also sa dharmyam. So, that’s why just this knowledge of the modes, in and of itself, doesn’t lead us to Vaikuntha or Goloka.
It takes us to the spiritual level. mam sa dharmyam agataha. Yes? Yes, I think these are his translations.
Sarga and Pralaya, Sarga can refer to, it can refer to creation, it can refer to the beginning of life, where also the creation takes place. So, pralayena vithanti cha. So, what this essentially means is, creation and destruction are not just events that happen at the beginning of, beginning of the life of the universe, or at the end of the life of the universe.
Creation and destruction are happening constantly. So, actually at every moment in our body, cells are getting created, and cells are getting destroyed. So, there are various kinds of pralaya also, which is talked about in the 12th canto.
So, here Sarga and pralaya basically refers to the creation and destruction of our material body or our material existence. So, it can, you know, for some living beings, like those who are in the higher planets, for example, Brahma Loka or other places, those people generally live on till the end of the creation. Brahmaji, even if he is a pure devotee, he doesn’t go back to Godhead very quickly.
He has to live out his whole life span, and then when at the end of his life span, when the universe gets destroyed, and at that time, with the destruction of the universe, he returns back to the spiritual world. The same applies to the associates of Brahma also. They also live for a long time with him.
So, for them, the pralaya is the time when their own material existence will also end. At the next time when Sarga will happen, they will no longer be around. They will be Vamsi Adharmya Magata.
They will have returned back to the spiritual world. They will have attained the spiritual nature of Krishna. That is identical to the nature of Krishna.
So, it can refer to the creation and destruction of our body or it can refer to the creation and destruction of the universe. Is there any pralaya between the Yugas? Yes. Actually, there is a period called as Yuga Sandhya.
And in Yuga Sandhya, there are transitions that happen which are often catastrophic. So, there is no exhaustive description or specific description not even exhaustive of what kind of destruction happens. But there is a general indication that these are traumatic events.
For example, at the start of Kali Yuga, it is said that all the visible planets, they were aligned in one line with the sun and the moon. And that combined alignment of all the planets has cosmic influences which also lead to sort of a ripple effect on the earth where destruction happens. So, the start of the Kali Yuga was accompanied not just at a political level with the destruction of the ruined NXT.
It was also accompanied by various other upheavals that happened. Generally, in Yuga Sandhya, some kind of destruction happens. But certainly, it is not a huge destruction because the Yugas per se they do not apply to the upper planetary systems.
Their time flows at a different rate and therefore, the circulation of the Yugas doesn’t happen the way it happens over here. So, whatever destruction happens, happens on the earth and it is not that the whole earth is destroyed. But some level of destruction happens at the transition of the Yugas.
Can you say that like 5000 years back when Mahabharata happened in the Japa Yuga I think Balgubi was telling that there was some for 5-6 hundred years there was like except India and some of the country other parts were inundated by the water. So, that’s why the Vedic culture is not found in other countries so prominently as it is in India. Is it that there was a pralaya where most of the parts were covered in water around 5000 years ago? I don’t know.
Certainly something happened. We know from the Mahabharata that suddenly the ocean rose and it took away Dwaraka in it. So, we know that Dwaraka was in the ocean but still it was in a sense land, it was landed territory.
Within the ocean it was it was landed territory but the ocean rose, it took up and the ocean rising was sudden. So, other parts of Dwaraka will also likely to have happened but the extent and the specifics of the destruction that is difficult to say. Generally speaking unless we are very sure about the sources it is not good to associate scriptural claims with things that can be directly either verified or disproved by historical research.
That is, unless we are very positive for example we say that Pratyaksha and Hanuman are not valid but from a functional point of view that is what we use most of the time. Pratyaksha and Hanuman is what we use. So, unless we have clear sources there is some in the Leelamrut we are trying to edit that out of Leelamrut now but it is there that Prabhupada said that by 2000 nobody will be able to live on the land.
Now, this sort of statement now, some devotees try to do all sort of jugglery they said there are three cities in America which are underground and this indicates the kind of trade that are coming. This is terrible. We cannot make this kind of jugglery.
Now, doomsday prophecies are very very bad. Christians have made so many doomsday prophecies to try to get people to surrender to God to surrender to Jesus and the Mayan thing was there last year and they have become the butt of jokes. and then every time for example there is one Christian till now 21 times the prediction of the world is going to be destroyed.
And if nothing happens then they say Jesus is so merciful he has given us more extension now. So, the point which I am making is now if you look back at the sources it should have been mentioned in Leelamrut it is not mentioned but there was a section a few days before Prabhupada spoke that on the morning walk some guests had come and there was some society some like weather research society climate research society not a very mainstream not a UN body or something like that they had made a report by 2000 the land will be so polluted that nobody will be able to stay on the land and Prabhupada was simply repeating that but in that particular conversation Prabhupada did not give the reference he gave a scriptural basis for that also so this kind of statements to keep them in Leelamrut is unnecessarily creating doubts in people’s minds so of course Satsvarupa Maharaj is willing to do the editing but he is quite sick now so we are having a body of devotees who are going through it all and discussing what all can be changed in it now this is a simple fact even if we don’t remove it it is not Prabhupada saying it we should just say that actually Prabhupada is quoting some other source saying that so at least that should be added so the point I am giving this example to illustrate that when we tie the statements of Guru Sadhu Shastra with something which is historically specific then we open ourselves to the possibility of being falsified being proven false and Prateksha and Anuman are the operational pramanas of the Vedic traditions so unless we have a clear scriptural statement to a particular effect there is no point in making something so clear and specific so I know some people say that there is something in Bhavishya Puran but Bhavishya Puran’s authority is especially in terms of its content is debatable I mentioned last time Bhavishya Puran is the prediction of Queen Victoria’s ruling India so there are serious doubts about much that is present in the Bhavishya Puran and in general most scholars consider Bhavishya Puran to be interpolated and our Acharyas have not quoted much from the Bhavishya Puran Jeev Goswami Nisandar was quoted only once or twice and that is also got nothing to do with prophecies it is only the philosophical sections that he quotes so I know at least two devotees who have written books based on a lot of historical research one is Uttakarmaprao’s Human Devolution forward in Archaeology and the second is the Amrit Maharaj searching for Vedic India and both of them have done a lot of research and neither of them have mentioned this idea of a large part of the world coming underwater this is something which is we can say that Prateksha Pramana and Hanuman Pramana are not very reliable but if tomorrow we try to argue that India did not get independent on August 15, 1947 that is not something which we can really debate so if the whole world had come under something like that water there should be some adequate evidence for that now history may not be able to give us accurate dates for things but the way historical research is that kind of catastrophe can be easily understood so there are 3-4 things that are known of what happened what might have caused this there were lot of seismic upheavals so why the ocean water rose by which Dwarka got covered that is one thing that we know some reason that it could have been a tsunami it could have been some huge tidal wave but Dwarka got covered the other thing that we know is that Saraswati disappeared now we consider Saraswati to be an invisible river and at the Triveni we say that Saraswati comes in unmanifested form there Saraswati is now known actually Saraswati is still there existing as a river it is called as Khaggar it is in the Rajasthan area and it is a narrow river and actually the US remote probes they have these probes by which they look below the surface of the earth through some technology and they have found large patches of features under the surface of the earth in the Rajasthan area Thar desert area which is a river bed basically and it is a broad river bed and what they have found is two things not only is it a breathtakingly broad river which is what Saraswati is mentioned to be as a huge river so secondly they have found evidences for civilisations existing not only on the banks of that river but also on the bed of that river that means that after the river dried up also people continued to say the river is this big and people are on the banks of that river the river becomes small and people’s houses come closer so subsequently the houses are there where the river bed was so like that the drying up of Saraswati it seems to have happened over a period of time but there are reports, records from some of the soldiers who came with Alexander now Alexander generally when the kings come along they want not only to conquer the world but they want history and especially posterity subsequent generations to know how they have conquered so they would have their scribes with them those who would write and these are often respected historians so Al-Baruni, Yuan Shang, Fahin they came in the 80s but Alexander invested India in the PC it was around 324 or something like that so when he came along at that time it is described that his travelogue which is given by his historian he describes that actually we went through areas where there were well built houses but everything was deserted so it seems that basically what can be informed from the history is that Saraswati was moving in a particular way but maybe because of earthquake or something the whole direction of Saraswati changed and then when it changes two things happen the area that was irrigated first that loses water second is the other area gets devastated and then after that the Saraswati basically flew in a direction where it did not have a continuous pathway it created a path for itself to dry it up and that is how Saraswati became lost now none of this is based directly on scripture so it is based on the best historical knowledge that we have right now it may or may not be correct but this is something which is intellectually defensible now the idea is that the whole world was covered by covered by ocean, by water like ocean that is definitely not historically defensible so there is a whole conspiracy theory people have these conspiracy theories that there is a small secret group of people who is running the whole world all these conspiracy theories Prabhupada did not appreciate these conspiracy theories he is asked about it so there is a whole conspiracy theory that there is a secret continent called Atlantis and that continent Atlantis was the source of all the advanced civilisation in the world and then they say somehow the earth had a massive earthquake and when that massive earthquake occurred the Atlantis which was the centre of the earth what happened the earth got tilted and the whole earth got tilted and because of that the Atlantis where it is it shifted to the Antarctic so these people say that if we dig deep below under the snow of Antarctica we will find the remains of a very ancient civilisation over there so now this is something which is there are some ISKCON devotees who quoted that and then there is such a furore that Associated ISKCON with such such ideas which are not very sustainable so Zutakarma Prabhupada told me that whatever he writes in his whatever he writes in his books he says none of the evidence is hearsay it is not that you heard from somewhere there is fossils all the evidences for anomalous fossils anomalous all the evidence that contradicts evolution theory is all from published papers so when we have to talk to certain kind of people we have to use the pramana which they will accept so he doesn’t use any newspaper reports ok here a particular fossil was found and this fossil is so old no let somebody else do the research get it published in some respectable journal and then he will publish in his book so we should have proper standards for as devotees we shouldn’t be in a sense jumping for any shred of evidence that supports the Vedic version we have to look at the quality of the evidence also so without that later on you see it is like this this stool is standing on its legs the stool itself is sturdy but if the legs are weak then it falls down so when we are presenting our case our case is based on shabda but while presenting our case based on shabda we may use pratyakshana anuman like the legs over there that’s how we help people develop faith through pratyakshana anuman and then we bring them to shabda so if we use evidences which are not very sound now you know this is something which is very it happens too much and in general devotees when they hear one fact one fact is heard most devotees never consider the sources very seriously just because like there was one devotee who came here and he said that Akbar met Rupa Goswami or Sanatan Goswami or Jiyu Goswami and then he took him to his kutir and then when they went all around and he saw that I want to do something for you and he gave him a vision of Vrindavan and then he saw that his whole kutir was made of jewels and he said this kind of wealth I don’t have even my whole kingdom so when we hear this kind of story it appears very attractive but actually speaking you know if you see the history this is very very difficult to sustain because Rupa and Sanatan Goswami among them Sanatan Goswami was older and then basically both of them passed away by 1558 and Akbar was born in 1555 so Akbar was 3 years old so how did I talk with the devotee then he said maybe Jiyu Goswami I don’t know so that means he was also speaking based on hearsay so then he said ok I will ask my sources and get back to you he never got back to me so the point is as soon as we start taking specific facts we have to be careful about ascertaining the facts otherwise we open ourselves to criticism there is one devotee he was telling me he was giving a DYS course and he quoted some fact nowadays so he found that there is one boy he thought the first time he has come for DYS and he is making some nice notes in his computer of everything so then after he completed the DYS class what this boy did is sir you told these points while you were speaking these points I was searching on Google and 6 points that you told in your class are wrong now what happens is we have certain notes which are there there are certain things which are referenced well referenced points but people just want to add some masala and they get this from here that from there and that from there and they just put things together so we have to be very careful about the facts that we use so if once that happens now with Google with Google available Wikipedia available so we hide inaccuracies if we are quoting something which is not accurate it is very difficult to conceal it so it is a fact we have to be careful ultimately our goal is to give spiritual facts which are neither materially provable nor disprovable but to help people come towards spiritual facts we also give them some material facts so those material facts that we give they have to be sound so I wouldn’t support the idea unless we have some I would say not just one clear reference from Shastra even if it is in Bhavishya Puran I would like to see if some Acharya has quoted that so otherwise it is very difficult for us to know whether what is in Bhavishya Puran is authentic or not and then along with that so it is like Guru, Sadhu, Shastra along with that I would also like to consult some Iskcon devotee scholars to see what they say about the fact and then only then quote it is it clear? yeah sometimes some devotees say that that Saraswati she is now dried up and somebody says that she is flowing underground and like that and now Ganga Mother Ganges also now becoming very short so they are also saying one reason behind that because of the sinful reaction nowadays increasing so that’s why all these pure rivers they are disappearing so is there scriptural evidence behind this kind of statements of Ganga or others are they diminishing and drying because of sinful reactions well certainly you can say sinful reactions of all the people are polluting the river so the industrial influence are coming in so it is not reactions it is also actions so see the the rivers themselves they are for example now you have Suryadev and he is the predominant deity of the planet called sun and that will change time after time but with respect to rivers it is not like that no it is not that Ganga is a river and there is a predominating deity of Ganga who is called as Gangadevi no Gangadevi herself has her body as Ganga so she is given that power by the lord by which she has she is a damsel she is a goddess so whenever any any divine manifestation appears in this world at that time for most practical purposes almost all practical purposes the divine manifestation acts as if it is material that means the deity is transcendental but if somebody is careless and say pushes the deity unless the deity fall some parts of the deity may break that is the transcendence to us the deity manifests the transcendence through the purification that it brings about in our heart through the elevation through the enhanced remembrance of Krishna that it offers so we cannot perceive the transcendence spiritually and materially actions happen in the normal way similarly when actions happen on the actions that damage the rivers happen on the rivers in Yamuna which was quite widely circulated and they used it in a when they say Yamuna project was there so they used it quite widely basically a lot of stuff written on the Yamuna river but it was not very accessibly written so I wrote that article and it was published in BTG then our Radharaman Prabhu from Calcutta you know he took that BTG issue and gave it to Akhilesh Yadav who is the chief minister of UP and Akhilesh Yadav said I will take action after that from three perspectives so from the transcendental perspective Yamuna Devi as a goddess or Ganga Devi as a goddess she cannot be affected by anything material just as Krishna is not affected by anything that happens in the world including anything that happens to the deity so Yamuna Devi is not affected and actually what is affected is we are affected if the deity if somebody does something to the deity then we no longer have the opportunity to take Krishna through the deity similarly if the river gets polluted so the pollution is happening because of two main reasons one is the water is being taken away for irrigation and for drinking water supply and everything and second is that lot of polluted water is being put in so from Delhi onwards practically the whole Yamuna there is not one drop of Yamuna water coming from the Himalayas down actually before Delhi only all the water dries up through various dams and channels and in between there are several where actually the bed of Yamuna is dried up and if there is any river water any river in Yamuna that is not a single drop of Yamuna water from Yamunotri is coming it is all simply the effluents that have been added into the Yamuna that have been put drained in the Yamuna bed from Delhi area so it is not Yamuna at all in that sense we are affected and third is that yes we are affected and Ganga Devi is transcendental but we express our devotion by trying to protect Ganga Devi, Yamuna Devi just as we see the Goswamis arrange very resourcefully for the deities to be protected when Aurangzeb was vandalising Vrindavan and then he took them to to Jaipur under the Rajput kings so like that we should do so now whether there are karmic reactions we could see it that way but that often becomes too generic a response and what can I do about it if the withdrawal of the rivers is just a broad pattern of way karmic reactions are going to come in Kalyuga then that is a that is a sort of belief in helplessness because that is what is going to happen anyway it is ordained but certainly there is nothing specifically told like that that all the sacred rivers will unmanifest from the world so on the other hand when we see that it is because of human causes and we can try our best to change those human causes by taking action at a mass level by getting petitions by creating awareness clear yes Hare Krishna so Guru like definitely there are two things one is that unless we are completely sure about the reference we should not quote it we should be completely sure well I won’t say completely sure we can never be completely reasonably sure and as you said that it should be mentioned by some Acharya or historically it should have been backed up like that so the question is that in case of that boy saying Google we also should say the same thing like in our case we are making Veda Vakya as the authority he is saying Google Vakya as the authority no no no what he had quoted was evolution theory has been rejected in America he says no opposition to evolution has been rejected in America you cannot oppose evolution legally you cannot teach any alternative to evolution in terms of intelligent design or creation in America legally it is banned according to 6th amendment so this is not a transcendental statement it is a material claim that we are making and materially it can be where it is not possible to substantiate that so what I was saying that generally people have tendency to go on Google and Wikipedia and all actually lot of information on the net is not verified it is so many things which anybody just keeps it so based on that we cannot like what you call challenge the authority of the scriptures or scriptural statements such kind of statements definitely we have to be they are basically of the area of science as you said Anuman and Prateksha which can be used for substantiating the Vedic authority but not unless we have verified it fully so in the case when people say ok I have heard this I have read this on Google these are not the very valid claims against the Vedas that is the first point I want to make so now we can authority on information on Google certainly that is not very it is not everything over there is the same standard as far as Wikipedia is concerned Jayadev Maharaj is making a team of devotees in various parts of the world who are trying to make sure that the Wikipedia content especially on things which we are concerned about like say Prabhupada, ISKCON Bhagavad Gita, Krishna Radharani our Acharyas that is more or less in according to Gaudiya Siddhanta now of course there will be academic perspective that will be there but actually it should not be wrong and in in secular publications we can’t say that say Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is an incarnation of God but what we can say is that according to Gaudiya Vaishnavism Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is considered to be an incarnation of God so we cannot present the paramparas understanding as the absolute truth but at least it should be presented as the voice of the tradition so it’s quite an important endeavour and especially if any of you have boys who have gone to America and they are in places where they can’t do much service and they are little intellectually orientated they can be given this service so Wikipedia overall is reasonably reliable certainly not as reliable as say Britannica Encyclopaedia because that is done with a lot of research but the advantage of Wikipedia is that you can always look at the references and the references are very clearly given so most of the information that is there factual information that is now for Bhakti Sanath Swami Thakur the information is quite accurate Prabhupada’s life’s timeline that is given that is quite accurate so I am one devotee in Russia who is almost like who has himself written 3500 articles about Krishna conscious subjects written or edited and finalised and he says that is one of the most important services it’s a very valuable service so we can’t just dismiss this knowledge area because that’s what people are relying on so we work at it at different levels one is that we try to work at a foundational level to make that knowledge also at least contain the voice of the tradition along with that we encourage as you said we encourage young people upcoming devotees to focus primarily on Guru Sadashastra as the sources of knowledge and thirdly if somebody wants to use it see generally speaking as the times are spreading there is this whole concept of free speech and liberality so people don’t appreciate censorship in general so if you say don’t read a particular thing that just brings up the sort of rebellious mentality is there in that? is your philosophy so weak that if I read something your philosophy cannot sustain it no it’s not a matter of weakness it’s a matter of distraction the world will be filled with so many distractions so generally speaking if somebody is very much interested in reading things on Wikipedia then we can tell them that whenever you read something you look at the references so generally speaking if they have quoted there is a difference but when they are not using traditional sources they have used their academic sources or sceptical sources we can easily make out what the sources are so in general for information Wikipedia can be used but for analysis for conceptual understanding that is not very sound because Wikipedia has the policy that anything that is published there should be from some other published source so it should not be a it is not a site for original writing it is an encyclopaedia so it should be published from some other published source and that published source should be it cannot be say radheshyamdas.com it has to be a they have certain standards of certification so it should be like a mainstream education site of an institute or a respectable newspaper report or a magazine report so if something is published on Back to Godhead then we can refer to that so for example there is an article about Baldevidya Bhushan in Back to Godhead and that is referred to to complete the biography of Baldevidya Bhushan so generally speaking if somebody is very interested in using Wikipedia then they can be recommended that they can be discriminating and not just take the information from there but take only the information not the analysis part because the analysis part is the mainstream academic perspective that is there which has the idea that the Vedas are older and Puranas are recent and Vaishnavism came about a few about a thousand years ago or whatever so those ideas are based on their own mode of analysis so like there is information which can be taken as long as the references are sound but the analysis and inferences that are there that we have to be a little cautious about so of course we should not become insecure if somebody questions some facts we have to also be confident we have to check your sources I will also check my sources then we can discuss later but especially it is good to be suspicious about sensational statements it is good to be suspicious all sorts of sensational statements dramatic, unheard facts we just dance in the mind when you hear them we have to just normally be careful about them there is this there is this idea some people say that Bhaktsanth Thakur when he would walk on the streets when he would see Mayawadis he would go to them and chastise them and slap them it is totally false totally false Bhaktsanth Vaibhav does not mention it and if you see Bhaktsanth Vaibhav if you read it carefully there are lot of common facts Bhaktsanth Vaibhav does a good amount of research to show why it is not true unlike Leelamrut Leelamrut is not a referenced research book research biography there are no references for what is given Bhaktsanth Vaibhav has given lot of references so from the scholarly point of view it is much more substantial than Leelamrut also in terms of the authenticity like Prabhupada says this concept of Ved Vakya that earlier in the he mentions quite often that our faith on the scriptures should not be it should be that full we should accept so now definitely in today’s context as you said there are different liberalisation of knowledge because of which people want to go for this kind of sources that is one and where they may find information also like the analysis part which you said the academician analysis so we can question their beliefs also then the point which I was mentioning that not to quote a particular scripture or not to have faith on that particular scripture because it could be academically proved wrong then we can also question that why it can be proved wrong because their understanding may be wrong or it is that it could be interpolated that also is possible that some interpolation has come because of which it is wrong so then my point is that that would lead to a territory which is debatable how will one have the natural faith on scriptures definitely in intellectual circle as you rightly said we need to be very much cautious but in general what should be our approach so if we decide not to quote some scripture because it will be contracted by the academic or mainstream body of knowledge then are we not giving too much credence to that body of knowledge and not having faith in shastras see you remember I showed this diagram in my last camp the scriptural knowledge it can be divided into three broad categories that which agrees with science that which contradicts science and that which transcends science so our primary focus is this third body of knowledge that which transcends science we are interested in realising ourself as Atma and returning back to the spiritual world that’s our primary focus so now we use some of this but when we use this this is something which can damage people’s faith but this is not really our concern so I am not saying that we should not quote certain facts just because they are contradicted by they may be contradicted by science rather my point is that we should not quote them unless they have been specifically quoted by our acharyas the scriptures are so vast and from that now Prabhupada say for example see the scriptures are the word that is used is Omniform like you have uniform is one form one dress Omniform means they have many many forms that means they give many things for many different kinds of people now Prabhupada does say that Manu Samhita is a law book for society but there is so much in the Manu Samhita which Prabhupada did not try to implement within his school you know as in auspicious as a widow now some of his disciples they were widows but Prabhupada did not treat them in any way like that there are so many things in Manu Samhita which Prabhupada did not quote so Prabhupada more specifically than the Manu Samhita he was focussing on the principle that there are laws of God which are given and it is those which we have to follow so the point is that what is it within the scriptures that has been our Acharya’s emphasis that is relevant for our outreach which we need to quote so that should be our standard and whenever such things are going to contradict the mainstream understanding we need to have some explanation available for that but the question is that do we need to spend all our energy in raising points which are going to raise the heckles of people in bringing points forward which are going to cause doubts in them and then resolve the doubts well we don’t necessarily have to do that one common example is the moon landing in a moon landing Prabhupada did not make an absolute statement that man did not go to the moon Prabhupada made three statements I could talk what is in my article on the moon that one is that they did not go to the moon at all second is they went out but not to the moon they went to some other place and third is they did not go they went to the moon but they didn’t access the moon so they didn’t go out of the earth they went out of the earth but to some other planet some other celestial body or they went to moon but didn’t access the moon so if we take that the Acharya said that man has not gone to the moon he did not say that and not only that you know it is Guru Sadhu Shastra so there is no statement in Sadhu and Shastra specifically that man cannot go to the moon so of course that context did not come up for but Shastra specifically the concept of Adhikara qualification is there but there are also examples of demons going to Swargaloka attacking Swargaloka over Swargaloka so specifically that man cannot go to the moon there is no statement in Shastra directly like that and Guru has not made a unequivocal statement like that so we don’t have to absolutise statements which are not absolute within our tradition only so our faith in Guru Sadhu Shastra with respect to Vedavak is with respect to the transcendental knowledge and even in the Vedic times you know it is not that just because something is Vedavak it will be immediately accepted ok it is a Vedavak but what is its meaning you see this is a scriptural statement but what does a scriptural statement mean that is why there are so many commentary there are so many debates so many discussions and you know practically Advaita Vedanta Advaita Vedanta Vishishta Advaita all of them accepted the principle of Vedavak but still what is the meaning of the Vedavak was a matter of discussion debate sometimes confrontation also so it is not that faith is meant to be stopper for intellectual activity we have to have faith but faith is not meant to be a stopper for intellectual activity no questioning no discussion no doubts that is not the meaning of faith actually the tradition itself is filled with examples of vibrant intellectual activity which goes in parallel with faith does that address your question this history also has the same yeah now I am using the word science in a generic way there are social sciences and there are hard sciences there are physical sciences which are physics chemistry and they are called soft sciences so there is social science and there is economic science all these are called soft sciences they are also included over here so basically I am using science here to refer to knowledge acquired through pratyakshana so in that case there are many people say that Krishna himself did not exist that now there is lot of debate on that Dvarka findings which has come about and all so these kind of things they are affecting that which transcends science because they try to enter into that territory yeah so now see now our point is that there are certain some people may say that Krishna himself did not exist and that is something which contradicts science but that is also going to impinge on that which transcends science so certainly it is not that we are going to hide our beliefs just so that we don’t oppose some people that is not our idea but we have to see it is like when a war is being fought we have to decide which are the most important wars to fight so you know you can fight so many wars now for spreading our mission of Krishna consciousness which are the most important wars to fight so for example to say to fight the war to establish the existence of soul the existence of God the supremacy of Krishna these are far more important than to whether to prove that man went to the moon or whether there is a ocean of ghee or sugar water or whatever these are relatively speaking peripheral so the point is these are certain things which you don’t have to entertain and today actually speaking most mainstream scholars don’t doubt the existence of Krishna now what they will say is this Bankim Chandra Bankim Chandra Bipin Chandra Pal was the person who postulated this and since then it’s been going on they say that Krishna was a historical person but most of the supernatural activities that he did they were things which were added afterwards in his life so date of Krishna some people vary there is some serious scholarship which also points out that Krishna was almost 5000 years ago but the mainstream understanding today is that definitely Krishna was before Jesus maybe between 2.5000 to 5000 years sometime in between and his historicity is never doubted what is doubted is the exact date of his appearance and what is strongly rejected is the whole concept of supernatural activities you know he lifting Govardhan or doing anything of those things but those are just beyond the scope of empirical science to discuss so from the historical point of view I don’t think that is today an issue of debate you know because I wrote an article about this also that there are Jain scriptures which debate now I am using the word scripture not necessarily in terms of revelation just the books that are considered sacred by certain people Jain scriptures which talk about how Krishna they critique the teachings of Krishna and these are written in the BC’s but while critiquing the teachings of Krishna not one of them questions the existence of Krishna so if they wanted to critique Krishna’s teachings they could just have argued that he did not exist but none of them do that so that’s why I think that’s not a major issue but there are certainly ideas which contradict the there are certain many mainstream notions of science which contradict a scriptural understanding our central trends of scriptural understanding and they are definitely worth debating so our point is simply choose the battles that we want to fight and stay focused on that you know it’s like we had this communication seminar so Anantana Prabhu was telling that especially he was preparing us that if in the future you are interviewed by the newspapers so how should you respond to their interview questions so his basic point is that the newspapers are out for a scoop you know they want something something to create sensation like I was doing this oh on the book OMG I was doing an interview a press conference in Belgao and you know now actually my interview is in Belgao and it’s on the oh my god but then they try to raise this question about the Bangalore temple controversy and you know people are fighting in Bangalore and this and that so Anantana Prabhu’s policy he said you know before you go for the interview you make sure three or four messages that you want to give and whatever questions they ask you come back to your message you come back to it now you know if I try to if in a press conference you are there for 30 minutes and oh my god if I try to explain the whole complexity of the Bangalore mess you know first of all they don’t accept the authority of the guru only so the rittvik guru and the guru it doesn’t seem to be it doesn’t seem to be a major issue for them so then I just said yes it’s one of the big institutions and in certain places certain people with vested interest come along and that may lead to some conflicts but we stand for certain principles and we are discussing the principles over here not discussing specific institutional practises let’s come back on the principles so like we have to be clear what is the message we want to convey so and bring back bring back bring back to that so these are not the primary messages that we have to convey to people so as long as we are clear what we want to convey we bring guys back yeah I don’t know whether that is like we say about 10,000 years that golden period is there so can you clarify what exactly is this period it has been mentioned or it is yeah actually Krishna speaks to Ganga Devi it’s in where is it VVP is Brahmavayat Puran Kalera dasha sahasrani Madh bhakta ha samthi bhakta 10,000 years of Kali my devotees have gone they will be one varna everything will be degraded we say that will happen Brahmavayat Puran Sri Krishna Janma Kanda Uttar Ardhe text 59 this is this is a reference to this quite clear this is actually Sri Bhagwan Krishna speaking to Ganga Devi no no no well I don’t know what it says in this reference but it is generally the understanding is from the Apyandhu Chaitanya Mahapuram since all the 5000 years have passed so we will have to look back at what are the other verses I will find out what are the remaining verses I will generally what I have heard is it starts from Chaitanya Mahapuram appearance so Brahmavayat Puran Sri Krishna Janma Kanda Uttar Ardhe fine yeah it’s clear this device also now we say in the fifth device usually it is mentioned about the different religions and we indirectly propose the people to accept the Sanatana Dharma there proposing that other Dharma the religions as so called Christianity or Muslims they are inferior and we also quote some of the scriptural like some verses from that like in Quran it is said that they were tribal men and they were not told to have sex with their mother and sisters and Christianity has been told Jesus tells the people that still more has to be told to but you cannot take it so but some this kind of references might disturb their feelings or emotions and also how can we present them so that to establish Shabda as the confirmed truth which they can benefit eternally so two parts how can we establish Shabda as the confirmed truth and what about certain statements which show other religions in relatively poor light generally they should be spoken very cautiously and they should not be spoken in a tone of derision when we speak also how we speak is very important so if we present it as objective fact now I would say the safer thing is to say that the detail about the knowledge of God who God is what is his kingdom and how he lives what he does the positive knowledge about God in the Vedic scriptures is far greater than what is available in other traditions and that is quite that is undeniable so similarly a philosophical understanding of our position in the world I have given a series of classes on East or West Krishna Consciousness is the best so there I analysed in terms of what is Sambandha Gyan as compared to Sambandha Gyan what is the Abhidheya and what is the Prayojan so the process of Sadhana that is almost not there in other traditions Namaz is there or the Christians are going to church and doing mass or offering grace before every meal or whatever but those are really not Sadhana in a serious sense so in terms of Sambandha Abhidheya Prayojan we can explain how the Vedic tradition is higher and I have got a full class on this series of classes in fact generally if I in Utkarsh camp I go before that in the VTW I take this in three or four classes but we can speak those points but it should not be spoken in a derisive way and we can also speak about the positive side of the Vedic revelation so it is true that so what we can say is basically look at the content of the scriptures themselves look at the audience of the scriptures and then you can understand the level you know a level of what is being taught we look at the content there is not much very heavy knowledge about God very clear not very exhaustive philosophy over there and then there are basic moral principles so that is not a especially that about having sex with your mother and that is a little provocative and we have to speak it with caution in some parts of Quran also in advanced versions as it was mentioned in somewhere I heard that it is also mentioned that yes there exists you know about the personal features of the God are mentioned in Quran and which are only accessed by the people who are much more advanced in their religion as such yeah personal aspect is mentioned see so like one more point add this like when we present that we have more information or content than your religion then this particular aspect also comes into picture like I was questioned by one student which aspect this aspect of you know we having more information about the spiritual realm so what is the question about that the question is that even Quran has some higher information which are accessed by the higher personal devotees who are there in the Muslim community so as such the Quran is what it is so information is not really given in the Quran about God about Allah not much positive information is given about his face and mentioned about his face or mentioned about his laugh and his anger but there is no positive description of what a person does in what Allah does in the Jannat and what actually happens so this is not just now there are certain people certainly this is not just a matter of bickering over details it is a matter of objective reality so of course Muslims have their own spin on this and they will say that Allah is unknowable and that is why there is no knowledge about it but the idea that there are Sufis and Sufis are many of them are quite devotional minded and some of them were quite advanced and they wrote they wrote devotional poems which express exalted feelings of devotion so in that extent it does contain a lot of positive revelation in terms of the feeling of bhakti but Sufis are not considered Muslims by most Muslims they are considered to be renegades they are considered to be deviated from Islam and historically Sufism arose as a blend of religious Islam and Hindu bhakti to a large extent so that is why there are no doubt there are people who have risen to high levels of devotion even in the Islamic tradition but the Quran itself does not contain much positive description about God Yes Kanhai Krishna When Prabhupada uses we see that he uses some empirical data to substantiate his points like about how women are less intelligent than men so he talks about the weight of the brain or even there is this Aquarian gospel which Prabhupada quotes for saying Jesus came to India so as you told like we understand that this needs to be taken with caution so what I wanted to ask was that then this may pose a bigger problem where like for any matter where we want to settle within ISKCON we settle it with Prabhupada’s statement what is Prabhupada’s opinion over something so like for some more sensitive things like you know history of the Gaudium art what happened after Shilobhakti Sadan Saraswati departed so we take Prabhupada’s statements as final and all so how to understand then this that well Prabhupada if he is dependent on some empirical data of some people then it could very well be true that that may not be true what Prabhupada is telling so how to understand this whole thing then how we should consider something as the final within ISKCON at least this is the final opinion on the matter how can we understand that something is the final opinion on the matter even within ISKCON because Prabhupada’s statements are considered authoritative but if Prabhupada is relying on on empirical sources then yes it’s difficult and that’s why there is so much debate about what Prabhupada’s positions are within ISKCON also on various issues and that’s not necessarily bad you know we are individuals and there will be as I said yesterday there will be some irreducible level of diversity which will be there because all of us are irreducible individuals so regarding Prabhupada’s statements different devotees may sometimes have different understandings and as long as they are following the mission of Srila Prabhupada we don’t have to take up kajals over that we don’t have to shed blood over that if some devotee’s understanding of Prabhupada is slightly different from our understanding of what Srila Prabhupada’s position was that is perfectly ok and regarding Prabhupada’s statements which are based on empirical sources I don’t think that is any serious intellectual will doubt that there is much as I said even Bhaktisanth Vaibhav also gives many points which are different from what Prabhupada himself told so for example most that is the story of Madan Mohan Malviya coming and cleaning the utensils so most Gaudiya Mata devotees say that you know the deity service is very sacred you know in our temples if some new person comes will we allow him even to wash the vessels of the deities so they say it is unlikely that such a thing happened which Prabhupada himself has quoted that so what Bhakti Kasma does is this is what Prabhupada has quoted but this is what most devotees feel and you leave it at that so there is no there is no what shall we say undisputed authority for deciding what happened over there it may or may not have happened so now if he is going to write a biography of Bhakti Kasma then those who know about him he cannot suppress their voice just because what they are saying is opposed to Prabhupada or is different from what Prabhupada said so there can be differences like this and we have to recognise that these are always possible so to the extent we don’t understand what the Acharya stands for the Acharya stands for his devotion to Krishna and his ability to infuse the devotion in others as long as we don’t see that as the distinctive contribution of the Acharya and try to sort of consider everything about the Acharya absolute then we will learn we will always be insecure sometimes what if in future some fact that has been said if we have this whole idea that everything that Acharya has spoken is absolutely correct then we will always be insecure what if in future some fact is proven to be wrong what if in future something is proven to be wrong so we don’t have to our tradition doesn’t teach us to rest on that kind of pramana clear yes sir Hare Krishna Prabhuji as you are talking about this Yamuna so what should be our attitude towards Yamuna now when we go to Vrindavan and with regards especially to taking bath or worshipping Yamuna well with respect to taking bath in Yamuna now you know we understand that just as when Radha Kunda was practically not there you know it was just a small puddle Chaitanya Mahaprabhu still took bath in Radha Kunda and then afterwards they dug and then the whole Radha Kunda manifested once again so the potency of the Yamuna at a spiritual level is not necessarily dependent on the condition of the water over there or even the physical source of the water now that is the place where Krishna has performed his past times that is the place where Krishna has bathed in the Yamuna and therefore bathing there will still be purifying at a spiritual level at the same time we have to be cautious you know if that water is too polluted and if you bathe in it you might get some skin infection if you drink that water that might lead to some contamination so generally for this we will have to look at what the local authorities there recommend so if they recommend that we just take a little water and sprinkle it on our head that’s what we follow but if they say that you can take a brief bath we can do that so we accept we respect the manifestation of the spiritual level but at the same time if things at a material level are not appropriate then we have to act accordingly it’s a simple it’s like suppose you know that prasad is transcendental but if prasad is spoiled will we eat it then if somebody has brought prasad from Puri just for us but that prasad comes later to us means a little late so that it is spoiled right now so what will we do at that time generally speaking taking it may not be such a good idea such a statement but we see in the Bhagavatam and other Vedic scriptures that Brahmaji is running behind his own daughter to have intercourse so here we see an example whereas in Quran only we see a statement so they might counter it like this and we might be in more deep trouble yes this is always a danger that you know generally speaking when examples of comparison are given they should be honest comparisons you know if we compare the highest with somebody else’s lowest and then say how bad you are and how good we are that’s what actually the ROC did ROC is the Russian Orthodox Church and when they were doing anti-preaching they were trying to stop ISKCON’s temple in in Russia then what they did was long ago in New Vrindavan there was some lot of legal issues and some drug trafficking and lot of things that happened when that was when the League of Devotees was outside of ISKCON and manipulative to do like that yes now if you see actually it has happened we don’t deny it but what we also have to see is what is our response we did not condone it as soon as it was discovered actually Kirtan Maharaj was told to perform and when he didn’t do that then he was expelled from ISKCON so so this sort of comparisons if we do then it can always lead to problems so that’s why even if we give an example like this we’ll also have to even if then we quote like this we also have to make it clear that the point which you are making is not that all the teachings of the Quran are like that but the fact that actually speaking there is a difference between an example and a teaching in fact example can be a more extreme case where the teaching is a standard directive for everyone so in the sense you know from the broader application point of view a teaching or instruction is more indicative of the level of the people rather than an example so if you want to defend we can defend also and the point is that this story of Brahmaji it is something which is if one studies the whole gamut of the Vedic literature it is definitely an exception it is an exception which is a huge deviation from what is the normal character of Brahmaji but it is not out there and that basically indicates the power of temptation which can overpower anyone but at the same time that is not the normal character of Brahmaji if you look at the overall description that is given in the scriptures so generally comparisons should be equivalent so this whole point of you know I finding fault with you then you find fault with me there is no end to that so what we are saying when it also statements like this have to be quoted is that there are multiple levels of instructions but if you look at the look at the overall social level of the people over there at that time that was such that you know even basic morality was not practised over there at that time and it was needed to be taught but that was not the case as a standard practise in Vedic times what happens generally the device sessions are given up by our boys and they are not themselves so very well convinced or situated to be able to make such a claim or especially the sex session becomes very difficult for them to deliver and to balance people and come out rationally winning over the whole crowd so generally it’s a diluted approach which they adopt to and the only comparisons which are given are like you know the face of I mean some references from the Quran and as you said that the information about spiritual kingdom or more details about Krishna only that much is what we can compare and then statements like these so it becomes a little more little difficult to deal with that session very effectively that’s why it’s easier to skew that session in India than in America or somewhere else where multiculturalism is the norm you cannot use this kind of session in the middle east so in India relatively it’s easier because the Vedic culture is what is the mainstream culture but still we have to be sensitive and especially if you are training the boys then provide them more material give them a little more training then they will be safe but still actually it’s reasonably structured we are not trying to hurt anyone we are not trying to deride anyone especially if we train boys that it should be spoken not in a derisive way do you know what is said in the is it said like this? do you know how bad it will be for so that sort of thing can be very very alienating but if you are doing it in a dignified way where the tone is non derisive it is more of informational then that is fine okay so let’s move forward we were on the second verse second verse we discussed that so now we are going to discuss about how the soul comes to the material world mama yonir mahad brahma tasmin garbham dadamyaham sambhava sarva bhutanam tato bhavati bharata so mama yonir mahad brahma tasmin garbham so it is I who impregnate the mahad the garbha now garbha is what garbha is like the womb so which is that garbha it is mahad brahma the great brahman so here it is mahad great so that is the brahma so here actually the word brahma refers to material nature not to the absolute truth now brahma actually in a sense it says brahma can refer to the atma brahma can refer to the brahman as the absolute truth but ultimately everything is the energy of brahman so brahma can refer also to material nature so in the first chapter of the vedanta sutra the main analysis of how when we look at the context when the word brahman is used its meaning can be different from what the literal meaning is because the context also has to be used to understand the meaning so here the word brahman refers to brahma refers to material nature and sambhava sarva bhuta naam so when he gives in the womb then after that all the beings become manifest so in a sense the verses 3 and 4 are similar lets look at 4th and then we will just look at some other small differences between the two verses sarva yonishu kaunteya murtaya sambhavantiya taasam brahma mahadyonir aham bija pradapita so sarva yonishu kaunteya all living beings murtaya sambhavantiya murtaya is their forms their forms manifest sambhavanti they become created taasam brahma mahadyonir so brahma mahadyonir these three words were there in the previous line also so now that is a significant concept and also in this verse as well as the previous verse the aham concept was there also aham bija pradapita so the commonality of the two verses is that there is a womb and then there is a lord who is the seed giving father and by that combination various living beings appear in this world so various living beings appear in this world through the combination and the emphasis of the previous verse is on the fact that krishna is the seed giver mamayonir mahat brahma and this verse is that krishna giver the soul is imperishable but when he comes in the material existence even his bondage becomes imperishable it goes on for such a long time it appears as if it is going to go on forever sattvam rajas tamaiti so he mentions the three modes together gunaha the word has been used a lot of times in the bhagavad gita but the three gunas together in one place is mentioned for the first time here in the bhagavad gita sattvam rajas tamaiti gunaha prakriti sambhava so they are born from prakriti and nibadnanti what they do is bind they bind the soul so how do they bind the soul they bind the soul by infusing certain desires certain ways of thinking and acting so i mentioned yesterday the modes are what the subtle psychological forces which shape our behaviour in particular ways which shape our perception of matter and our response to matter in particular ways nibadnanti mahabaho so let’s look at the three modes and we’ll discuss these modes more when we discuss their individual characteristics from worst and onwards let’s look at the introduction tatra sattvam nirmalatva prakashaka manamayam sukha sangena badanati jnana sangena canaga jnana sangena so the first characteristic of it is nirmalatva it is pure there is no mala in it and then that nirmalatva has further two characteristics it is nirmalatva because there is prakashakam prakashakam means there is illumination by which one knows that this is right and this is wrong so one doesn’t contaminate oneself by that and anamayam anamayam means that just by living in sattva guna we free ourselves from sin so we know what is the right to do and we avoid the wrong so prakashakam anamayam and these two words prakashakam and anamayam are related with sukha sangena and jnana sangena so prakasha leads to jnana and anamaya leads to sukha miseries come because of our sinful reactions so when there is no maya there is anamaya naturally there is sukha by that and when there is prakasha there is illumination then naturally knowledge arises when I can see clearly then I understand things clearly so now that means nirmalatva leads to two good consequences that is prakashakam and anamayam illuminating and freeing from sinful reactions however these two virtues of the mode of goodness can also become its traps because when there is anamaya there is no sinful reaction then one starts feeling comfortable and that’s why the sukha is a consequence which is not bad but here it is sukha sangena badnati the feeling that I am happy here that itself can make a person feel that there is nothing more to strive there is no necessity to strive for a higher level of consciousness so that’s how sukha can bind a person and jnana sangena chanaka actually the notion that I am more learned than other people that can be very intoxicating because it makes a person feel that I am superior to others I am better than others what do others know that can also make one bound because one feels that this is the position that I want to maintain I don’t want to do anything higher in my life jnana sangena chanaka now after describing this in the next verse krishna will describe the mode of passion rajo raga atma kam viddhi krishna sanga samudbhavam krishna sanga samudbhavam tanni badnati kaunteya karma sangena dehinam karma sangena dehinam so rajo raga atma kam viddhi the mode of passion is characterised by raga that is attachment and what it leads to is krishna so when you are attached to something naturally you want it more and more and more and there is a craving because of that and tanni badnati kaunteya karma sangena so these three are related when raga is there then attachment is there that leads to krishna I want things more and more and naturally when I want things more and more they don’t come free I do work for them so that leads to karma sangena so the raga leads to krishna and krishna leads to karma and that karma causes bondage so for a materialistic person especially in the mode of passion nothing is ever enough so enough is never enough for such a person no matter how much the person has it wants more and more and that’s why the person has to keep working struggling for more so most of our society today is in the mode of passion and we will discuss that later when we discuss the characters of the modes so let’s look at ignorance na tamastva jnana jam viddhi mohanam sarvadehinam brahma dalasya nidra bhis tanni badnati bharata tanni badnati bharata so now it’s interesting tamas means ignorance and krishna says ignorance is born of ignorance tamastva jnana jam viddhi so now what does it mean tamastva jnana jam viddhi tamastva means that actually it is if i have a little knowledge i act on that knowledge my knowledge increases but if i have some ignorance and i act on that ignorance my ignorance will further increase just like a person has a little say attachment to drinking alcohol when the person acts on that the person becomes more addicted to alcohol tamastva jnana jam viddhi and it is mohanam sarvadehinam so here krishna is saying that actually tamas affects everyone so it actually deludes everyone so of course all of us when we sleep we come under the mode of ignorance but that is regulated so when a person goes under the mode of ignorance in an unregulated way that is harmful so if you see pramad alas and nidra these are things which are nidra is something which is mandatory for everyone everyone has to sleep for some time and pramad and alas pramad is madness and laziness they are not necessary but they are inclinations that come and they have to be countered so the mode of ignorance affects everyone but whether we get affected or not that will vary based on person to person now krishna will summarise in brief the effect of the three modes in the next words sattvam sukhe sanjayati rajah karmani bharata jnanam avruttet tamaha pramade sanjayatyauta so sattvam sukhe sanjayati so what is described earlier sattva one is bound by sukha rajya one is bound by karma and tamas one is bound by jnanam avruttet one is moha or illusion covering of knowledge pramade sanjayatyauta so the knowledge is covered one acts madly now in the next words krishna will describe how these modes are in competition so we will discuss that after a break so here krishna will describe how the modes are in competition and how when a particular mode wins then what are the characteristics there we will discuss the modes in more detail thank you very much shreemad bhagavad gita ki jai so we will start at around 11.20