Is there a difference between vairagya and virakti?
Answer Podcast
Transcript
This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
So, is there a difference between vairagya and virakti? So, there are two different things over here. In general, when we study scripture, terms have general meanings and terms have specific meanings.
So, for example, when we use the word Bhagawan in the context of Brahman, Paramatma, Bhagawan, at that time the word Bhagawan has a particular meaning. It is referring to the personal aspect of the absolute truth. And the word Brahman has another particular meaning.
That is, it is referring to the impersonal aspect of the absolute truth. But it is not that in all occurrences in scripture, these words always mean the same things. The word Bhagawan is also used for Bhagawan Badrayana, Bhagawan Narada, Bhagawan Shiva.
There it just refers to a very great saintly person who is devoted to Bhagawan. So, there is a technical meaning of words within a particular context. And there is a general meaning which may not apply in that context.
So, Brahman does not always refer to the impersonal aspect of the absolute truth. Brahman is a general term referring to spiritual reality. When we say, use the word Brahma Thato Brahma Jijnasa, it is not referring to now enquire about the impersonal Brahman.
No, it is enquire about general spiritual truth, of spiritual truth. So, in fact, Brahman can also be a describer for Vishnu, for the absolute truth in general. So, the point is that there are concepts and there are terms.
So, you know, I could say concept is like a suitcase. Concepts are mental. And terms are like handles for carrying the suitcase.
So, term is a verbal tool for handling a concept. Or a term is a verbal handle to a mental concept. And now, like two different suitcases may sometimes have exactly identical handles.
Isn’t it? Exactly same handle may be for a small suitcase, another for a very big suitcase. So, the handle, just which handle is there is not as important as which suitcase it is connected to. If we have this carousel, you know, where we collect the baggage after we come by a flight.
If I try to identify my suitcase only by looking at my handle, I might pick up somebody else’s suitcase because somebody else’s suitcase may also have a similar handle. So, you know, we have to look at words, look at terms in scripture, especially when the Acharyas are giving some kind of analytical framework. Then at that time, they use the terms for specific means.
But it is not that every occurrence in scripture of that term will necessarily be with that meaning only. So, having said this, now, is there a difference between vairagya and virakti? I’d put it this way that there are two kinds of renunciation. The renunciation that comes by punya or the renunciation that comes by the practice of material processes of austerity, you know, in jnana, in yoga.
So, there is a kind of renunciation which comes by practices of piety. And there is the renunciation that comes by the practice of bhakti. So, there is a difference between the two.
So, we could say in a particular context that vairagya, usually the word vairagya is associated with, it’s coupled with jnana. And jnana and vairagya are considered to be the characteristics of the path of jnana. So, in that context, the vairagya that comes is not so much from knowledge of the absolute truth.
That vairagya comes from knowledge of this world. When one studies the world seriously and understands that, oh, this world is temporary. śrutiḥ pratyakṣa-maiteyam anumāneṣu jātuṣṭayam pramāṇeṣu anavasthāṇād vikalpā ca virajyate In the Uddhavita, it is said that there are four ways in which a person can become detached from this world.
śrutiḥ, by hearing from scriptures, pratyakṣa, śrutiḥ pratyakṣam, pratyakṣa means we may actually see, we may meet a very wealthy person and that wealthy person, we think, oh, he must be so happy. But then when we go and talk with them, you know, maybe their daughter has run away with some man and their son is a drug addict recovering in some drug center, their wife has filed for divorce and, you know, they’re all alone, suspicious, miserable. Wealth does not lead to happiness.
So pratyakṣa. śrutiḥ pratyakṣa-maiteyam. Maiteya is itihās, so historical narratives.
There are often, in almost all folk traditions, there are, not in folk tradition, in all religional traditions, there are stories about how greed leads to misery, how a person who is very miserly or very materialistic, they suffer and then they die. There are Aesop’s tales and so many tales like that. So from itihās also we can learn.
And śrutiḥ pratyakṣa-maiteyam, anumāneśvacātuśram, anumāna. Anumāna is inference. Anumāna, sometimes we use it negatively to refer to guesswork, but anumāna also refers to inference.
So from what I have seen, I can infer. Somebody may say, oh, I have seen so many marriages, nobody is happy. Therefore, I may infer that marriage doesn’t lead to happiness.
Or I have seen so many wealthy people, they have their own anxieties. In fact, they have more anxiety than others. Therefore, wealth doesn’t lead to happiness.
That’s inference. So in these four ways, śrutiḥ pratyakṣa-maiteyam, anumāneśvacātuśram, pramāneśva-anavasthānād. Anavasthānād means this world does not have a permanent avasthā.
It does not have a permanent situation. It is temporary. Vikalpāt sa virajyate.
And in that way, when the world offers, hey, this is not enjoyable, but this is enjoyable. Try this alternative. Try this alternative.
No. Virajyate. A person becomes detached.
One does not pursue these pleasures. So here, when jñāna and vairāgya are coupled together, it is primarily by knowledge of this world’s temporariness that one gets detached. Whereas when one practices bhakti, it is that by attraction to Krishna, one becomes detached from this world.
So there is that difference between detachment that comes from understanding the nature of this world and how it is miserable. And there is detachment that can come from understanding the beautiful beauty of Krishna. And therefore, one feels, what is this? What is there to enjoy in this world when Krishna is so relational? So those two are different kinds of renunciation.
So, yes, in that sense, there is a difference between different kinds of renunciation. And in bhakti, if we have the vairāgya about the nature of this world, that is good. But that alone is not necessarily leading to bhakti.
Because sometimes vairāgya can also make us proud. Among all the six opulences, if we see, jñāna and vairāgya are the two which are most likely to be mistaken as signs of spiritual advancement. If somebody is wealthy, nobody will think that they must be very spiritually advanced.
Somebody very good looking, nobody will think that that good looks are necessarily a sign of spiritual advancement. But when it comes to jñāna and vairāgya, just as wealth and beauty can come by past karma, similarly, jñāna and vairāgya can also come by past karma. Some people may just have a better intellectual level.
Some people have better sense control capacity. Now when that comes by past karma, that is favorable to bhakti. Now if a person is wealthy, they can use their wealth in Krishna’s service.
Similarly, if a person is intellectual, they can use their intellectual capacity in Krishna’s service. Similarly, like that, if a person is renounced, that renunciation can be used in Krishna’s service. But that renunciation alone is not bhakti.
But when we become focused on Krishna, absorbed in Krishna, and that brings renunciation, that is actually the fruit of bhakti. So here, in 1.2.7, Vāsudeva bhagavati bhakti-yoga prayojita jñānaity āśvairāgyaṁ jñānaṁ ca dhāyatukam, what is that section doing in the Bhāgavatam? That whole section is, the previous verse is parādharma. Parādharma is bhakti.
So now he says the parādharma is bhakti. Then naturally some people may get the question, but what about jñāna and vairāgya? Because traditionally, jñāna and vairāgya were considered to be very elevated spiritual states. So then, in that section 1.7.8.9.10.11, basically what Suta Goswami does is, he says how everything else is subordinate to bhakti.
So he says, jñāna and vairāgya? No, they will come automatically when bhakti is there. But what about Varanashram? The purpose of Varanashram is to actually develop bhakti. Otherwise, Varanashram is useless.
So like that he is analysing various things over there. So in that context, when the word vairāgya comes, it is similar to the way the vairakti is used in Bhakti Samaj Sindhu. So it is the renunciation that comes from devotion and the renunciation that comes as opulence from past karma.
They are two different things. Does that answer your question?