How Balarama’s causeless mercy on Duryodhana was still less for Duryodhana

[Balarama Purnima talk at Crawley, UK]

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Causeless mercy as demonstrated in Balarama’s mysterious relationship with Duryodhana and how causeless mercy, how even causeless mercy is less for some people. So broadly speaking, we can see that in general, if we look at whichever religious history or in general any fictional story also, there are broadly two parties, there is good and bad. Sometimes the lines may be blurred between who is good and who is bad, but overall there are the forces of good and the forces of bad and within this there is a conflict.
Now at one level, we understand that God should be on the side of the good, but at the same time if God is the source of everyone, the Bhagavad Gita describes in 529 in the Bhagavad Gita, suhrudam sarva-bhutanaam, Krishna is the well-wisher not just of the devoted but of all living beings. So then one part of us thinks that actually God should be on the side of good, but another side we feel that actually God should be impartial. So God should transcend the sides in this world and this tension between favouring goodness and transcending dualities.
This is like an essential theme in the Bhagavad Gita as well as the Bhakti literature. In fact the whole 7th canto starts with Parikshit Maharaj asking Shukadeva Swami, you know Vishnu, help Indra, so is Vishnu against the demons? And that’s how the first chapter in the 7th canto is the Supreme Lord is equal to all. So now as I said that God should naturally favour the good, but at the same time it doesn’t feel right that God should reject anyone, God should condemn anyone, that God should completely forsake someone entirely.
So this dynamic, this tension, Krishna says, I don’t play favourites, that I am equal to everyone and yet in the next verse he says, those who are devoted to me, I reciprocate with them. In fact it’s a very intimate sense of union that Krishna is talking about over there, that they are in me and I am in them. Now with this point, what Krishna is telling is that beyond God’s equality is his reciprocity, that God is equal, no doubt, is equal to everyone.
The first verse talks about his equality, first part of the verse, but then he talks about his reciprocity. However, we can say that equality means, whatever you do, I’ll do accordingly. So equality, there are three things over here, there is equality, there is reciprocity and there is mercy.
So what is the difference between the three? Equality is, say for example, now the sun is equal to all, in the sense that it gives light to everyone. Now, if somebody curses the sun, if somebody neglects the sun, it’s not the sun, sun will give less light to that person. So sun is equality means, it’s almost you could say neutrality, but wherever there is a personal relationship involved, you cannot have relationship with only equality.
So you approach someone and you talk with them and somebody is appreciating them and wanting to come close to them and there is a stone like, and somebody criticises them and again they are stone like, you might appreciate how unflappable they are, but we will not be able to develop any personal relationship with them unless there is some kind of reciprocation. So, equality is good in principle, but any personal relationship depends on reciprocity and that reciprocity is what Krishna talks about in 4.11 he says that, as people surrender unto me, I reward them accordingly, that’s reciprocity. Now, mercy is something more than reciprocity, it is you could say that reciprocity means you do this for me, I do this for you, but mercy means that you may do a very little for me and I will do a lot for you or you may do nothing and I may still do everything for you.
So we could say it’s a spectrum, equality, reciprocity and what is the third thing, mercy. So now, yeah, I can have now, sure. Then with equality, isn’t that undisturbed by happiness or distress, equiploised, not bewildered? Okay, good question.
So, in our spiritual life, initially at least, are we trying to develop equality in terms of not being disturbed by anything? Yes, everything in scripture has to be seen in the context of the scripture. In the case of Arjuna, the Bhagavad Gita has a core that is universal, but also it is spoken at a particular time to a particular person and for Arjuna, his emotions were coming in the way of his service and therefore the Bhagavad Gita’s stress is very much on an unemotional kind of spirituality. The Bhagavad Gita doesn’t contain verses about say, pure devotee dances in ecstasy and cries tears of ecstasy.
That’s also there in the process of bhakti, but bhakti has to be applied according to context and context means for Arjuna, when his emotions are coming in the way of his service, at that time, Krishna presents bhakti principles in a way that stabilises the extremes of the emotions and thus he says, sukhe, dukhe, same, kritva, labhala, bhaujaya, jayo, in happiness, stress, in failure, success, in honour, dishonour, be equipoised. Now are we aspiring for that at our level? We are following the Bhagavad Gita and there are two visions of the relationship between material emotions and spiritual emotions. One is that they are opposite, that we give up material emotions and then we develop spiritual emotions and to some extent that is true, let’s say, if somebody is very sensually obsessed and then they cannot become spiritually attracted, so bhogeshwaraiva sattanam taya apahartha cetasam eva sāyātmika buddhi samādhau na vidhiyate, so if our emotions are caught in sensuality, then there is no consciousness available to focus on Krishna and if there is no focus on Krishna, there is no connection with Krishna, then there is no experience of emotional relationship with Krishna.
So we could say that material emotions need to be given up to develop spiritual emotions. That’s one way of looking at it and that’s true, but that’s not the only way because material emotions can also be talked about in different ways. That means Krishna, a very integral teaching of the Bhagavad Gita is about saubhāva, about innate nature and how we need to act according to our nature.
Now when you talk about nature, talk about the specifics of the categorisation are not as important as the principle of categorisation. Krishna is saying that the point is not just to divide people into four varanas, Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra. The point is that we have a particular material nature based on our body and mind and we need to ensure that we work in harmony with that.
So it’s not that this kind of classification, it’s not discrimination, you’re not putting people in boxes, rather we are understanding the boxes we are already in. We already are having a particular nature, so we understand that. Now when we say we have a particular nature, what does it essentially mean? Nature means we like some things.
Brahmanas like to study, Kshatriyas like to manage, delegate, get things done, Vaishyas, they delight in making money. These are also emotions, aren’t they? So are these emotions also to be given up? No. Krishna says these emotions are natural to you and use them for pursuing dharma.
That’s why we see later on, so we can see this sense in two ways in which the word calm is used in the Bhagavad Gita. So calm can in a very narrow specific sense refer to lust and that is talked about in third chapter where Krishna talks about how in 3.36 to 4.43 how calm can delude us, how lust can delude us and how we need to overcome it. There also specifically if we consider the context, Krishna is not talking just about lust, he’s talking about self-destructive desire.
Because Arjuna’s question is, what is it that makes us act against our best interests? And now if you consider, it’s not only lust, it’s anger also makes us act against our best interests. Greed also makes us act against our best interests. Envy also.
So you could say there are many self-destructive drives within us and calm is used in a generic sense over there. Talk about self-destructive drives. But then in the 7th chapter, in the 10th verse, Krishna talks about dharma aviruddho bhuteshu kamo smi bharata arishabha.
So here he’s saying that kama, which is not contrary to dharma, says that is a manifestation of the divine. It is I who am present. Now here, kama can be, if you use the generic understanding of kama, you can say that there are these dharma, artha, kama, moksha.
And this is considered to be a purusha artha. So dharma normally considered as virtue or duty, it’s considered very positive. Artha we might consider as functional.
And kama we might consider to be, oh, kama is to be given up. But in the Vedic context, all three are talking the same breath, dharma, artha and kama. That means these three are normal goals of human life.
But there’s a check and balance system. What Krishna says is, pursue the kama that does not violate the boundaries of dharma. So kama, desire, so you could put it generically as ambition.
So ambition that is not contrary to ethics. Krishna says, I am that. You see, everything wonderful that has happened in the world is because of somebody’s ambition.
Whether we talk in modern times in terms of say technological advancement, or we talk in ancient times when somebody built a big temple, somebody composed a beautiful literature. It was, first of all, a desire in somebody’s heart. So kama is the motive force in this world.
And not all desire is bad. So Krishna says, if the desire is in harmony with dharma, then that is good. So similarly, we could generically say that there are some emotions which we naturally feel in according to our nature.
Some people might just feel, okay, let’s go and read a book or hear a class. They feel stimulated. Somebody else, oh, we have to manage a festival.
That’s what energises them. So these are emotions which come, you could say, from our body-mind. They’re not necessarily spiritual emotions entirely.
Because somebody might feel excited about managing a festival for Krishna, but they might feel less excited about managing a festival in their college or office also. So these emotions, we could say, are usable in Krishna’s service. And those needn’t be given up.
They can be channelled. So are we trying to become steady? Yes, we want to become steady in terms of not overreacting to life’s ups and downs. But that doesn’t necessarily mean we have to become completely unemotional.
So the whole principle is, not put all emotions in one category, but see emotions in the light of dharma. If an emotion is taking me away from dharma, then I need to keep it at a distance. If an emotion can help me in the pursuit of dharma, then that’s wonderful.
I use it. And ultimately, pure devotion is also an emotion. So we could say the highest perfection of dharma in the path of bhakti is emotion.
So there are emotions which are anti-devotional, which we need to stay away from. There are emotions which are non-devotional, which can be used for devotional service, which need not be used for devotional service. We have to analyse properly.
There are pro-devotional emotions which we can use. And there are devotional emotions. So we could classify emotions in different ways.
And we want to be equipoised so that we don’t get swept away from dharma by our emotions. That’s the central point. Do you want me to speak on Balram Jayanti or do you have question answers? I’m okay either way.
Whatever serves the community the best. Okay. So let me quickly, I’ll quickly answer this question.
I’ll complete the theme which I was going to speak. And then we can have further questions on this topic also if required. So as far as discerning our nature is concerned, broadly speaking, guna, karma, vibhag, asha, krishna says quality and activity.
So we could put in today’s terms quality and activity as, if we have the quality of doing something, that means we feel good while doing it. And if we have the karma of doing it, that means we are good at doing it. Two different things.
I like to do something. I feel good doing it. And another is I’m actually good at doing it.
So you could say comfort and competence. So while looking at life and while looking at various roles that we are playing, various activities we are doing, we can be self-observed and see what is it that we feel comfortable doing. And what is it we are competent.
And we could say that is a pointer toward our nature. We don’t necessarily have to exactly pinpoint this is my nature. But even if you understand what are the activities according to my nature.
Today we don’t have an ashram, so we can’t necessarily get into those four categories right now. But that way by self-observation we can understand what are the activities that are natural towards us. And then we can gravitate toward them as much as possible.
So I was speaking about these three things. What are the three things? Equality, Reciprocity and Mercy. So now at one level Krishna exhibits all these.
Because whenever we use any terms or any concepts, they are actually mental constructs which we are applying on the complex reality of this world. And so if we consider this to be like a spectrum. So at one end of the spectrum will be mercy and another end of the spectrum will be equality.
And we could say this whole spectrum is based on reciprocity. So in equality as we have explained over here, the reciprocity is very very less. I just equi-poised.
In mercy the reciprocity is extremely high. You do a little, I do a lot for you. So now we see that at one level, as I said Krishna naturally loves the devotees.
Now in one sense devotees themselves transcend the category of good and bad in the world. Because devotion, of course it’s good, but it is more than good. It is beyond punya.
But still if you wanted to classify devotion in the category of good and bad, that would fall broadly in the category of good. So we see that Krishna in the Mahabharata, there are the Pandavas and the Kauravas. And broadly speaking the Pandavas are virtuous and the Kauravas are vicious.
Now of course, as I said again, any such categorisation is always very general. So sometimes the Pandavas also succumb to vice. Say for example Yudhishthira gets carried away by gambling.
Sometimes Bhima can get extremely angry and he can just let that violence streak dominate him at times. But these are occasional. Of course, even when they are occasional, sometimes the consequences can be catastrophic.
But still they are occasional. Whereas if you see the Kauravas, they might also sometimes act virtuously. But overall their tendency is to go along with vice.
So Vikarana who is one of the brothers of Duryodhana and he stands up against Duryodhana and everyone else at the time when Draupadi is being dishonoured. So he exhibits virtue. But overall he goes along with the vicious ways of the Kauravas.
Now Balaram is in a relationship with Krishna where Krishna is… Balaram is like the perfect friend of Krishna. Yesterday I spoke on Balaram Yanti in Leicester and I talked about how in Krishna Leela, Krishna Leela is in three broad places. Vrindavan, Mathura and Dwarka.
And there are only two characters who are with Krishna in all these places. One is Balaram and the other is Rohini. But Rohini is from another generation and she is a woman.
And so Krishna and Balaram they come very close to each other because they are throughout their life together. I talked about how Balaram is the closest friend of Krishna. What do we expect a friend to be? A friend should stick to us within thick and thin.
A friend should understand our heart’s emotions. So how when Krishna feels separated from Vrindavan it is Balaram alone who understands that. And how if we need to do something but we are unable to do it the friend does that for us.
So that’s how when Krishna cannot go back to Vrindavan because he is bound by his words so at that time Balaram chooses to go on behalf of Krishna. So Krishna and Balaram are very good friends. The best of friends.
But at the same time when we have a friend we want, we have various flavours of relationship with a friend. Sometimes we agree with many things, sometimes we disagree on many things. And if we disagree then we content.
It is not that every disagreement has to lead to disunity or rupture. Sometimes disagreements can also spice relationships. How? You think like this, I think like this.
And then especially if there are disagreements if two people have a basic platform of affection among them then they know that the point of a disagreement is not to win the argument. It is to gain an understanding. Why do you think like that? But okay.
So now Krishna also in his fraternal relationship with Balaram wants someone to contend with. And thus Balaram plays that role. And how does he play that role? By supporting those who are opposed to those whom Krishna is supporting.
So Krishna gives, Krishna is given by Balaram somebody to contend with. So the bhakti vision of God is not that God resides in solitary majesty above everyone else. God enjoys the rich gamut of relationships that we all aspire to enjoy in the world.
And therefore here Krishna has Balaram who at one level is Krishna himself. Krishna and Balaram are the same person but they are two personalities. When God expands the expansion is at one level the same person but it’s also a different personality.
So Krishna and Balaram contend with each other. There are times when Krishna and Balaram when Balaram is the person closest to Krishna’s heart understanding the depth of the agony to see that Krishna is in separation from Ravana. But another time Balaram takes the opposite side of Krishna.
And whenever we act in the world we are actually living we live in a complex world where we relate we don’t just relate with one person we relate with multiple people. So for example if two people ask me a question there is a time only for one question and if I choose one person to answer the question the other person will feel bad. So every action affects not just that person it affects other people also.
And that also has to be kept in mind when we act. That’s why sometimes relationships become complex. Because when we are relating with one person we are not relating only with that person.
Our relationship is not isolated they are interpenetrating. So now at one level Krishna wants someone to contend with. And when somebody when say if somebody asks some favour from us normally we will do that favour to them but if we do that favour somebody else will be very displeased with us.
Then at that time just to not displease this person we may say no. This person will say why? It’s a simple thing, you can do it easily. So then in the gamut of only this relationship if you are saying no to someone it may not make any sense.
Why are you saying no? So one relationship cannot be seen only in the isolation without considering other relationships. So similarly we say that Krishna wants to reciprocate with Balarama or Balarama also plays that role of having someone, of contending giving Krishna someone to contend with. So then for that purpose he has to connect with someone who is opposed to Krishna.
So Duryodhana himself does not have any intrinsic merit to attract Balarama’s grace. So when we talk about causeless mercy it is it is not that it does not have a cause but rather the cause is too less for the mercy. There is a cause and Prabhupada gave the example of causeless mercy.
He said that suppose he was once on a morning walk and there were some ducks who were quacking and there was a man who was feeding the ducks and there was one duck who was quacking very loudly and his man was throwing more crumbs at him. So Prabhupada said Krishna is like this. He says if you beg more for mercy, Krishna will give you more mercy.
Now the duck’s quacking doesn’t oblige the person to give them more quacking doesn’t necessarily mean he has to give more. So the cause is there but the cause is not enough for the reciprocating action. So causeless mercy that means the cause is too less for the mercy.
So if we consider this on the spectrum then what do we have? Duryodhana he is not even devotionally disposed at least he is not devotionally disposed towards Krishna but then somehow Duryodhana and Balram hit off. They just like each other. This is Balram’s causeless mercy.
It’s not due to Duryodhana’s qualification but then as soon as Duryodhana sees generally when we interact with people we can actually make out this person actually wanting to be with me, this person tolerating me or this person just waiting to find some weapon to hit me with. So then he sees that Balram likes me and then he also tries to ingratiate himself to Balram. So Balram becomes pleased with him and then Balram teaches him mace fighting.
Now of course the Pandavas and Kauravas all of them have learnt from Drona and it is from Drona that both Duryodhana and Bhima learn mace fighting but Balram is a specialist. It’s like if you go to a university and learn something, say we go to MIT and learn computer science but then if you, after that you have got the degree but after that if somebody is a computer science genius then you get to work with them, you get to learn from them. What you learn is much more.
So Balram teaches Duryodhana and in one sense among Duryodhana and Bhima, Bhima has the upper hand because Bhima is physically stronger than Duryodhana but then those odds which initially are say tilted towards Bhima, they change again because Balram gives some special teaching tips and tricks to who? Duryodhana and thus the odds level out. Actually more than levelling out, it’s almost as if there is skill and strength skill would eventually turn trump. Maybe I shouldn’t use the word trump.
So what happens? This is his causeless mercy. Now what happens? Balram generally when we like someone or when we love someone then what happens? We tend to trust their words or even if we hear that they have done something wrong we tend to give them the benefit of doubt. Let me find out actually what happens.
If we don’t like someone and if we hear something bad about them, we tend to immediately believe that. In fact, gossip happens when what is the fuel for gossip? See gossip happens when we hear something we like about someone we don’t like. It just starts off.
So now why am I talking about all this? That when this whole moral carnage happens in the Kuru assembly when Draupadi is attempted to be dishonoured and then the Pandavas are dispossessed of everything and then they go to the forest. At that time Krishna and Balram go and meet the Pandavas in the forest and both Krishna and Balram are furious. This is atrocious.
How did such a thing happen? And then but already they are obliged to be in the forest for 13 years and Krishna assures Draupadi that those who have wronged you will be punished and then they come back. But then Duryodhana comes to meet them and Duryodhana gives his whole own side of the story. Generally what happens? Whenever there is a conflict, somebody comes and complains.
Each person tells their own side of the story and if you are in conflict resolution, you understand that no story has only one side. How many stories does a story have? What do you think? Unlimited. That is.
Postmodernism. Yeah, you could say that. At least if there are two disputants there are two sides of the story.
But usually if there are two disputants there are three sides of the story. My side, your side and the right side. Now this doesn’t mean both the people can be honest.
Sometimes we deliberately what happens? We downplay the wrong that we have done and we highlight the wrong that the other has done. Consciously we do it sometimes. But sometimes even subconsciously memory is very slippery and sometimes we genuinely forget.
It doesn’t register to us. So what happens? We usually at least for ourselves can’t tolerate an unflattering picture of ourselves. So when we tell a story, always we tell it in such a way that we don’t look like the bad guy in that.
So Duryodhana tells his whole side of the story. And the way he puts it, he said I never forced Yudhishthir to gamble and anytime he wanted he could have stopped gambling. If he was not good enough to gamble and yet he gambled and he lost everything.
I didn’t force Draupadi to be put on the stake. So he tells the whole story in such a way I was just playing a game. What was put on the stake that was Yudhishthir’s problem.
And now somehow Balram gets influenced by this. And then just before after the 13 years are over then before the Pandavas now have to decide 13 years are over and as per the rules they have to they have given their kingdom back. there is no sign from the Kauravas of any message.
So then the Pandavas are thinking what to do. So Krishna is also there. Drupada is also there.
So most of this meeting initially at least happens in the kingdom of Virat where they have been incognito. And then Balram also comes there and then Balram basically his Pandavas completely changed. Initially he was so angry this is a horrendous injustice what he says.
Now he is saying Yudhishthir has no right to be angry with Duryodhana. It is because of his own fault that he has lost and Duryodhana comes up with another story. What is that? When the incognito exile gets over that is the time when Arjuna comes out and he fights.
So now if you see in Indian calendar there is a solar calendar there is a lunar calendar and if you consider Diwali sometimes one part of India now of course the time has been standardised and many times we celebrate according to national calendar but if you go according to Panchang the traditional calendar so Diwali in Maharashtra and Diwali in Delhi might be on two different days like it happens in Janmashtami also we celebrate on one day and the general Hindu community celebrates on other days quite often. So what happens this calendar conflicts keep happening so what Duryodhana hides behind a calendar conflict and he says actually the incognito exile period is not over it is supposed to be one year but one year is not over and Bhishma says the year is over and Duryodhana says you always favour the Pandavas and he doesn’t accept it and he does his own set of calculations and he says the Pandavas have been found before the incognito exile is over and the rule was if before that they are found then they have to go again for 13 years 12 plus 1 again in fact the condition was set in such a way that his hope was the Pandavas for the rest of their life would have to be in forest because he thought the Pandavas are so well known they will just not be able to hide and if they are not able to hide we find them and in fact the Mahabharata describes that he sent thousands and thousands of spies to search for the Pandavas during the incognito period and he was very frustrated when nobody could find him as if the Pandavas had dropped out of the face of the earth and when he finally found Arjuna he was delighted so now somehow Balram accepts Duryodhana’s side he says actually your case is not as black and white as you think so he says oh Pandavas when you approach the Kauravas you should approach them with humility you know Duryodhana exhibits his all-knowing nature why is it that in this scenario Balram does not feature that Duryodhana is not telling a lie ok so Krishna and Balram are the same and Krishna periodically exhibits his all-knowing nature so why does Balram not exhibit his all-knowing nature Narlila Kaivalyam the Vedanta Sutra says that when the divine manifests for the purpose of performing Leela at that time there is a certain amount of subordination of the divinity for the purpose of Leela several classes I have been coaching on this topic that lovability is enhanced by vulnerability that means if somebody is perfect all powerful when we want to relate with someone we want to relate with somebody who is worthy somebody who is special somebody who is attractive we want that person to be worthy and that is how we understand that God is greatest he is the greatest person so he is worth relating with but we not only want to form a relationship with somebody who is worthy but another thing in any relationship is that we need to feel needed in that relationship if that person doesn’t need me only then what is my value in that relationship so to have that depth of intimacy there is a need to feel needed and how do you feel needed when that other person exhibits some vulnerability see somebody is very powerful and they just solve all problems and everybody who has problems come to them for solving their problems but then if you are close to them and they say actually my heart is burdened by this I don’t know how I am going to deal with this then at one level you might say they are exposing themselves but then that indicates a certain level of trust its only when you trust someone you share your insecurities fears, vulnerabilities so this principle applies in normal relationships and applies in divine relationships also so basically for the purpose of Neela Krishna one way he exhibits his vulnerability is by not manifesting his Godhood not manifesting his omniscience and that’s why when Draupadi is attempted to be dishonoured and then she survives she is saved now we say Krishna came and gave her the unlimited saree but nobody sees Krishna over there all that they see is that her saree is inexhaustible and they think that because of her chastity that her saree was mystically expanded unlimitedly and later on when Draupadi meets Krishna in the forest, Draupadi asks Krishna I called you why did you come I needed you I am your devotee, I am your friend I needed you and Krishna he doesn’t put on the God cap he says my plan is perfect, how dare you challenge my plan he says I didn’t know he says at that time a demon Shalva had attacked Dwarka and I was caught in defending it devastated Dwarka and I was caught in defending as soon as I came to know I immediately came here so for the purpose of Neela the Lord doesn’t necessarily always exhibit his omniscience and the same applies to Balaram also so now the Pandavas are naturally disappointed they thought that their cause is completely justified and they would get the complete support of the Yadus both Krishna and Balaram but then all their attempts for peace are foiled by Duryodhana’s arrogance and then just before the war it becomes a sure that war is inevitable now then they have to they are seeking allies so now Balaram wants to contend with Krishna but that contending is in terms of arguments, sparring he doesn’t want to fight against Krishna and he knows that Krishna loves the Pandavas so at that point Krishna has not told that I am not going to raise weapons so because of this what happens is that Balaram thinks that if Krishna fights on the side of the Pandavas I cannot fight against Krishna so it’s just like even in an affectionate relationship of friends there can be arguments but the arguments have limits no matter how heated the argument becomes you won’t come to fists you won’t start attacking each other physically so like that there are limits to they shouldn’t come at least so now Balaram doesn’t want to fight against Krishna so Balaram takes a strategy that is quite uncommon in those times and what is that? goes on pilgrimage so that’s a very pious way of not taking a stand so Vidura also does the same thing when the battle is happening he just goes away now if you see he goes on the pilgrimage and his pilgrimage ends about the time when the war is almost ended of course he goes well before because this war is not like an ambush attack certainly not like a terrorist attack sometimes people are very uncomfortable when they hear about the Bhagavad Gita or the fighting of a war because now people are paranoid about religious violence understandably so but the world of difference between the Kurukshetra war and whatever violence happens in the name of religion, terrorists or whatever in general the Kurukshetra war was fought between equals who were equipped and alert it was fought between warriors terrorists they attack only civilians who are not equipped and were not alert so if you see this war a place was decided a time was decided and they came and fought there alone so it’s a very different dynamic the nearest we might get to terrorist violence terrorist kind of violence in the Mahabharata is Ashwatthama’s killing the sleeping sons of the Pandavas and that’s universally condemned by everyone in the Mahabharata so violence is there because violence is a fact of life it is not a desirable fact of life but it is an unavoidable fact of life sometimes it is just required so then the war gets, so the point I was making he goes on a fairly long pilgrimage it starts long before the war starts but once the war is decided once the sides are finalised then the war goes and on the 18th day Duryodhana is left all alone and he tries to hide and he is found but when he is found at that time Balram comes over there and now Balram waits and watches for Balram Balram is a student sometimes there are different kinds of sports there are team sports and there are individual sports so if a coach has trained somebody for an individual sport the coach wants to see how is my player going to perform so Balram sits and watches and the Pandavas are not very comfortable to see Balram over there because they know Balram might favour Duryodhana but the fight goes on and on and on and on it has become like a rigged match how a rigged match that say like this might seem a mundane example so but I think it will illustrate the point say in a cricket match now when a bowler bowls and the batsman gets bowled out so in the so suppose the batsman gets bowled out now sometimes I read somewhere that it happened in the recent world cup that many times the ball would hit the stump but the bells would not fall down and then the batsman would be out but not out so now suppose there is a cricket match in which it’s ruled the only way the batsman can get out in any way except bowling him out you cannot no catches no LBW and the stumps are made in such a way no matter how hard the ball hits the stumps are not going to fall then what does the bats bowler do say it’s like already Duryodhana and Bhima are like a very good match one is stronger the other is more skilled but then in between to rig the match comes Gandhari’s benediction and Gandhari’s benediction is that no matter what happens no blow will injure Duryodhana now if it’s like that how do you fight there are times when Bhima hits Duryodhana so heavily that that blow could have like rend a hill apart and when that blow hits Duryodhana Duryodhana flies away but he flies and he lands and he gets up and he himself is amazed that nothing has happened to him so then Bhima is shocked what is going on and then Krishna realises that there is no way that Bhima can win and then the fight goes on at one particular point because they are equally matched Duryodhana hits Bhima so severely that Bhima is jolted but because Bhima is a fierce warrior he doesn’t show the slightest pain it’s like sometimes if we do something to disturb someone we speak some sensational piece of gossip and then there is no sensation we speak something to disturb others and if nobody is disturbed then what happens we get disturbed so here do you understand what I am saying so here Duryodhana hits Bhima severely and Bhima acts as if he is unaffected although Bhima is severely wounded battered and when Duryodhana sees Bhima is not at all affected Duryodhana becomes alarmed and then he moves back because actually at that time if Bhima had even winced a little bit then Duryodhana would have taken advantage and Duryodhana could have killed severely battered by that blow it was such a fierce blow but at this point when Bhima so Duryodhana moves back and Bhima gets some breathing space and he recovers the battle has been going on for a long time and Bhima has severely hit Duryodhana but to no effect and Duryodhana has hit Bhima to significant effect although Bhima has not shown that at that time Bhima decides that this this match is rigged if the match is rigged then I cannot fight fair now Bhima has already taken a vow that he will break the thighs of Duryodhana because Duryodhana had used those thighs to make an indecent proposition to Draupadi but Bhima’s original plan was that he would defeat Duryodhana fairly and then break his thighs but this match is rigged it’s like whatever Bhima does he just can’t win so it’s like this now the bowler is bowling and the batsman is never going to get out if you see in bowling it’s the bowler who does most of the work and the bowler has to keep running and the batsman stands at one place and hits so like that Bhima is getting more and more battered and tired and Duryodhana is unaffected so what do you do at that time? so finally now if a player cannot get out then you just get him out how? you cannot get him out make him retired ahead so you know you can say body line so just bowl in such a way that the batsman gets injured and the batsman has to leave so now this is what Bhima decides to do now Krishna has indicated this to Bhima already Krishna Krishna points to the thighs he says you have to hit him on the thighs so and Bhima has been trying to avoid that Bhima wants it to be like a decisive win but he realises what to speak about decisive win, there might not even be a win now so then he at the right moment he hits Duryodhana and he hits him below the waist at the point of thigh and that blow is so severe that everybody can hear Duryodhana’s bones cracking and as Duryodhana falls to the ground the match is over as soon as this happens Balram springs up infuriated and he looks around he has his own his own plough he charges towards Bhima how dare you fight unfairly and he is about to attack him and then Krishna comes in between and then Krishna speaks he says actually the Pandavas they were the victims of so much unfairness and what the Kauravas have sown they have reaped now so Balram is not satisfied Balram says Krishna it’s clear you are partial to the Pandavas and the whole world will know that Bhima won unfairly and still because Krishna is favouring you he walks away in half so here what is happening over here is it seems that Balram favours Duryodhana right till the end but there is something deeper happening see broadly there are two conceptions of ethics there is categorical ethics and there is contextual ethics categorical ethics is that good and bad are two categories whatever falls in this category is good whatever falls in this category is bad so for example lying is bad which is true now categorical ethics are whatever happens lying is bad lying falls in the category of bad and this category is inviolable, non-negotiable whereas contextual ethics acknowledges that there are moral categories, there are ethical categories but we also have to look at the context so suppose there is a violent mob on a riot and they are pursuing our friend and our third friend comes to our house and says, frantically, please save me and we hide them in the attic of our house and the mob knocks on our door is he here? what should we do at that time? what should we do? yeah, we can’t speak the truth because what does context mean? Mahabharata says basically that right and wrong action is to be decided not just by the content of the action but also the intent of the action and the consequence of the action so categorical ethics means that only the content matters what you are doing is all that matters but contextual ethics means the intent and the consequence also matters so why is somebody doing something? what is the result of doing that? so normally lying is bad but if lying produces a good result or rather speaking the truth produces a bad result then the right thing to do is speak the truth speak that which is not the truth that’s why we need not just values but we also need the right we need the right values but we also need the right hierarchy of values right hierarchy of values means speaking the truth is one value saving somebody’s life is another value so we need the right hierarchy of values which value has more value in which context so basically this confrontation between Balarama and Krishna is this confrontation between categorical ethics and contextual ethics so categorically speaking what Bhima did was wrong he hit him below the thigh that’s against the rules of the game so categorically speaking it’s wrong but if you consider in the context all the wrongs that they had done before then this was just a minor wrong so Krishna that’s what Krishna says that actually the Kauravas are reaping the fruits of their own action so now when Balarama says Krishna is just favouring Krishna is just favouring the Pandavas that’s his way of sticking to his point so that means another point that is demonstrated over here is that like I concluded causeless mercy is also less for some people that means somebody so Balarama was you could say almost unconditionally favourable to Duryodhana but even then that even if God is on your side if you are not on the side of virtue you will be destroyed so Balarama was with Duryodhana but Duryodhana was consistently vicious we all sometimes do some things wrong and that’s bad but when we do something wrong there is a difference between weakness and wickedness weakness is where we all have lust, anger, greed all these anarthas all these unhealthy religious drives within us and sometimes we succumb to them so weakness is basically hot-headed suddenly the urge comes and it overpowers us so at least we have an intelligence and conscience with which we try to battle the immoral drive but sometimes we are defeated that’s weakness whereas wickedness is where the intelligence is being perverted the conscience has been deadened and in wickedness a person doesn’t feel that I am doing anything wrong at all and they use their intelligence not to rectify the wrong that they are doing but to justify the wrong that they are doing so wickedness weakness is hot-headed wickedness is cold-blooded it’s cold-blooded where somebody systematically, diabolically plans how best to hurt someone and if that is the case weakness can be forgiven mercy can be given for weakness and the weakness can be overcome but for wickedness even mercy is not enough because that person doesn’t even have the desire to change God’s grace can magnify even the slightest good that we may do or even the good desire that we may have but God’s grace no matter how powerful it is it will never overrule our free will it will never overrule our free will and in the case of wickedness the person has basically committed to use their free will to do terrible things so even God’s grace is not and that’s why Balram even with his unflinching support for Duryodhana is not able to what this very complex dynamic relationship between Krishna, Balram and Duryodhana demonstrates is that that God even if God takes the side of vice but vice will be doomed by their own actions so God is not just on the side of good God is also on the side of the bad but if the bad don’t want to be reformed then even God cannot help them so God wants to help us but he needs us to want his help to seek his help to want to change we can help the unable but we can’t help the unwilling we can’t help the unwilling and Duryodhana is unwilling and thus he is destroyed so Balram serves Krishna in this extraordinary way by giving him someone to contend with and through his actions he also demonstrates the dynamic interaction between causeless mercy and free will so I’ll summarise I spoke today on this theme of how Balram’s causeless mercy on Duryodhana is not enough for Duryodhana so I started by talking about how Krishna and Balram they are best of friends and in friendship we want someone to spar with someone to contend with so Krishna has Balram play that role and one way he plays that role is by taking the side of those whose side Krishna has taken so at one level God is in the side of the good but another level is God transcends the sides and if God takes sides in this world, God takes the side of the good then God demonstrates that I will even take the side of the bad so Krishna takes the side of the Pandavas Duryodhana takes the side of the Kauravas and then I talked about the principle of equality, reciprocity and mercy, they are like one spectrum for a personal relationship equality alone is not enough, reciprocity has to be there but in the human divine relationship it’s not just reciprocity, it’s mercy we do a little and the Lord gives a lot more in return and we talked about mainly in the relationship between Duryodhana and Balram, I talked about three main points three main incidents first was that he helped, somehow they hit off with each other and then he taught him special skills in mace fighting by which he became equal to Bhima who was better than him in strength or even superior and then he took the side of, initially he felt that the Pandavas had been dealt with unfairly but Duryodhana spun his side of the story and Balram felt that no it was Yudhishthira’s fault that he gambled nobody forced him to and he told him to be cautious and because Krishna had chosen to fight against he knew that Krishna would support the Pandavas and he didn’t want to fight against Krishna so he went to the pilgrimage but because he had trained Duryodhana so he wanted to see that final fight between Duryodhana and Bhima that’s why he came back by that time and in that fight the match was rigged like a batsman whose stumps will never fall down so there’s no way Bhima could have defeated Duryodhana and therefore because the match itself was unfair Bhima had to use an unfair wins to win this match and the confrontation between Bhima and between Krishna and Balram at the end about the morality of Bhima’s actions is the confrontation between contextual ethics and categorical ethics what is right is determined not just by the content of the action but also by its context context means its intent and its consequences so divorced from context what Bhima did was outrageously wrong but consider in context that was the only thing that he could do to get the right result and thus he did that so because Duryodhana had not just weakness but wickedness and although he had Balram’s support unstintingly but if somebody is committed to vice even God is not enough to save them so God can help the unwilling God can help the unable but not the unwilling and thus Balram’s causeless mercy even his causeless mercy is less is too less to redeem Duryodhana thank you very much Hare Krishna so any questions or comments they were asking why why is Subhadra not present in Krishna’s childhood pastimes well of course you could say there is a contextual reason and there is a transcendental reason contextually Krishna’s birth happens in mystery and secrecy basically so the goddess basically when that girl child who is born to Yashoda and is taken by Vasudeva to Krishna Vasudeva to Mathura she slips out of Kamsa’s hand she appears as the goddess so actually she is considered to be Subhadra but during that time because the whole idea was you have to throw Kamsa off the track of Krishna so what happens is it appears as if to everyone that she has disappeared and then she is not there in the childhood pastimes because in those childhood pastimes primarily it is that Kamsa suspects that Krishna is the great child but he is never sure as he sees more and more demons being killed it becomes more and more clear but till then it is not clear and in general in Vraja except for Rohini there is no one else who is not from Vraja Vraja, Vrindavan is a particular mood and although Subhadra is a very very intimate associate of Krishna but in the mood of Vrindavan Subhadra her mood is more of the mood of Dwarka although she wants to come to Vrindavan and the whole Jagannath Yatra is about coming to Vrindavan but the flavour of that relationship is that she appreciates Vrindavan from outside and thus in Krishna’s childhood pastimes because she has already been taken so if suddenly that girl who is disappeared, who we thought was the goddess turns out to be the sister and she is already there with Krishna that will raise Kamsa’s suspicion so she just disappears in the childhood pastimes Any other questions or comments? So thank you very much Shri Balaram Ji Ki Jai Shreela Prabhupada Ki Gaur Bhakta Vrindaki Jai Jai Gaur Premanandai