NoI 3 Text 1 – How to spiritualize anger in devotional service – Mumbai 2013

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Thank you very much.
One of our fundamental emotional drives can be rejected entirely. So, anger is also a fundamental drive which we cannot reject it, but we can sublimate it, we can spiritualise it. And that is what Srila Prabhupada talks about.
Generally, Srila Prabhupada would give these three examples of anger, of Hanuman burning Lanka, of Arjuna fighting against the Kauravas and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu getting angry with Jagai and Madai. So, now what essentially is the role of anger? So, we know now the scriptures talk about the, can any of you tell some examples of the other side of anger? Or rather it could be how anger can be spiritualised? So, these three examples are there, but are there examples of scripture of anger causing destruction? Famous example from the Bhagavatam fourth canto. Yes, Lakshmi Pujapati.
The cursing and the counter cursing led to the devastation of the sacred sacrificial arena. So, in general, the scriptures acknowledge the fact that anger is destructive. And Krishna also talks about, in several places in the Bhagavad Gita, he talks about anger as arising from the mode of passion ignorance.
Krishna says that So, he does talk about anger as undesirable. And also then he talks about the three gates to hell in the 16th chapter, 16.21, he talks about So, Krishna clearly, so we look at the danger. First, we can understand the dangers of anger if we want the principle and principle is that it is a gate to hell.
So, as I told in 16.21. And if you want the example for the principle, that is the Daksha pastime. So, there is no doubt that anger is dangerous. And of course, Krishna doesn’t say that anger has to be entirely given up.
At least, that’s not what we see in the past times. But even when we see Hanuman’s anger, Hanuman still, after he destroys Lanka, he initially is delighted and then he is devastated. Because he thinks, when he sees most of Lanka burning, and he looks around, and he is feeling happy that he has wreaked havoc on the demon who has caused so much to pain to his lord and beloved, Rama and Sita.
But then suddenly he thinks that, when I was burning up all of Lanka, maybe Ashok Vatika also got burnt. And he is so mortified and thought, what have I done? I had come to get the message of the whereabouts and the well-being of Sita, but I have destroyed Ashok Vatika and what has happened to Sita? And as he is struck with agony and the thought, suddenly he hears a voice from the Devas. And as he is trying, first with all the devastation all around, he doesn’t make sense of the voice, he starts lamenting, he starts chastising, castigating himself.
Why did I succumb to anger like this? Why did I lose control of myself and cause destruction like this everywhere? And he suddenly hears a soothing voice from the skies, Sita is safe, what you have done is not at all, it’s not bad. Sita is safe, basically that’s the message. And then he calms down.
So, even in the Ramayana, where anger is glorified, is utilised, still there is always the possibility that the anger can take us beyond the limits. So, that’s why, vācho vegam manasaḥ krodha vegam. So, whenever there is anger, we can use anger in devotional service, but there is always the possibility that instead of, what may happen is, instead of we using anger in Krishna’s service, anger may use us in Maya’s service.
What may happen is that exactly the opposite may happen. Instead of we using anger in Krishna’s service, anger may use us in Maya’s service. Therefore, there is always the need to be cautious.
Now, often our anger may arise not out of genuine concern for others or even concern for the Lord. It may arise because of our own feeling of say, insecurity or insult. So, it is said that whatever emotion comes from the heart, touches the heart.
Whatever emotion comes from the ego, goes to the ego. So, many times when we feel angry, we may feel angry, we may think my anger is spiritual, but actually it may not be spiritual. It may just be feeling that, you know, I have been scorned, I have been neglected.
And when the anger comes up because of that, that anger may not really be coming out of a concern for Krishna’s mission or concern for Krishna’s devotees. That anger may be coming just because we have been, our ego has been hurt. Now, naturally as devotees, we want to be sensitive to others and we don’t want to hurt others, we don’t want others to hurt us.
But as far as anger is concerned, when we are purely motivated, even the anger is beneficial. But when we are not purely motivated, then anger can often be counterproductive. So, basically, you know, when we talk about anger, the role of the anger is important ones.
There are basically, you know, this is a little bit, now what Prabhupada is giving the examples about discipline, you know, how Arjuna or Hanuman disciplined the miscreants. So, often when we talk about anger, we may feel angry with the materialists or we may feel angry with some devotees around us. Sometimes seniors may become angry with the subordinates, the subordinates are not doing their services properly.
So, generally there are, it says that there are four kinds of parents, because basically parents have a responsibility to discipline their children. And discipline involves some amount of correction, which we motivate by anger. So, basically, what are these four kinds of parents? Parenting basically involves these two aspects, loving and disciplining.
So, the worst kind of parents are neglectful parents. So, no love, no discipline. That is what happens.
Then there are authoritarian parents. They offer no love, only discipline. Then there are permissive parents.
Permissive parents, they offer no discipline, what they offer is only love. Actually, what they offer is not really love, because love, now why, what I mean by love is that they offer guidance, they offer support, but they don’t discipline. And the best kind of parents are authoritative parents.
Have a balance of love and discipline. So, actually, there has to be a balance of this. That means, when a person is doing something, I’ll explain these four points again.
What do I mean by love and discipline in this context? Should we stay away from the family, in a troubling room? We can stay away. So, love basically means when we want somebody to do something, that person should feel that we are his well-wisher. And we should explain, we should do this because this is good for you.
And this is how it is good. So, love means showing our care. And then explaining, love essentially means that we value the person and we value the intelligence of the person so that we can explain to the person why you should do this or why you should not do this.
So, love can mean many, this is many aspects over here. Love means basically, here in this context means caring for the person and valuing the intelligence of that person. And discipline means correcting when there is wrongdoing.
So, now, the neglectful parents, what do they do? They are just in their own world. They are too busy. They don’t care for their children at all.
Children will just be watching TV, just get out of my way, whatever you want to do. So, no love and no discipline. That is not at all a good kind of parenting.
When there is authoritarianism, they just banged out. Don’t do this. If you do this, I will punish you.
And they are very heavy in speech, heavy in punishment. And often the children become very emotionally scarred by this kind of parenting. It is only discipline, no love is offered.
On the other hand, the liberal parents or permissive parents, they say that actually, you know, how can I hurt my child? So, whatever my child asks for, I will do that. And they think that that is the way they are expressing love. But often, then they spoil the children by that.
So, permissive, they never set any limits for their children. On the other hand, authoritative are, they explain, this is what you should do, this is what you should not do. And this is why you should not do these things.
And then after that, they also, if still some do something wrong, they give some warning and they give some correction and some kind of punish disciplinary action may also be required. And they do not flinch from doing that. Even by doing the disciplinary action, they make sure that they are explained properly what is wrong and what is right and why they are being given and how they can correct themselves so that the disciplinary action will not be given.
But basically, the idea is that there are times when if we want to be of true help to others, we have to be strong. And that applies to everyone. So, just as when we want to help others, we may have to be strong with others.
Similarly, when our seniors, our guides want to help us, they may also need to be strong with us. So, where this paraphrase talks about krodha vegam. So, when you have to regulate the urge for anger, that means we express it in a way that actually makes sure that other people are benefited.
So, that means the anger will have to be expressed in a very regulated way. It has to be expressed in a way by which the person understands the purpose of the anger and the person learns the lesson that needs to be learned. So, in general, whenever we become angry towards anyone, that anger creates a distance or even a rupture in the relationship.
So, therefore, anger in love itself is not something which is conducive for healthy relationships. But at the same time, all of us are human beings and we will commit mistakes sometimes, others will commit mistakes sometimes. And at the very least, people’s mistakes have to be pointed out if they are major mistakes and they need to be helped so that they will be correct, they will learn the right way to act.
And for that purpose, sometimes anger needs to be expressed. But whenever anger is expressed, it has to be done in such a way that people learn the lesson. Now, there is also the scriptural statement about when a devotee, we are talking here about those who are under our care or those whom we are responsible for.
So, those may be those who are aspiring devotees or devotees. Now, what about those who are blasphemous? You know scriptures tell. So, this response, this is for devotees.
Now, let’s look at the second part. If we are doing it for blasphemers, the scriptures say that there are three ways in which we can respond when somebody blasphemes the Lord or the devotee. Does anyone know what are the three ways we respond? Yes.
Okay, don’t listen. What does that mean? Yes, first is leave that place. Second is cut the tongue.
So, now actually cut the tongue, literally it itself includes defeating the person through logic and arguments. So, now it’s not necessary that any one of these is right or wrong. You know, in the Daksha pastime only, when Radhanath Mahajan was giving a class on this topic, I had asked him this question that when the whole pastime, how it started is that Lord Shiva was disrespected Baksha and then Lord Shiva left and then eventually Daksha was doing sacrifice.
At that time, Lord Shiva was not invited. So, Parvati went in sacrifice with the followers of Lord Shiva and Parvati was also neglected over there. Her father didn’t welcome her and then Parvati Sati, she was Sati at the time.
So, she saw that there was no sacrifice allocated for Lord Shiva also and that’s why she felt very upset and then there was this whole cursing and counter-cursing that started. When that cursing and counter-cursing started, in a sense for the followers of Lord Shiva, when Lord Shiva was criticised, blasphemed, Lord Shiva was like their master, like the spiritual master. So, it was almost like a Guru Aparadha.
So, they were bound to respond and then the whole cursing counter-cursing started. So, my question was that who exactly was wrong over there? What exactly was wrong in the part of the followers of Lord Shiva or how do they pinpoint what was wrong over there? So, actually he said for the followers of Lord Shiva, certainly when Lord Shiva is blasphemed, they have to respond. But the principles that are given in the scriptures, they are given not as a rigid formula that has to be followed.
They are given as guidelines for how we can make things better and not how we make things worse. So, in this particular situation, the response of the followers of Lord Shiva of counter-cursing, the end result was that it simply made things worse. So, it may be best in such a situation to walk away from that case.
So, we see now what happened was, in the Daksha pastime only we can see, what did Lord Shiva do? Lord Shiva walked away. Then we had Sati who committed suicide and we had Shiva’s followers who got into cursing and counter-cursing. So, it is not necessary that one formula is right and others are wrong.
These are all three possible courses of action and the respond in such a way that the situation becomes better, not worse. So, sometimes we will be working in a company or we may go to meet our relatives and they may speak a lot about criticism of Krishna and Krishna and it is not that at that time we have to respond aggressively. We have to see what will be the best way we can deal with that situation.
Sometimes walking away from that situation, sometimes hearing and then responding calmly, that may be the best response. So, there is no rigid formula of how we can respond. The whole idea is that it is natural when what we value, what we cherish is criticised that we will feel angry and in a sense that anger is also an expression of devotion.
Generally, we think of or generally in India at least, people think that a sadhu should not become angry. That is the general conception. But that conception is based on a Mayavadi idea that the spiritual level of existence is devoid of all emotions and because it is devoid of all emotions, so it is devoid of anger also.
However, anger is also an expression of love, isn’t it? If we love something or someone and if that person is criticised, it is natural to feel angry. And if we don’t feel angry at that time, then it may indicate a deficiency in our devotion. When Hanumanji is right in front of Ravana and Ravana is blaspheming Lord Ram, it is natural to feel anger.
So, here the point which I am discussing is, there are two distinct points over here. That is, feeling anger is a sign of devotion but expressing anger may not always be devotional service. Feeling anger when Krishna is blasphemed is a sign of devotion.
Expressing that anger may not always be devotional service. That means, if I don’t feel anything, when suppose in the newspaper some article comes about Krishna’s mission which is all distorted facts and then it is very blasphemous, naturally we will feel pain, we will feel anger. It’s natural.
But how do we express that? That will be based on how best we can serve Krishna. So, feeling anger is not bad but expressing has to be done intelligently so that we improve the situation, not worsen the situation. Any questions about this till now? So, generally anger comes by instincts.
So, how do we control that? In general, the best way to deal with anger is to postpone its expression. That means that when we feel angry with someone, it’s best not to vent out at that time. But that also doesn’t mean that we suppress it forever.
Because if we try to suppress our feelings, then they will express themselves in ugly ways. And then, later on, suppose a person provokes us, one time I suppress it, second time I suppress it, third time I suppress it, five times I suppress it, six times I suppress it. And then when I express myself, I will seem unreasonably disproportionately angry.
And that will actually alienate that person further. So, therefore, actually when we feel angered by somebody’s conduct, it’s best that we don’t express ourselves at that time. But afterwards, at a time when that person is calm, when we have thought over the situation properly, then we decide how we can express ourselves.
So, generally the way I do it is most of my communication with devotees is in my email. If I am upset with somebody, I write an email. But if it’s a strong or heavy email, I won’t post it for at least three days after I have written it.
And same I try to do with my speech also. I mean, generally, if we are very heavy, angry about something, it’s best to write down our thoughts and then look over our thoughts. Am I really being disproportionately angry over here? Or is there a balanced reason? So, when I communicate myself in a coherent way, then it is easy to get the point across.
And also, whenever we are expressing anger, it is best that we express it targeted towards a behaviour, not the person. You know, it is important and instead of saying, you are such a lazy bum, that’s become the direct attack on the person. And then the whole, the person, it is not the person just when the person feels threatened, it is said that when the false ego goes into the defensive, nothing can budge the false ego actually.
So, rather than saying that, you know, whenever you don’t do a service that is told to be done on time, I feel very angry because so many other devotees get affected by this. So, here, what is the difference? There is a difference here. First is, there is a direct attack on the person.
In the second case, there is a specific incident that is mentioned, the specific consequence is given and then our feelings told. When the person doesn’t necessarily have to defend himself, the person has to, gets the impetus to correct himself. So, basically to separate the problem from the person and then explain how it is to be dealt with.
This sort of speech requires training. So, in general, don’t, as I said, don’t attack the person. So, instead separate the problem from the person.
That’s very important. If you don’t do this, then we lose the person. So, generally, whenever we want to give a correction, so how that should be given is, this is not something which is very easy to do in the spur of the moment and that’s why it’s good to think about it.
But at least when we know specific behaviour, then second is one’s own feeling and third is cause of that feeling which is equivalent to the result of that behaviour. So, that means when you come late for the morning programme, I feel annoyed because others will take this as a bad example and we will all be bringing all the standards of our moment by this, standards of our morning programme or whatever. So, a specific behaviour, one’s own feeling and then the cause of that feeling which is due to the result of that behaviour.
So, when we communicate in this way, then the result is that the person doesn’t see our emotion as unreasonable. The person doesn’t have to himself feel threatened. Okay, that’s the behaviour separate from the person and then we correct it.
We encourage that person to correct it. So, it is not necessary that this method will always work. Sometimes people may be too much into defensive.
But in general, if we keep this in mind, then there’s a greater likelihood that our communication will not fall on deaf ears, but it will bring about the desired effect. Okay, any further questions or comments? Okay, let’s move forward now. So, who is going to read now? Okay, so Juhave, Prabhupada is, here he talks briefly about Juhave and he will come back as in the commentary, he will go back to all these urges once again based on what Bhakti Sahasrara has said.
So, I’ll talk this briefly over and we’ll talk about it later. So, actually the controlling of the tongue is something which is not often talked about in most spiritual forums because the whole idea is that the idea of disconnecting oneself from material enjoyment is itself not something that is talked about. But nowadays people have a lot of concern for the food that they eat because many people suffer from obesity and obesity is largely a result of a person not being able to control the diet.
Of course, there are other factors. In some cases, with some people, obesity is hereditary and obesity itself is a relative term because some people may be somewhat overweight. But overall, if they are active and healthy, then that may not be obesity.
So, obesity basically is not just a physical state. It is a physical state that is dependent on one’s nature and one’s capacity for work. But still, there is definitely something like obesity and the whole issue is so complex that now some researchers have the idea that obesity is an infectious disease.
This is a paper that there are several medical journals in publishing articles about this. And the whole idea is that if somebody is obese, there are some germs which you have not yet discovered which could make people obese. And if you go near those people, you will get those germs and you will become obese.
This is a tragic idea. Actually, obesity may have some hereditary factors but it is definitely not caused by any disease. It is not germs.
It is basically the person is not able to control the diet. So, actually, America is the country with the, according to WHO, there are 800 million people in the world who are starving, who do not get adequate food to eat. And there are 1000 million people, let us say 1 million people, who are obese.
That means more than the number of people who get less food are the number of people who eat excessively. And it is not just a matter of eating excessive food. It is also a matter of eating the inappropriate kinds of food.
Actually, even before 50 years ago, food was never an item that was sold. Or even if it was sold, it was not a big industry. So, selling was not such a major industry.
But once selling became an industry, so all these food manufacturing giants, there are books written about this, these food manufacturing giants, their whole goal was to maximise the sales. And what will maximise the sales is the taste of the food. So, from 1970s, researchers found, it is not a fact that has to be really researched, but they found that the more salt, the more oil, the more sugar and the more fat, these four items that we put in the food, the more people eat it.
And in all the food, especially the fast food like say, pizzas or macarons or all this, the amount of the same item as it was cooked 30-40 years ago, 40-50 years ago, and the way it is cooked now, the amount of salt, sugar, fat and oil that has increased. And that’s why currently one of the major problems facing America is that they don’t have adequate number of able-bodied young men joining the army. Because most of the young people have grown up eating fast food and fast food just makes the body like a football.
And these people are just physically not suited. So, it’s a serious crisis and it’s a crisis. So, there are doctors who are saying, many doctors who say that, actually, modern society is committing suicide with its food.
It is committing suicide with its food. The kind of food we are eating is going to cause deletion. So, in general, always the facility for indulging in the tongue is there.
But in today’s society, that facility to indulge in the tongue has been expanded by the systematic planning and exploitation of these food producing companies. And people just become victim and the same culture is coming towards India. And it is also creating a similar crisis of obesity.
Now, obesity is the world’s number one causes of avoidable death. So, now, that is with respect to the broader society. Now, within devotional circle, just the act of regulating ourselves to prasad itself is a huge amount of regulation.
It’s a huge amount of regulation. And actually, that brings things under control substantially. Now, beyond that, if one can generally, as much as possible, stick to timing with the prasad, then that is a further step forward.
Now, prasad is one item where often the sense-graphically-fitted mentality or the enjoying mentality, you know, it gets in bypass of the following the four regulatory principles, it gets no other expression. So, all the enjoying mentality gets concentrated in the prasad. So, now, it’s not necessarily bad.
And Shrila Prabhupada was asked about devotees eating too much. Prabhupada said, if you eat too much, then you can eat, but don’t sleep up. Work equally hard.
So, otherwise, it will have its own effects. So, how we regulate it, that is something which each of us will have to learn on our own. And it doesn’t work out that somebody sets a standard of how much you should eat, how much you should not eat.
So, taking prasad, one time Shrila Prabhupada was asked, Prabhupada, when we take prasad, do the germs in the stomach also get benefited? Prabhupada said, yes. When you take prasad, you are doing social service. You are doing social service when you are taking prasad.
That’s true. Of course, that is not the only way to do social service. As sadhus, there are other ways of doing social service also, which are expected to do.
So, we have that example of when Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya became converted from an impersonalist to a devotee. And he was a reservoir of all bad logic. And Sarvabhauma, Sarvabhauma Bhakti Bhuvana Machare.
That Sarvabhauma, he was brought into the Bhumiya Bhakti by Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. So, what happened, the next morning, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu came to his place and knocked. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had gone to the Jagannath’s temple and taken and brought some prasad.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu would bring some prasad for Haridas Thakur. And on that day, he brought some prasad for Sarvambhattacharya also. So, when he knocked on the door of Sarvambhattacharya, Sarvambhattacharya had just woken up and he, Krishna, Krishna, he said and came out.
And as soon as he came out, he saw Chaitanya Mahaprabhu that he offered obeisances. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said, I have brought prasad for you. And then as soon as Sarvambhattacharya saw the prasad, immediately took the prasad and he ate it.
And now Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said, Sarvabhauma, what is this? You are a Brahmana, you have not taken bath, you have not taken your sanjhavandan, how is that you are taking prasad? So, then he quoted a shloka from the Padma Purana saying, prapti matrena bhoktavyam. This is as soon as you get prasad, take it. And then it is said that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was so delighted at that time.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu felt as if his descent has become successful, as if he has conquered all the three worlds. Now, prapti matrena bhoktavyam, take prasad as soon as we get it. This is not the only lesson from this past time.
What this represents is something important. Actually, in the path of impersonalism, the role of grace, role of kripa or mercy is greatly minimised. And the emphasis is primarily on one’s own determination, discrimination and adherence to the rules of purification.
So, on the impersonalist path, because ultimately they do not believe God to be a person. So, they cannot depend on the grace of God. So, what Sarvabhaupacharya’s immediate and unhesitant acceptance of prasadam indicated was that he instead of having faith in the rigid adherence to the rules, his faith had shifted to recognising the power of grace.
So, that was what pleased Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. That this hard-hearted impersonalist, instead of depending on rules and discrimination, is now wholeheartedly taking shelter of mercy, is believing in mercy, principle of mercy. That was what pleased Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
So, certainly prasadam is a form of mercy of the Lord and prasadam comes, we should honour prasadam. At the same time, prasadam also, generally, most spiritual manifestations of the Lord, they manifest in a particular material form. For example, the Bhagavad Gita is spiritual, but it manifests in a particular book.
Now, if I take a Bhagavad Gita and put it in water, if it’s put in water, the pages will get spoilt. The knowledge will remain transcendental, but the pages will become spoilt. That means, even when there is a spiritual manifestation, even when Krishna is manifesting in this world, when Krishna manifests through some material manifestation, the material manifestation follows certain laws, the normal laws of material nature.
The same applies to prasad also. Prasad is transcendental. It is Krishna’s mercy manifesting, but it’s manifesting through a particular material manifestation.
So, just as prasad is transcendental, but if it is kept for 6 hours, 10 hours, 15 hours, 24 hours, depending on the item, it can get spoilt. And then the spoilt prasadam, if we eat it, it will have some harmful effects on our health. Similarly, although prasadam is transcendental, because it is manifesting through a material manifestation, the material laws will still act.
So, if we eat disproportionately, that will have also an effect at a material level. Now, our health will get spoilt or as Prabhupada will talk about later, that the stomach becomes bloated, then that triggers sensual desires also. So, that means prasadam has a transcendental aspect, which is what is all glorified.
The principle of mercy that prasad represents is the transcendental potency that is there, but the same transcendental potency has manifested through a particular material manifestation. So, doctors talk about something called as hunger and something called as pseudo-hunger. What is the difference between hunger and pseudo-hunger? Somebody says that, I am hungry for gulab jamun.
Hunger is never for a specific item. Hunger is basically a biological sensation that is created because of a sense of emptiness in the stomach. Whereas, when there is hunger for a particular item, that is not a biological need, that is a psychological need, that is a craving created by the mind.
So, naturally we will like some items more and some items less, that is fair enough. And we can always take the item which we like, there is nothing wrong with that. But that attraction to specific items within prasadam did not necessarily be transcendental.
And unless we are cautious, that can have some effects at the material level also. And that is why we need to be careful about the kind of prasadam that we take. Of course, actually, as we grow older, then naturally the body itself does not allow us to eat too many things.
And then we come to some level of control automatically. And one does not have to be extremely strict about this, but one has to be cautious that our consumption of prasad, it can take us into, prasad is transcendental, but if we eat too much, it can make us lazy or if we eat too much, it can make us trigger our sensual desires. So, we just have to be careful about this.
And within that, prasad offers us an opportunity to spiritualise the urge of the tongue. Yes. So, for people, this whole idea of sex only for procreation seems to be extremely prohibitive.
They wonder how is it practically possible? But the whole idea is that the whole business of sex is glamorised and trivialised in today’s society. On one side, it is glamorised. All the advertisements, most of the advertisements, many of the movies, they all glamorise sex.
But on one side, they glamorise sex, but the more sex is glamorised, the more people think about it and indulge in it in a very trivial sort of way. Actually, sex is the means by which God has arranged, by which new life comes into this world. So, the restriction on sex is not because it is so bad, but because it is a very special activity by which new life is brought into the world.
So, Krishna says, I am sex life that is not contrary to religious principles. So, the whole idea is that when people treat sex, when it’s excessively glamorised, then the whole idea of sex gets reduced to just not an act where we serve as co-creators with God bringing life into this world, but it just becomes activity for just satisfying one’s hormonal urges. And that is actually but a trivialisation.
So, the more sex is glamorised in society, the more it becomes trivialised. That’s why the whole idea is not that that one has to be deprived, but one has to use activities for the purpose that they are given. So, when one is fully practised.
So, Prabhupada is summarising now, his purport gets over. So, sarvam kuthiyo ki sarvam sa shishya. So, all over the world one can become a, take disciples in this way.
Now, Prabhupada will go to Bhakti Sahasrarapu’s commentary from here onwards. Yes, so vachavegam, manasahavegam, he is talking about and overall the remaining things he puts in the shariravegam. Let’s look at this.
So, basically what the sannyasi is, this thriranda, this for three faculties, the speech, the mind and the body. So, Bhakti Sahasrarapu is saying that our identification with the body creates these three urges, physical bodily urges, the mental urges and the speech urges. Yeah.
Yes. So, one who practises resisting these demands or this is called tapasvi. So, Srila Prabhupada defines what is tapasya.
He says, elsewhere in his purport, he says tapasya essentially means sacrificing a lower pleasure for a higher pleasure. So, giving up something small for something much bigger. So, sacrificing a lower pleasure for a higher pleasure, that is tapasya.
So, in the famous instructions of Rishabhdev, where he says, he describes, he calls off, so Rishabhdev Maharaj calls upon his sons and he tells them that this human life is not meant for sense enjoyment. Don’t live like the animals in this body, like this soul-eating hogs, he says. Why? Because in this life, if one does austerity, austerity leads to purification and that purification will lead to one will experience unlimited happiness.
The idea is yes, there is this pleasure which is available at the level of the body, of the senses, but that is available for all species also. So, it’s something small. So, the whole principle of tapasya is give up something small so that one will get something far greater.
So, now in material life, people don’t know that there is something greater available also. Their horizons are limited to sense pleasure and that’s why spiritual happiness doesn’t make any sense to them or rather austerity doesn’t make any sense to them. What is the point of austerity? Simply torturing us.
Now, same may apply to us also. So, if we don’t hear the philosophy, if we don’t do sadhana, then we stop realising that there is a higher happiness available for us and then to the extent we forget the higher happiness or we forget the existence of a higher happiness, to that extent what happens is giving up the lower happiness seems like torture. So, here austerity becomes torture when we forget the higher happiness.
That’s why it’s important for us to regularly hear the philosophy and to regularly do our sadhana. So, how do we remember the higher happiness? Through the siddhanta and the sadhana. So, the siddhanta means when we study the philosophy that we know that there is actually a higher happiness available and through the sadhana when we chant properly, when we do our sadhana properly, then we get glimpses of that higher happiness.
So, by this combination of siddhanta and sadhana, we experience the higher happiness to some extent and when our vision is fixed, there is a higher happiness available, then giving up the lower happiness doesn’t seem so difficult or it at least doesn’t seem to be torture. Still the struggle will be there but because we know that the higher happiness is there, it’s available, then it becomes easier. So, that’s why keeping this in mind is important that there is a higher happiness and there’s a purpose why I’m restraining myself.
Without that we’ll feel that we’re torturing ourselves. So, now let’s move forward when we refer to two activities. So, those vachas, chitrapadam, chitra is poetic, artistic.
Chitrapadam Hare, so those words they may be chitrapadam, each of the pada is a part of a poetic work. So, those words may be very artistic and poetic but if they’re not filled with Hare Risho, the glory of Lord Hari, what are the characteristics of the glory of Lord Hari? That these words actually purify the whole world. Tad vayasam tirtha pushyanti manasa.
Vayasam tirtha is a very poetic phrase which is used. It’s a pilgrimage of crows. That means crows, we do a pilgrimage in dustbins, that’s why it’s a pilgrimage of crows.
Pushyanti manasa, manasa is the people who are actually discriminating. Mayatra hamsa niraman devshikshaya. Such places the hamsas do not go.
Similarly, actually this verse talks about two different kinds of taste. Let’s look at the next verse and we’ll discuss it. So, here it’s talking about poetic work which is not glorifying Lord Hari and the other is flawed work which glorifies Lord Hari.
So, tad vayag visargo janatag viplavod. Those words, visarga, visarga is actually a, the word visarga can be used for a destructive creation. means there is a destruction which brings about a new creation, a revolution they say.
Those words which bring about a revolution, janata aghavit labo, actually in the sinful lives of the people, they bring about a revolution, even if those words are pratislokam abhadavatyapi, every word of it, pratisloka is imperfectly composed. So this pratisloka abhadavaty is contrasted with chitrapadam harer yasho. Then if these words, namanya nantasya shonkitanyan, if they are actually containing the glories of the infinite lord, anantasya, then the sadhavas, sunvanti gayanti grananti, sunvanti gayanti grananti, they speak it, they hear it and they meditate on it.
So this is the difference between these two kind of literatures. So Srila Prabhupada uses exam comparison to say, the conclusion is that only when we talk about devotional service to Supreme Personality of Godhead can we refrain from useless nonsensical talk. We should always endeavour to use our speaking power solely for the purpose of realising Krishna consciousness.
So here Srila Prabhupada is talking about how to dovetail the speaking propensity and the more important point he is talking about is that we should not get attracted or repelled merely by the sophistication or the absence of sophistication in the speech. That means sometimes materialistic people may be able to speak very impressively and in contrast devotees may speak in a very simple way. So what is important is not the style of the presentation but the content of the presentation.
So the style may be very impressive but if the content is not the glorification of the Lord then that’s not of much use, it will not lead to our purification. And that’s why what he says is that this whole idea, now today there are so many people who go on in the name of spiritual leaders and these people basically do word jumble. They are experts at word jumble.
Now there is a famous Mayavadi leader who says Neo-Mathematical Vedanta. So what does it mean? It is a series of sutras. So sutras is, the soul is a circle whose centre is in your heart and circumference is everywhere.
God is a circle whose centre is everywhere and circumference is nowhere. Actually if you look at the meaning, there is no meaning. What do you mean a centre is everywhere and circumference is nowhere? It just has no meaning.
So Mayavadis what they do is they just simply do word jumble. So one of the Mayavadis gives a definition. How do you define God? He says if you take a glass of water and if you remove water from the glass what remains is vacuum.
If you remove vacuum from the glass what remains is God. Now this is total nonsense. But people hear such things and they get so impressed by it.
I used to write articles for the Times of India and there was a column called speaking tree. So one time the editor of the Times of India was saying that can you write a letter, can you write an article about why Krishna is black and tell something, don’t do the usual story stuff. So then I wondered why such a peculiar request? Why is Krishna considered black? So I did some research and then I found out that it’s a Mayavadi leader who has given his own analysis.
So just think, black is an inauspicious colour. Why would anyone conceive of God as having a black colour? There is a deep reason for this. Because black conveys darkness, white conveys light.
Therefore the blackness of the form of God is meant to indicate to us that we should go beyond the black form to the white light. That is where is the reality. Wow, I didn’t know this any time.
We should not know it any time. It’s such nonsense. Where is the scriptural basis for this? So you know people do this sort of word juggling, intellectual juggling and I think people get impressed.
So then I wrote an article saying that yes why would I do the same tag and I said why would anyone conceive of God having a black form? In fact Krishna is called a Shyam Sundar. Normally a dark complexion is not considered to be especially attractive. But Krishna is called a Shyam Sundar.
Why is that? And then I did a whole elaborate analysis about how God’s beauty is inconceivable to our experience. And in our experience we may consider the fair complexion to be attractive and the dark complexion to be not attractive. But how God’s form and God’s beauty is transcendental, is beyond our conceptions can be understood from the fact that although God’s form is dark it is considered to be supremely attractive.
So the Shyam Avarana is an indication not that we have to go beyond the form but that we have to go beyond our normal conceptions of beauty to understand that God’s beauty is transcendental. God can be Shyam and still he can be Sundar. So actually Chakravarti Pat talks in his 86th chapter of the 10th canto in his paraphrase.
He talks about how actually whenever we hear some scriptural descriptions they are indicative, they are not descriptive. That means when I say that Krishna is bluish black. Krishna is a bluish black youth.
So our Krishna is a youth with a complexion that is like a freshly formed mountain cloud. So what do I do normally? I think of a young boy who is 16 years old and then I think of a bluish black cloud and I try to superimpose the two images. I try to think okay this is what Krishna is like.
But the superimposition of two material images does not invoke the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So he says this sort of analysis does not actually invoke the presence of the Supreme Lord. But because we are trying to think according to the way the scriptures are described, our endeavour to think that way leads to purification.
And eventually our endeavour to think about Krishna according to the way the scriptures have described pleases Krishna and then Krishna reveals himself. And that’s when actually our attraction to Krishna at a transcendental level awakens. So anyway the point I was making is that on one side we can have, so talking about austerity of speech here.
So unsophisticated speech with the devotional content is far greater than sophisticated speech without devotional content. So that’s what unsophisticated speech is. As the verse is telling, Prathishlokam vadhavatyapi.
Prathishlokam, this was your description, 1, 5, 10 and 11. Vadhavatyapi. And sophisticated speech is Chitrapadhyayam.
Chitrapadhyayam. So of course now if somebody can use sophisticated speech in Krishna’s service, that is excellent. So you can have a lot of intricate word analysis and brilliant concepts.
So Bhaktasanth Thakur would do that. His language was so impressive that he used such choice words that actually he purified the dictionary and the English language by his glorification of Krishna. He just chose such words.
And even today people have such difficulty in understanding what his works are. And not just as devotees, even scholars who study Bhaktasanth Thakur’s work, they find it quite difficult to understand what he is saying. So it indicates that if there can be sophisticated speech and there can be devotional content, that’s excellent.
But primarily what we should look for is devotional content. And when we speak also, we can try to focus on devotional content. And when we hear, we focus on devotional content.
And that’s how we move forward in our devotional service steadily. Now, any questions for them, as for the agitations? What about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s golden colour? Well, why does Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu have a golden complexion? The reason for that is given is that Lord Krishna Radha Bhava Jyoti Sivalitam, Navami Krishna Swarupam. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu describes that.
It is Krishna who took on Radha Bhava and Radha Jyoti. Internally he took on the mood of Radha Rani, Radha Bhava. And externally he took on Radha Jyoti, the complexion, the effulgence of Radha Rani.
For what purpose? To taste the sweetness of the love of Radha Rani for Krishna. So his golden complexion is actually an expression of Radha Rani’s golden complexion. Now, of course, when I say it’s indicative, even when I say Krishna’s complexion is bluish black and I say it’s indicative, it doesn’t mean that he actually doesn’t have a bluish black complexion.
He does have. But what that bluish black is, we cannot conceive of it in material terms. So, there is a poet who glorifies Lord Ram and he says, Lord Ram’s eyes are as beautiful as Lord Ram’s eyes.
His eyes are so beautiful that he can’t compare with anything material. In Lalit Madhav, there are two kings who glorify Lord Krishna and they say, even the sages also do this at times, but they say that we glorified you with choice poetry. But now when we have actually seen you, we realise all our glorification was like an insight because our glorification is like a person is glorified as the landlord of a dozen villages when the person is actually the emperor of the whole world.
So, whatever glorification we offer is inadequate for the Supreme Lord. So, in that sense, Radha Rani’s complexion is also golden, but it’s not exactly like the golden that we see in this world. See, how can we, the way we are talking, interacting with devotees, we can’t just have constantly talking about Krishna only.
We need to have some humour and some light talk, but how can we do that without going into the zone of nonsense or prajalba. In general, if you look at, there is negative talk which is just wasteful or even critical or blasphemous. There is purely devotional talk, which is very uplifting and purifying.
And in between, there is talk at the human level. You know, we are concerned about others. You know, the Sanatana Goswami, he was loved by all the Vrajvasis and one of the reasons why he was loved by all the Vrajvasis was that he was so concerned about everyone.
All the Vrajvasis considered him to be like their guru and whenever he would meet them, he would ask them about their family or friends. How are you? How are your family? How are your children? And then they were so attracted to him that they would share their heart’s concerns and along with that, they would also see his saintly example and be inspired to emulate that saintly devotional standard in their life according to their capacity. So, there is talk at the human level, which we cannot deny.
That means, if a devotee is sick, talking about the devotee’s sickness is not mundane talk. It is human talk and it is helpful to create a sense of community and deepening of relationships among each other. So, same way at the human level, there can be various talks.
So, even when there is humour, that humour is overall within the boundary of devotional humour. It’s somehow connected with Krishna. It’s not just going in the zone of Prajalva or it is not stimulating, reviving our old mundane emotions, then it’s not necessarily a problem.
At the same time, it’s good to find out like-minded devotees. That means, we’ll talk about this more in detail when we come to the association, part of association. But in general, we should find out devotees who share our interests.
Sajatiya Asha Sangha, it is said. Sajatiya Asha Sangha means those devotees who have the same category of desires as we have. So, then we will have some devotional substance to discuss, which need not just be philosophy.
For example, if you are learning to cook for Krishna, there are other devotees also learning to cook for Krishna. Then it’s not that you have to directly just talk about philosophy, but you can talk about your service and we can talk about various things related to the service that is meaningful. At the same time, there is also aspect of devotional service and then it doesn’t need to be very specific about service.
You can diversify from that and talk about the whole devotional life that is centred around the service. So, in general, even among devotee circle, over a period of time, it is good to find out devotees who are like-minded and then we don’t have to do loose talk just for the sake of maintaining a conversation. Now, when we find that we can’t relate much with people, either we clamp down or then we talk about things which are not really important.
Just we try to make some talk. But if we have devotees with whom we can share some devotional interests, then there is naturally so much to talk about. Did I answer your question? Yes or no? In general, what are the effects of Vajrava? So, the most important point for us as sadhakas is that it distracts us from Krishna.
I gave earlier example of the frog croaking. So, how does it distract us from Krishna? It basically blunts our devotional sensibility and it sharpens our material sensibility. I’ll explain this.
It’s an important point to understand. Probably this is the concluding point to discuss for today. So, Vajrava, Prachalpa, what all does it do? It blunts our devotional sensibility.
Now, what do I mean by the word sensibility over here? It’s the capacity to experience. For example, if somebody goes to art gallery, the person doesn’t have any artistic sensibility and the art gallery doesn’t make any sense. If there is a very good musical concert, then people generally appreciate it.
But if somebody has a musical sensibility, the person can appreciate much better. So, what happens when we engage in Prachalpa is, tongue is the primary mode through which we connect with Krishna, the tongue and the ears. Shravanam and Kirtanam.
And after that there is Smaranam and after that the other limbs of the Upanishads are also there. So, when we speak or hear Prachalpa, then our tongue and our ears are engaged in mundane talk. And when we are engaged in mundane talk, that mundane talk desensitises us to spiritual stimuli.
It desensitises. We cannot experience any spiritual stimuli afterwards. We cannot relish the spiritual stimuli.
Our heart becomes sort of numbed or deadened. And the more this becomes like a trap, the more I don’t experience any spiritual stimuli. I don’t experience any spiritual experiences.
The less I feel the impotence to do some spiritual activities because I am not getting any experience. And then I get further dragged down to sensual stimuli. A simple point to illustrate this is, say a cricket World Cup is going on, cricket tournament is going on.
And then we associate somebody who is mad after cricket. And then we start talking with that person. And the more we talk with that person, the more that person’s desires, that person’s hopes, that person’s emotions start coming into us.
And when those emotions come into us, at a material level, many things appear to be much more stimulating and sensational than devotional stimuli. And then, to the extent to say a person becomes excited by material things, to that extent the person cannot become excited by spiritual things. It’s like, I remember I talked about Tama Guna, Vajra Guna, Sattva Guna and Transcendence.
So, if I’m too excited by Rajasic and Tamasic things, then I’m that much getting away from Sattva Guna. And I’m getting that much away from Transcendence. So, when I’m away from Transcendence, I cannot experience Transcendence.
And that’s how I stay trapped. So, therefore, Prajapati Bhagwat blunts our devotional sensibility. Why does it do both these? Because basically, it fills our consciousness with material sound vibrations, instead of spiritual sound vibrations.
So, what we essentially want, if we want to awaken ourselves is, we need to expose ourselves to more and more spiritual sound vibrations. So, if we don’t expose ourselves to spiritual sound vibrations, naturally we suffer. Because we are exposing ourselves to something or the other, not material, if not spiritual, then material.
And the material sound vibrations will trigger the corresponding desires in our heart. And those desires will drag us down. So, therefore, if we can keep this in mind, that we are here to awaken our devotional sensibility, in order to experience more and more happiness in relationship with Krishna.
And how can we experience it, if we are becoming more and more spiritually deadened? So, Prajapati Bhagwat, this is what it primarily does. It takes away our spiritual sensibilities and it fills us with mundane sensibilities. Is it clear? Any other questions about this? Just look at one more paragraph.
Yes. So, basically, Bhakti Sahaja Thakur over here is dividing the Manasa Veda into two parts. So, Vacho Veda, Manasa and Krodha Veda.
So, he is saying this Manasa Veda has two parts, one is the Avirodha Kriti and the other is the Virodha Yukta Krodha. So, here in this analysis, if you see Prabhupada started describing the Bhakti Sahaja Thakur’s commentary from here onwards. So, first he is talking, this paragraph is, from the commentary onwards, first paragraph, second paragraph and this third paragraph, this was Vacho Veda.
Now, after that in this paragraph is Manasa Veda and Krodha Veda. And then after that, there is Jiva, Udaro, Prastha Veda will come in the next paragraph. So, here Prabhupada basically divides our Bhakti Sahaja Thakur, basically, the Manasa and Krodha Veda, he says, ultimately both are coming from the mind.
So, Manasa Veda, he says, is Avirodha Priti. Priti is attachment or attraction. Avirodha means it’s unregulated.
So, the mind just latches itself off to something, this is what I want, Avirodha Priti. So, it’s an addiction, this is what I want, come what may. And then when I don’t get it, then I get angry.
There is Avirodha Yukta Krodha. Who is there to oppose me? Whoever opposes me, I will get angry with that, I will destroy that person. So, in this way, the mind goes through this cycle of attachment and anger.
This is what I want and if I don’t get it, I get wild about it. So, in the Bhagavad Gita also, Krishna talks about how, Kama Krodha Vimuktanam Yathinam Yath Chetasam Abhito Brahma Nirvanam Vartate Vidhatmanam. He talks in 5.26, Kama Krodha Vimuktanam.
A person should become free from these two urges, the urge of Kama and the urge of Krodha. Kama Krodha Vimuktanam. So, now Sri Prabhupada explains in these three categories.
What is this? The Mayavadis, the Karmakandis and the Karmis. So, what are these three categories? How is Mayavada? This is Manasa Ha Vega is Avirodha Priti. That’s what he is talking about over here and in that Bhaktivinoda Thakur gives us these three categories.
Mayavadis, then there is Karmakandis and there is Karmis. So, Karmakandis are, they are in a sense, what Bhaktivinoda Thakur talks about these people as pious sense gratifiers. These people, they want sense gratification but they want it to piety, that means Dharma Artha, then Kama.
Whereas Karmis are non-religious sense gratifiers. That means they want sense gratification by whatever means possible. If it’s through Dharma, well and good.
If it’s not through Dharma, it doesn’t matter. I just want sense gratification, whatever way I get it. Now Mayavadis, they want the subtle enjoyment that I am the supreme.
So, all these are the Avirodha Priti, the unregulated attractions of the mind and these create the forces, first which agitate the mind and then when they are not fulfilled, then one leads to the repulsion, the repulsion which leads to anger. So, Avirodha Priti and Avirodha Yukta Krodha. In this way, the mind traps us and Bhaktivinoda Thakur explains that we have to, when we, now in general, often we try to control our anger but the way these two are linked, so to avoid Avirodha Yukta Krodha, that means whenever we feel angry, we need to identify and purify our Avirodha Priti.
So, when I find that I am getting too angry about something, I have to find out, okay, there must be some attachment underlying that is making me angry. So, I look at, instead of just trying to suppress the anger, I discover what is the attachment that is making me angry and then deal with that attachment. Then the anger will go away.
We’ll discuss about this a little bit more tomorrow. Thank you very much.