Is aversion always bad – isn’t Yamunacharya averse to sensual pleasure? (Vedic wisdom)

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Yes, Krishna. So, the point is, he is emotionally absorbing Krishna.
But while being emotionally absorbing Krishna, sometimes some other desire comes. So, when I use the word agoravijan, when the Bhagavad Gita says, it is referring to emotional fixation in the negative. We see aversion.
Some people may say that in America, now there is a whole stand of white supremacists. We are the real Americans, and all the immigrants, they are creating trouble for us. So, Mexicans are creating trouble, African-Americans are creating trouble.
Some people, people of a particular religion are creating trouble. People of a particular region are creating trouble. So, in that case, one is obsessed with them.
So, one’s mind is filled with when we are saying aversion, emotional fixation. So, for a devotee, when Yamunacharya is saying, when I am absorbing Krishna, if anything tempts, if anything comes up, so the point here is not that I am, that the point here is not aversion to that desire. The point is the sweetness of Krishna.
Normally, when we get something worldly which promises pleasure, if there is some delicious food, our mouth starts watering. We start getting craving for it. But this verse is talking that when one becomes absorbed in Krishna, how great must be the taste, that there is absolutely no craving.
It is that one feels, this is nothing. I don’t need this at all. So, there is no emotional fixation in a negative sense and positive.
It is in a, as compared to the sweetness of Krishna bhakti, now, yes, for us in the sadhaka stage, sometimes, a little amount of aversion, maybe, like we say sometimes, if one spitted twice shut, playing with a dog, and once, or once burnt twice shut, if I have drunk some milk and I am very hot, next time, every time I get milk, I say, no, I won’t drink this milk. I am playing with a dog, I have got bitten. Then I won’t go near a dog.
So, similarly, if there is a particular area in which we have fallen into delusion, then we may need to take extra precaution. So, if somebody is a renounced order, then they have to be a little more cautious when associating with people of the, of the upper gender. So, in this case, it is caution, not aversion.
Now, what is the difference between caution and aversion? Caution is centered on one’s own safety. Aversion is centered on on on that object, and considering that object is so bad. The two are very different.
The focus is, this is not healthy for me, so I will not do this. This may tempt me, this may deceive me. So, I will keep a distance from this.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean that object is bad. A simple example, let’s say, somebody has got diabetes. And in our movement, there is so much sweet prashadam that is there.
So, now, if I have got diabetes, if I start, sweets are so bad, nobody is educating sweets. Sweets are maya, sweets are maya. And that is wrong.
Sweets is something which I should not eat. So, I have to have caution, and that is required. So, sometimes the word aversion may be used in the sense of caution.
But, the, when, when it is used in that sense, the emphasis is that we have to keep a safe distance from it. But it is not that that object is bad. So, aversion means we start demonizing that object itself.
That is anxiety.