If several spiritual organizations urge us to study their philosophy and try our their process how should we decide what to follow?

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
A question from Timothy. Suppose there are two organizations claiming to be right and both say you read our philosophy and practice you will get results.
Also on all other levels like lifestyle they are almost looking to be equal. So what are the criteria according to which we should choose? Or we have to at least take one step. So even after getting some result or realization of some philosophy someone challenges that you are getting some results because some mystic person like yogi would have written it and he may not be god or satyavich avatar of the lord.
So how do we refute this argument? Answer. Firstly there is it’s not a matter of studying the philosophy and practicing. It is also a matter of what the philosophy is and what the practice is.
Somebody may say that practice this and your mind will become more peaceful. Now even by the practice of ashtanga yoga or some other mystic, some other processes which will bring people to the mode of goodness. They will produce a result that brings people to the mode of goodness.
And from empirical point of view the mode of goodness is definitely better than the mode of passion. So in that sense it is certainly not the claim of Krishna Panchayat’s philosophy that it alone can bring about transformation. So if there are organizations that bring people to the mode of goodness that is good.
And as far as it goes, that’s very it’s helpful overall in creating the mode of goodness in the overall society. The only challenge may come when the mode of goodness is considered to be the highest. That means whatever hazy understanding of the absolute truth that is there.
Satwat Sanjayate Jnanam is said but Acharya has described that in the mode of goodness the learning that we get the Jnan that we get is primarily impersonal. You don’t get a personal understanding of God. That has to come at the mode of pure goodness itself.
So it will bring people to the mode of goodness and if it makes claim that that is the highest level then we have to take issues with that. At the same time, if it is just getting people to the mode of goodness and it is helping people to become more balanced, more mature, more controlled then there is nothing wrong with that. So, as I said, it’s not just a matter of follow our process, understand our philosophy follow our process.
What is the philosophy aiming for? Is it actually aiming for love of God? And is the process leading to the development of love of God? So, love of God is the universal, largely speaking, goal talked about by all religions. Jesus said that the topmost commandment is to love God. Islam is based on surrender to God.
And Vedic literature also talks about that which is love of God. So the first question would be, is it teaching love of God? And if it is, and if people are actually developing love of God, now how do we know if people are developing love of God? We discussed about internal and external symptoms of love of God. Internal symptom is satisfaction due to experience of God and external symptom is that leads to detachment from everything else.
these are all outlines. Specifically, Krishna Prabhupada himself when he was asked by some person from Hippie in America, Swamiji, your philosophy is around that of Buddha. So Prabhupada said, do you follow Buddha? He said, no.
Prabhupada said, follow Buddha. Follow Jesus, follow Krishna, follow someone, don’t just talk. What that means is, if you follow a particular path, we will ourselves realize how far it takes us and we will get elevated.
And if it is not right path, we will also understand that it doesn’t give the promised results. And that way also we will, by recognizing that this path is not the right one, move closer to the right path. So, for a seeker who is venturing towards spiritual life, ultimately we cannot have a set of iron-clad absolute criteria.
These are the criteria we should look for in a spiritual organization. Because, even if we give criteria like that, as I said a few criteria would be that it should help people to become detached from material life, it should help the person to develop love of God and love of God also to some extent. So, these criteria itself may not make sense at the starting level of spiritual life.
Because, when one starts off with one’s own passion, one will be expecting worldly results in the spiritual process. So, therefore, at that level, the definition of success in spirituality that one would expect from a spiritual organization will itself vanish. So, if the lifestyle is similar to what is taught by Krishna Consciousness, that would mean, say, people are already following four element principles, something like that, which is quite rare and remarkable.
Some people who follow, but it is very rare where a spiritual organization makes that as a condition. Some people might be from their culture or upbringing be following this, and they continue to follow this. There are many traditional South Indian, Brahmin South Indian people, religious people, who do not have any of these vices.
But, for a person who has been doing that, and to view all of them is quite rare and is remarkable. So, when we are talking about transformation, transformation is what? It may be in terms of, say, the internal satisfaction that a person has. Somebody will feel, I feel better, my mind is more peaceful.
But, these are subjective feelings. And they may or may not be deep and authentic. Sometimes, some people, especially one of the biggest problems that comes up is, when a person accepts a spiritual path, that person starts thinking that, now this is the path I have accepted, I can’t be wrong, I must be right.
Therefore, rather than exploring whether the path is right, the person starts using his intelligence to prove that the path is right. Then, when that open-mindedness changes into closed-mindedness, then it becomes difficult for the person to keep moving on. And to come to the path that will take him to the highest understanding of the Absolute Truth.
But, if somebody is open-minded, then the ultimate guide is Krishna. And Krishna will guide a person in a super-soon and proudly pursue it onwards. The book Journey Home of Radhanatma is indicative of a person who left America just in search of God and went to experience so many teachers but eventually came to Krishna’s lotus feet.
So, how did that work out? Ultimately, it is, He directs the wanderings and he will direct a sincere soul who is wandering towards a path that will bring him back to Krishna. So, firstly, look at what is the goal. Secondly, in addition to a subjective right here, like I feel better or I feel more peaceful, we have to look whether actually there is an attachment to God manifested as detachment from matter.
I am going to lend you a hand. Then, there is also one has to look at whether the path is giving a clear understanding of God because that is also important. There are many Christians also who live celibate lives and they were devoted to God, which is fine.
They will be definitely elevated and depending on the love of God that they have developed, accordingly they will get a destination that is compatible to their level of spiritual advancement. Therefore, we have to be very clear that the criteria that we can give are basically two. Positive criteria in terms of knowledge of God, love of God and the negative criteria in terms of detachment from worldly pleasures, especially immoral, anti-devotional worldly pleasures.
But beyond that it is ultimately up to every seeker and one cannot possibly go about exploring all possible paths. There are so many paths one can explore. The first level of experimentation is intellectual.
Does it make sense? There are many paths which may not make sense. Just like when we go to a doctor, it is not that when I want a treatment for my constipation, I try all the existing therapies that are there in the world. I have a general understanding of the criteria.
Which doctor will I try out? Whatever the doctor says should make sense to me. Secondly, if the doctor prescribes some treatments, if I take the treatment, it should make me feel better. If it doesn’t improve my condition, then there is no point in continuing the treatment.
So essentially choosing the spiritual path is like choosing a medical treatment. So the difference could be that people may not have any clear understanding of what is the sickness and what is the health of the spiritual path. So open-mindedness means that one doesn’t impose one’s conceptions on the spiritual path.
One may not be open-minded in terms of absolute understanding that scriptures are the absolute authority and other things are the spirituality. That understanding cannot be expected from a new seeker. But what can definitely be expected is that one is open to understanding spirituality on its own terms and not in the terms that fit into one’s own mental cupboard.
That means I have a materialistic idea of life and I expect spirituality should make my life material life better, you see. To the extent it makes my material life better, to that extent it is a valid path. If now, even Krishna consciousness will make my material life better it is a valid state.
Because when our mind is stabler, naturally we will perform better in our material life also. But that is not the defining criteria. So, initially if we just focus if we are on a spiritual search like that or we are guiding somebody else on a spiritual search like that then the first level check will be whether it makes a lot of sense.
Second level check will be whether what it promises works or not. Whether it delivers what it promises or not. So, then as we advance or as we become more discriminating, then we will look at what it promises.
Is it material or is it transcendental? Is it talking about love of God or is it talking about worldly things itself? And by that we can move forward and gradually come to the understanding of pure love of God on its own terms. And Prabhupada generally said that if we connect ourselves with a path that helps us to develop love of God then that’s a valid path. Regarding the source of the knowledge, whether it has come from some mystic yogi or it has come from the Supreme Lord.
Ultimately we are trying to verify or we are trying to find a proof for Shabda in terms of Pratyekshana Namah. And because Shabda is higher we cannot really use that in a valid way. So, and even if we say that it is Shabda Shabda, it’s a word of God, but when it comes to the human plane it has to use some human agent and we say scriptures are revealed by God, but then when they come into humanity it is through some sages.
So, those sages when they go into a mystical trance that is called Vaidusha Pratyekshana. So, we ask them is the main medium for us who has compiled the Vedic literature. So, that something is a word of God is something which cannot be because it is a supernatural event or a supernatural claim if it is not truly assuming or we start from the position of doubt but again because it is supernatural claim it is almost impossible to prove it by natural means.
So, how do we move forward? We essentially have to see that look at the internal consistency of the teachings and the external consistency. Internal consistency means that whatever process we are following is it coherent with the larger body of the Vedic literature because the person is saying that all the lakhs of shlokas in Vedic literature all of them have been concocted by some yogi or just the process of chanting Hare Krishna has been recommended by some yogi. So, if we say that just the process of chanting, obviously nobody will claim that all the lakhs and lakhs of verses are just coming from some yogi.
So, then if he is saying that just the process of chanting Hare Krishna is coming from some yogi’s yogi’s conceptions then you have to say okay but is it overall compatible with the larger body of the Vedic scriptures. So, is it internally consistent? That is the meaning of internal consistency. Does it agree with the larger body of the Vedic scriptures? If it does, then we understand that this is a this is a part of the Vedic literature.
It is not something separate. So, even if it has come through some yogi, it is more like the it is more like Shruti. Shruti, when it is elaborated upon or made more clear, then it becomes Shruti.
So, then it becomes like that. Then it is a part of the Vedic body of literature itself. On the other hand, if it is something which is contrary to the Vedic scriptures to the broad principles or general outlines of the Vedic scriptures then, for example, there is a book which somebody has written called as Krishna Upanishad.
So, now there is no reference to Krishna Upanishad in any of the traditional list of Upanishads. Somebody claims that I have discovered this book or I have revealed this book. There is a similarly something called Allah Upanishad.
So, these sort of books there are no references to this in the traditional literature. And their messages often they condemn deity worship. So, their messages are more in compatibility with what the philosophers teach rather than what the Vedic literature teaches.
So, then there is obviously a lack of internal consistency there. Then we can clearly reject those. Now, what we mean by external consistency is that do they produce the same consistent results generation after generation after generation.
If they do, if we look at the person of Krishna consciousness to a broad extent we will see that whatever was the result of Arjuna his intellectual conceptions, how they change while studying the Bhagavad Gita, his devotional commitments, how they became more refined and focused on studying the Bhagavad Gita. That is what was demonstrated by Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. That is what was demonstrated by the Goswami.
That is what is demonstrated through the parampara down till our level. So, generally if any living being, any ordinary living being, non transcendental or living being who is not supreme, if a person reveals knowledge it may have its validity but it will not have universal validity. Because that person, because he is not God, because he is not omniscient, so he can’t really address the heart of the living entity and cater to that in a universal way.
So, universality would also be an important criteria. That would be the external consistency. That means it is same as applying generation after generation after generation.
So, the essential message in the God iteration remains the same. And that is a growth or a or a further development of what is actually given in the Vedic literature in a latent way. It might not have an emphasis before but the principle of bhakti and bhakti to the supreme lord who manifests as Vishnu or one of his avatars, that is there in the Vedic literature directly.
So, that way by looking at the internal consistency of that body of knowledge and process with the larger body of the literature and by its external consistency, by looking at whether it is producing the same results generation after generation, we can understand