Nourishing the creeper of devotion 3 – Avoid attachment to renunciation

[Chaitanya Charitamrita class at ISKCON, London, UK]

Video:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna So today we continue the discussion on Nourishing the Bhakti Lata Beach.
This is the third session. In the first session I talked about how when we are practising bhakti and we are trying to increase our love for Krishna, at that time we have a channel within our consciousness which we are trying to open towards Krishna. But there are many other channels that are open also.
And if we ritualistically practise bhakti, we are religious but not spiritual, then we build the channel but we don’t block the flow of the water elsewhere and thus we don’t grow much. So just doing externals without trying to cultivate a longing for Krishna doesn’t help us to grow towards Krishna. In the second session I talked about how while we are practising bhakti, it’s not that the spiritual world is far away up there.
Spiritual world and Krishna are present in our hearts also. Sometimes we long for some facility by which we can serve Krishna. But we can serve Krishna right now with what we have.
Even attachment to things that are helpful in our devotion, those attachments should not become stronger than our attachment to Krishna. That can also be a weed that sucks away our focus from Krishna towards other things. And here the verse states how in the spiritual world what do we do? We relish the fruit of love for Krishna.
And so today I’ll focus on the theme that when we are practising bhakti, our purpose is to connect with Krishna and to love Krishna. And we shouldn’t get distracted even by other things no matter how favourable or important they may seem to bhakti. We normally think about attachment.
The opposite of it is we think renunciation or detachment. However, at a subtle level, the opposite of attachment can also be aversion. So basically if we become too obsessed with trying to give up certain things, then that obsession can also distract us from Krishna.
When we are trying to practise bhakti, at that time it’s important that our consciousness and our emotions be available for offering to Krishna. And there are certain attachments which we have which we want to give up so that we can offer our consciousness to Krishna. But sometimes in battling to give up those attachments, we become so consumed by the effort to give up a particular thing that we get exhausted by that.
So there is the battle for renunciation and there is the war for devotion. So renunciation, maybe it’s not necessarily renounced order, but we all have certain attachments which we want to give up. Now we want to give those up and for that we fight a battle for renunciation.
But the battle for renunciation is only one part of the war for devotion. War for devotion means we want to connect our consciousness with Krishna and get it absorbed in Krishna. So sometimes we may get so caught in the battle for renunciation that we may be distracted from the war for devotion.
And because we lose the battle for renunciation, so we end up thinking that I have lost the war for devotion also. All the two are very different things. An example to illustrate this point, first metaphorically and then practically.
Say if there is a fort which is being attacked by an enemy and they have one entrance on the western side, another entrance on southern side. So their main defence is the southern side. And that’s where they are expecting the enemy to attack.
But then the enemy attacks from the west. And then they send their defence to fight on the western side. And while this defensive force is fighting on the western side, they find that actually only a small advanced troop had come from the western side and they have sent their whole army to fight there.
And while they are fighting here, the real force comes from the southern side and enters the fort and destroys the fort and defeats them. So this is, in army terms, it’s called a decoy or a diversionary technique where the army is distracted from the main fight so that it can be defeated. Similarly for us, renunciation is not the main fight.
Devotion is the main fight. And that means we have to focus on trying to absorb our consciousness in Krishna. In the 11th canto of the Srimad Bhagavatam, Krishna tells Uddhava that naati bhuyat, that even if you become, even if you are unable to give up your attachments, don’t become discouraged in bhakti.
Still keep practising bhakti. The devotee has faith that no matter what happens, Krishna will still accept him. And a devotee keeps serving Krishna.
So there can be attachment to anything in this world. And so paradoxically we might develop attachment even to renunciation. That means what? Suppose a practical example.
Suppose there is Nirjala Ekadashi. That Ekadashi when we are supposed to fast without water also. And sometimes some devotees say, okay, I have to fast all day without water.
How will I fast? So then most of the day they are fasting, but they don’t get out of their bed also. Just wake up for some time and sleep most of the time. And then I don’t have any energy to get up.
I don’t have any energy to do anything. Then basically the whole, normally they might spend their day in the mode of passion or in the mode of goodness, mode of passion, running around doing things, mode of goodness, maybe reading something, chanting something. But that day they fast, but the whole day they spend in the mode of ignorance.
They are sleeping or waking up and still feeling, oh, I’m hungry, I’m hungry. Again going to sleep, again waking up. Once I was at a place in India which was extremely hot.
And the devotees wanted to fast 24 hours for Nirjala Ekadashi. So it was extremely hot, the devotees, and then somehow it was a remote part of India. So there was no power over there.
So the power went off, it was hot, they were sweating. So you’re sweating when it is fasting, it becomes unbearable. So the next morning one boy told me that yesterday night I took a bath 18 times just to cool my body.
And then the whole day next day he was sleeping. Because he couldn’t sleep at night. So he didn’t want to have water going into his body, but water was all around his body.
And the whole consciousness was, oh, the body is so hot, let me pacify it. What is the use of that? We don’t rest our body properly. And then eventually we can’t live without that.
So the next morning you can’t wake up. Even if you wake up, you’re half asleep and the whole day is spent sleeping. So sometimes the goal of renunciation in a particular way can become so obsessive for someone that they lose sight of everything else.
And when that happens, then they just get consumed by either getting the renunciation or failing to get that. They get that, there is pride. They don’t get that, they’re disappointed, they’re dismayed.
And either way, the emotion is not being offered to Krishna. So our primary purpose in bhakti is to offer our emotion to Krishna. And if a devotee is not able to be renounced, at that time the devotee thinks, Krishna, I’m so attached.
Please purify me. If that attachment and our inability to give up that attachment, if that creates humility and that enables us to focus on Krishna, that inspires us to call out to Krishna more wholeheartedly, then actually we may make more spiritual advancement even if we fail to stick to a particular standard of renunciation. On the other hand, if we succeed, I was going to fast, I fasted.
And then after that we become proud. See, I fasted. Say if you’re fasting on Ekadashi and then you go to the kitchen and see who all are eating what.
Sense gratifier. So attached. Hopeless.
And you start thinking like that, then our body may be fasting, but our ego is feasting. And again, we won’t make much spiritual advancement. By no means I’m saying fasting is not good.
Fasting is good. Renunciation is also very valuable. But fasting and renunciation, they are simply one resource for enhancing our devotion to Krishna.
And if that resource is available to us, it’s possible for us, good. If it’s not possible, that’s OK, it doesn’t matter, we can still serve Krishna. Now, is it that somebody who can fast is more spiritually advanced than somebody who can’t fast? Possibly, but not necessarily.
Is it somebody who is in the renounced order is more advanced than somebody who is in the not renounced order? Possibly, but not necessarily. The cultural perspective, yes, those who are in the renounced order are given more respect. But it is not that that respect necessarily equates with spiritual advancement.
Certainly nobody should think I am more advanced. We have in the Chaitanya Charita Amrit the example of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who was a Sanyasi hearing from Ramananda Rai who was a Grihastha. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu heard from him because he was so advanced in devotion.
Now renunciation is also important. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was very pleased by the renunciation of Raghunatha Das Goswami. And he says, Mahaprabhu ur bhakta gane vairagya pradhan.
That the devotees of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu are defined by renunciation. But whom is he talking about? Now he doesn’t expect his Grihastha devotees to become renounced. Otherwise Acharya, Srivas Acharya, Srinivas Thakur.
They are practising bhakti wholeheartedly in their situation. So all that I’m, what I’m saying is in no way meant to minimise renunciation. But what it is, is that the focus has to be clear.
And the focus is devotion. We want renunciation so that it can help us in devotion. So I’ll talk about, say Krishna is here, we are here.
And we want our emotions to go towards Krishna. We want the Bhakti Lata beach to be watered, the river of devotion to be watered and want to grow so that it can connect with Krishna. So that we can relish the fruit of love for Krishna.
So basically renunciation is with the world. Devotion is for Krishna. So now renunciation essentially means that our emotions don’t get entangled in the world.
Our emotions are available for offering to Krishna. If we are attached, then our emotions are consumed by the world. But apart from attachment, the other side of attachment can be aversion.
So aversion means this is so bad, this is so bad, this is so bad. And that’s considering something to be bad is also being emotionally entangled in it. Suppose somebody is diabetic.
If they are diabetic, then they cannot take any sweets, any sugar items. Now that does not necessarily mean that sugar items are bad. Whenever they may see a sugar item, it’s so bad, take it away from me.
Some people even may have an allergy for something. Some people have an allergy for peanut butter or something like that. They can’t eat that food.
Then what happens? They are very much emotionally consumed by that. Oh, I can’t bear it. I can’t tolerate it.
So if either they have an allergy or they have an aversion, then their emotions are consumed in that. And if we have aversion, then again our emotions are not available for offering to Krishna. If we come to temple and if we are averse to someone, we are angry with someone, we are resentful of someone and we hear that person’s voice, then immediately our consciousness becomes filled with that person.
Why is he here? What are they doing here? And we cannot focus on Krishna. So there can be aversion, there can be frustration, there can be renunciation. The three different things.
Aversion means I am very much negatively emotionally involved with something. Frustration means I’m disheartened because I’m not able to give it up. I want to give it up, but I’m not able to give it up.
So I’m frustrated by that. But even that frustration is an emotional relationship with the world. And that emotion also exhausts us.
That also consumes our emotion. And renunciation means the emotion is not involved in the world itself. Somebody said there are two people who are alcoholics.
One of them is alcoholic, one of them is not. So both of them are saying this is their home, this is their office. They are going from home to office.
Along the way there is a bar. Suppose that an alcoholic wants to drink alcohol. Then as soon as they pass by the bar, I want to drink, I want to drink, I want to drink.
Their emotion will be consumed in that. If they want to give up alcohol, but they have gone into aversion. Why is this bar there? Every time I pass by this bar, I get so agitated by it.
So again they are emotionally consumed by that bar. They are frustrated in trying to give up alcohol. Oh, you know, last time I indulged, next time also I’ll indulge.
So powerless. I’m so bound. I’m so hopeless.
Again, their emotion is so involved in the alcohol. But somebody who has not drunk alcohol, somebody who has always been a Tito Taylor, they just move forwards and they don’t even notice that the bar is there. So they just go on and do their work.
So as devotees, ultimately we want to come to this level where we are absorbed in Krishna. And for absorption in Krishna, renunciation is helpful. But more important than renunciation is attraction to Krishna.
Absorption will come not just because we are detached from the world. Absorption will come because we are attached to Krishna. And attachment to Krishna comes if we steadily practise bhakti.
So no matter what happens, whether we are able to give up our attachments or not able to give up attachments, we still keep practising bhakti determinately. So the battle for renunciation, sometimes we win it, sometimes we lose it. But the war for devotion is something which we can keep fighting no matter what happens.
Now the two are related but the two are not the same. We may lose the battle for renunciation but we still keep fighting the war for devotion. Now renunciation, where does it come from? Why is it that some people are able to renounce something, some people are not able to? As I said, renunciation can be a result of spiritual advancement.
And the Bhagavatam talks about it, वासुदेवे भगवति भक्तियोग प्रयोजितः जनयत्याशु वैराज्यम् ज्यानं जेध है तुकम् In 1.2.7 the Bhagavatam said that if we practise bhakti then spiritual knowledge arises within us and even renunciation also arises within us. But sometimes renunciation may also be simply the result of past karma. Krishna has six opulences.
Does anyone know which are the six opulences? Beauty, power, strength, renunciation. Thank you. Among these six opulences if we consider, you see most people are attracted to beauty, strength, fame.
How many people are attracted to renunciation? Not many. But actually many people are attracted to the fruit of renunciation. What is the fruit of renunciation? Peace.
त्यागाच् शान्तिर अनन्तरम् By renunciation we get peace. So if somebody can stay very calm, composed, unruffled even under disturbing situations. Former Indian cricket team captain.
He was always very cool. So he was called as Captain Cool. So now that is opulence.
How do you stay so cool, so unruffled, so unflappable even under tense situations. So he said that actually I also get agitated like everyone else but I am able to cover it. So what happens is this, some people are able to cover it, some people are not able to cover it.
Now covering is not covering up. Covering means simply restraining. Covering up means emotion is going on and just put on a facade.
So why is it that some people are able to have that composure, calmness, renunciation and some people are not? That is simply a result of past. Why is it some people have greater good looks than others? Some people have greater wealth than others. They are born with greater looks, with lower wealthy family.
Some people are born in a very famous family. Why is it like that? We understand it is because of past karma. Similarly, renunciation can also be a result of past karma.
It doesn’t always have to be. Renunciation can come from devotion also. But it is not necessary that the renunciation that a particular person has is only because of devotion.
Some people may have renunciation because of their past karma also. In fact, in some traditions in India where the renunciation is very much emphasised, if somebody wants to become a renunciate, first of all they check their astrological chart. And they check whether this person has renunciation in their astrological chart.
And only if they have it, then they allow that person to take the renounced order. Otherwise you cannot be renounced. This was one of the criticisms of one of the traditions that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said.
He said, you depend too much on Varanasi. You do not consider the potency of bhakti. Now, of course, bhakti is very potent and at the same time our past influences, past impressions also influence us.
So the point is that just as wealth is a resource and somebody has wealth, we can say they can do more service to Krishna. If somebody has a lot of good financial security, then they may not have to worry so much about working for a demanding job. And they can serve Krishna more or they have a lot of money.
They can use that money in Krishna’s service. Either way. But if somebody doesn’t have so much money, does that mean that they can’t serve Krishna? No, they can still serve Krishna.
They may not be able to serve in the same way as somebody who has a lot of money. But they can still serve Krishna. And if they make, if somebody says, you know, I will earn this much money and then I’ll serve Krishna.
No, that’s not required. You serve Krishna with whatever you can right now. If you get more money, then serve with more money.
So just as we, with respect to material life, we don’t let the pursuit of wealth make us postpone our pursuit of devotion. First I have to get wealth, then I can practise devotion. No.
We pursue devotion and we may pursue wealth also. So we can treat renunciation just like wealth. Just as wealth is an opulence that can come by past karma, wealth is also something which you may get by our present hard work.
Similarly, renunciation is something which we may have by our past karma. Renunciation is something which you can get by our present endeavour. But just as the pursuit for wealth does not have to cause the postponement of our pursuit of devotion, similarly the pursuit of renunciation doesn’t have to cause the pursuit of, cause us to postpone our pursuit of devotion.
Wherever I am, whatever attachments I have, let me just start serving Krishna right now. And even if my attachments are troubling me, still let me keep serving Krishna with whatever consciousness I have right now. With this more we practise bhakti, then we will ensure that we don’t become disheartened in our practise.
Because ultimately we have to fight the most important battle. Our weakness, we have many weaknesses. We may have lust as a weakness, we may have greed as a weakness, we may have anger as a weakness, we may have a pessimistic attitude as a weakness, we may have a fault finding mentality as a weakness.
We have many different weaknesses. But all these weaknesses stem from a fundamental weakness. That fundamental weakness is disconnection from Krishna.
And we need, we can and should address those specific weaknesses also, but the most fundamental weakness we have to address is disconnection from Krishna. And disconnection from Krishna also stems from a deeper weakness. What is that? Now why would we be disconnected from Krishna? Because we think something else is more attractive than Krishna.
Something else will offer me more love and more joy than Krishna. So the fundamental weakness that afflicts every soul is the unwillingness to believe that Krishna loves us even now. The unwillingness to believe that Krishna loves us even now is our greatest weakness.
If we could, by hearing scripture, by associating with devotees, by reading and appreciating Krishna Leela, if we can develop that faith that Krishna is in my heart, he is waiting for me to offer my love to him and just want to offer our love to him, just that understanding will inspire us to offer our love to Krishna. If say, we were doing some work and somebody is waiting to meet us. If normally that person is not a very important person, we make them wait for some time.
If that person is a very important person and then our assistant tells us, they are waiting to meet you for the last half an hour. Half an hour? Why did you tell me? I would have gone out to meet them right now. That person is very important.
So similarly if you understand Krishna is waiting for us in our own hearts. If we can get that faith, then why am I looking for this, this, this, this? Not that I have to give up looking for this, but I can immediately go towards Krishna. So this conviction that Krishna loves us even now is vital for us to move forward in our devotion.
And Chetan Charitamrat is whole focused on this theme of God’s love for us and our love for God. Bhagavad Gita gives us the identity of God. Srimad Bhagavatam gives us the activity of God.
And Chetan Charitamrat gives us the mentality of God. Who God is, is identified in the Bhagavad Gita. It’s Krishna.
And then Krishna’s activities, Krishna’s deelas, they are not described so much in the Bhagavad Gita. He says that remember those pastimes, remember me. But his pastimes, how he engages in love-filled exchanges with his devotees, are described through the many pastimes of Srimad Bhagavatam.
So his activities are described in the Bhagavatam. And Chetan Charitamrat describes his mind, his heart. How does he think? What is his heart’s incarnation? So he’s thinking, oh, these gopis love me so much, I cannot reciprocate love with them.
Oh, these gopis and their love for me, they are getting more happiness than what I am getting in my love for them. How is this mystery? So we try to understand this. So the Lord tries to understand this.
And this confidential revelation comes in the Chetan Charitamrat. Chetan Charitamrat is entirely centred on the theme of love. The Bhagavatam, Chetan Charitamrat, for example, describes how when Haridas Thakur passed away.
At that time, Chetan Mahaprabhu was right there next to him. And he was in front, it was a perfect departure, his eyes beholding the form of Lord Chaitanya, his hands holding the feet of Lord Chaitanya on his head, on his chest, and his tongue chanting the name of the Lord. He departed from the world.
And then he departed after that. What did Lord Chaitanya do? He picked up the body of Haridas Thakur and he danced with that body. Normally, when somebody dies, at that time, we just feel, I can’t be in this place.
People, if there’s a corpse in the house, we don’t want to stay in that house for long. They will keep the corpse, even if they have to do the last rites later, they want to keep it in the morgue, keep it in the morgue, we’ll get it out later, and then we will do the last rites, even if they want to postpone it. Normally, people may cry when somebody dies, and they may fall on that body and cry for some time.
But Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, he knows that the body and the soul are different. But Haridas Thakur had been in that body and his soul has left that body. So it’s that, Haridas Thakur is so dear to me that even his body is so dear to me.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, when he was in Jagannath Puri, he would never beg for alms. Because he was such a great saint, people would themselves come and give him alms. But after the departure of Haridas Thakur, that was the first time, in his entire stay in Jagannath Puri, he went to the shopkeeper and started begging for alms.
He said, I want to celebrate the departure of Haridas Thakur with a grand feast. So please give some alms. And the shopkeepers over there, they were so pious, they wanted to give charity to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, they started giving so profusely.
And then, so Damodar Goswami said, oh lord, you don’t have to beg, we will arrange everything. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu performed kirtan with the body of Haridas Thakur, dancing, dancing, dancing for a long time. He just wanted to keep on dancing and performing kirtan.
So Damodar Goswami told him that, now it is becoming sunset, now you should perform the last rites before sunset. And Chaitanya Mahaprabhu agreed. So Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, through pastimes like this, demonstrates how much he loves his devotees.
And he wants each one of us to also become his devotee. Krishna is constantly there within us, with us, within us. And Krishna’s love for us doesn’t depend on who we are.
It depends on who he is. He is Bhakta Vatsala, he is a lover of his devotees, but he is also Krupana Vatsala. Krupana Vatsala means that he is the lover of even those who are miserly, those who are materially attached.
He loves them also. Svarudham Sarvabhutanam. He is the well-wisher of all living beings.
So when we understand this, that Krishna loves everyone, and his love doesn’t depend on who we are. Just like a benevolent father may love all the children, even the child is not very responsible. Even if the child is addicted, even if the child has squandered his wealth, still father loves the child.
Like that Krishna loves everyone. So to the extent we understand this, to that extent our heart gets absorbed, gets permeated, animated by the desire to reciprocate love with Krishna. And when that happens, then we become spiritually energised.
So each of us has to find out how best we can stimulate our love for Krishna. Tomorrow I will talk about the concept of Uddhipan. Uddhipan is spiritual stimulus.
Just as there are material sense objects, similarly there are spiritual sense objects. Just as material sense objects trigger our desires in material directions, similarly spiritual sense objects trigger our desires in spiritual directions. So each of us has to find out which spiritual sense objects work best for us, and we expose our consciousness to them more and more.
And that’s how our consciousness will move towards Krishna. And that’s how we will be able to transcend the illusions of this world. And that’s how we will be able to go beyond the captivation of our emotions in this world, either by attachment or by aversion.
When our attraction to Krishna awakens, then that steady connection with Krishna will help us to relish the sweetness of devotion, undistracted, and that relishing the fruit of love of God is life’s ultimate purpose and life’s ultimate perfection. I’ll summarise. So I spoke today about how on the path of Bhakti, our purpose primarily is to connect with Krishna.
And that connection has to be given the foremost priority. Sometimes there are things which may distract us from Krishna, such as our worldly attachments and we want to give them up. So there is a battle for renunciation and there is a fight for devotion and the war for devotion.
If you get too consumed by the battle for renunciation, then we may go into the zone of aversion or frustration. Aversion means we start disliking something. Frustration means we start disliking ourselves because we are not able to give it up.
Both ways our emotions get consumed by the particular object that we are trying to give up and then our emotions are no longer available for Krishna. So like an enemy who wants to attack from one gate but sends a decoy in the other gate and when the defenders go to defend it, the enemy smashes into the fort and destroys the fort. So similarly, the forces of illusion, they may distract us by making us get very attached to renunciation.
And when we are unable to renounce, we become disheartened and we don’t practise bhakti properly, diligently, because we think I can’t practise, I am so fallen. And then our devotion also gets trampled over. So devotion essentially means our emotion is directed towards Krishna and we want to move the emotion away from the world.
So our emotions can be engaged with the world either through attachment, I want this, I want this, it can be aversion, this is so bad, this is so bad or frustration. Why can’t I give this up? But renunciation means there is no emotion involved in the world. Just like a sober person passes by a bar without even noticing the bar.
So like that, we want to come to the level of renunciation. Now renunciation can result either by the practise of bhakti itself because our emotion gets so attracted towards Krishna and we get so much taste in that, that we feel not very attracted to worldly things. Or renunciation may also be a result of past karma.
Just as somebody may have wealth by past karma, similarly somebody may have renunciation by past karma. Now wealth is useful for the service of Krishna, but it is not essential. And we don’t postpone our service of Krishna till we get wealth.
Similarly, we don’t postpone our service of Krishna till we get renunciation. Bhakti is so subtle that sometimes we may get renunciation and lose devotion. Because if I renounce something and I become so proud, and I look down upon and judge and condemn other devotees who do not have my level of renunciation, then I may actually make no spiritual advancement, actually may make offences.
So my body may be fasting, but my ego may be feasting. On the other hand, sometimes we may lose the battle for renunciation and we may succumb. But that may create humility and that may inspire us to wholeheartedly take shelter of Krishna.
And through that failure to renounce, we make more advancement, then we might make through success in renouncing. So if we keep our priorities clear, let me try to connect with Krishna always. So inability to renounce is something as a weakness.
But the fundamental weakness is disconnection from Krishna. And that is caused by our unwillingness to believe that Krishna loves us even now. So by meditating on Krishna’s pastimes, wherein he expresses his love in overwhelmingly touching ways, as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did for Haridas Thakur, we can stimulate, we can feel inspired.
This same Krishna who is such an important person, supremely important person is in my heart waiting for me. So let me offer my love to him as I can right now. And by finding out the spiritual stimuli that inspire us to love Krishna, that trigger our emotions towards Krishna, we can start marching steadily towards Krishna.
Focussing not so much on renouncing the world as on cultivating attraction towards Krishna. So attachment to renunciation is also a weed. And if we start nourishing it too much, then there will not be enough water left to nourish the creeper of devotion.
Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. Are there any questions or comments? Yes, Bhai Krishna.
Thank you very much. Just one question. You were saying that today when we browse the media, we see so much horrific things happening.
So many wars increasing more and more. And quite often a man, his whole family is wiped out. And worse.
What would you say to a person like that? How can you say to a person like that that God loves you when Krishna loves you? When the whole experience is one of misery, the emotions are gripped with misery, they have no space in their heads for anything else. They are overwhelmed, they are drowned in this distress. If somebody is in immense distress, their whole family has been wiped out because of something, how can we tell them that Krishna loves us? At such times, it is more through our actions that we represent Krishna’s love.
We are there to help them, support them. Sometimes when people are in distress, it may happen that religious preachers may be more concerned about getting God off the hook. Then helping that person.
That means, you know, God is not bad. God is not bad. You know, you are suffering.
It’s your own bad karma. Well, God is not on the hook. God is safe in a spiritual world.
And our purpose is not to get God off the hook. Our purpose is to help people get elevated. So it’s not that when people are in distress, we have to necessarily tell them, don’t think that God hates you.
Don’t know that God loves you. No, that’s our actions. When Draupadi was dishonoured, after that, when they are in the forest, at that time, Krishna comes to meet them in Kamivan.
So at that time, Draupadi, she is devastated. She tells Krishna, Krishna, I am your friend. I am your relative.
I am your devotee. I deserve your help. I called you.
Why didn’t you come to help me? I needed you at that time. Of course, Krishna came as the endless garment for her. But it was not that actually she saw Krishna over there.
It was just her garment did not end. So that meant that people thought it was because of some mystic power, because of her pachastity that her garment was elongated. That’s how she was protected.
So they did not see Krishna directly over there. Now when she says like this and she protests to Krishna, at that time, Krishna doesn’t say, what kind of devotee are you? You are doubting my perfect plan. My plan is always perfect.
Krishna gives a very, you could say almost a human response. He says, I didn’t know. He says, I was busy.
There was a demon Shalya who had attacked the, Shalva would attack the, attack Dwaraka and he had wrecked Dwaraka and I had to go there and defend and protect the citizens of Dwaraka. As soon as I came to know what had happened, I immediately came here. Yes.
Oh Panchali, even in such, in such distress, in such affliction, you stayed faithful to Dharma. That is your glory and your glory will be redeemed soon. Do not lose heart.
So he was there to encourage. He didn’t defend himself and say that, how can you question? So our purpose when people are in distress is simply to, how can we help them? If we are in a position to help them, we should help them. And at that time, if we can, sometimes just being with someone, being a support for them, that helps.
And even if they rant out against God, that’s a circumstantial emotion. That’s okay. We all have our human emotions and they will come and they will go.
So ultimately Krishna is not the cause of anyone’s suffering. Krishna is the cure for everyone’s suffering. And even if it seems as if, okay, I don’t know what I did and why this has happened to me.
As long as we are focused on the why question, why did this happen? Karma is an intellectually reasonable answer. It is not at all emotionally satisfying answer. When people are distressed, you tell them you are suffering because of their karma.
I don’t see any statement, as far as I have read, I have not seen any statement in scripture where somebody is suffering and people tell them, this is because of your karma. When Draupadi is dishonoured, nobody tells her, you must have done some bad karma because of which you are dishonoured. When Sita is kidnapped, nobody tells her, you must have been a demon in the previous life, you must have kidnapped a woman.
That’s why you were kidnapped. Nobody tells her like that. So, at that time, it’s a grievous wrong that has happened and they are supported.
So, similarly, our purpose should be to help people. So, when people are in emotional distress, at that time talking about karma, we have to see whether it helps. In some cases, it may help.
Not exactly when they are in distress, but slowly when they are recovering and their rationality is a little bit more alert, activated, then it may help. So, our purpose is to help. Our purpose is not to prove our philosophy is right.
Our purpose is not to get God off the hook. Our purpose is to help people. And if speaking the philosophy helps, then wonderful.
If talking about God’s love helps, wonderful. But actually more important than talking about God’s love is to embody God’s love. The greatest cause of atheism is actually theists.
The way religious people sometimes behave, that’s what put people away from God. God is so far away, it’s very difficult for us to have attraction to Him or even to have any aversion to Him. Our perception of God is largely shaped by those who have represented God in our lives.
To us. That’s why, actually I was in Texas and there was one person in a car bumper they had written, Oh God, please save me from your creatures. So, the preachers are self-righteous, condescending, holier than thou, hell and brimstone kind of speakers and people say, I don’t want anything to do with them.
So, therefore, in a proper forum, we can and should speak about God’s love, where people are interested in education and learning philosophy and philosophy perspective of life. But there are times when we have to embody God’s love. Vishal Prabhupada, when he first came, he was giving classes, but he was also cooking for people.
Serving prasad, washing their plates, hearing them, talking with them. These hippies, everybody else was just condemning them. What kind of, you’re wasting your life, you’re taking drugs, you’re doing this, you’re doing that.
But they felt Prabhupada valued them, Prabhupada loved them. And by this embodying Krishna’s love, gradually when he spoke about Krishna and Krishna’s love, also people were able to appreciate it. So when people are very much afflicted, it’s best not to get into the why question.
Now, why is this happening? Sometimes this world is such that we can’t know why something’s happened. But as the why question, why this, why this, why this? The why question is often simply the express way to frustration. So the best way in that situation is to change the question.
Not why this, but how now? How can I best this point now? How can I move forward now? And if we shift to the how question, then we’ll find that for coping with this difficulty, for moving forward with this difficulty, God can be a great shelter and strength. By chanting the names of God, by remembering God. When there was a big tsunami in South India, in southern part, in the Indian Ocean, at that time there’s an article which is published in Back to Godhead.
So Indranath Maharaj went to, as a part of relief activities which ISKCON was doing, he went to Sri Lanka. And there, there’s all the background, the houses were devastated, the village was in ruins. And people were just shattered.
And the devotees came with food. But the local authority said that actually from all over the world we have got food, clothing, everything. He said that we don’t need so much now.
People are traumatised right now. So do you have some trauma therapy? So then Maharaj said, yes. So he just started doing kirtans over there.
He was doing Hare Krishna, nobody was following. And then he asked, you know, here, you know, this is the place where Ram came and conquered. So people don’t know Krishna, they know only Ram.
So then Maharaj started chanting Sri Ram, Jai Ram, Jai Jai Ram. And he was singing, praying. And those same people, initially they were sitting dazed, traumatised.
But they came and started hearing the sound. Then slowly they started singing it. And they started, spirits started building up.
And then there was this picture, this picture, people, in the background there is some devastation and still their eyes and their faces are brightening up. Because they are experiencing the relief and strength and shelter that comes by remembrance of the Lord. So if we try to help people where they are, then Krishna will guide us how to help them.
If we think I have to prove my philosophy, I have to prove God’s goodness. No, we don’t have to do that. We simply have a service attitude, try to see how we can best help them.
Then people will sense God’s love through the actions of those who love God. Thank you. Hare Krishna.
Any other questions or comments? You can just speak, I’ll repeat. If we experience, if we are experiencing aversion, frustration or enunciation, is it somewhat dependent on the type of person we are? I think whether we are more emotional and also if we are either of those types of people, maybe both, how can that help us in our practise or what do we need to learn? Okay. If we are more emotional or more rational or we may be a combination of both, then will that determine how we experience either aversion or frustration or enunciation? Yes, our psychophysical nature does determine how we experience both the world and Krishna.
So if I have a body which is very vulnerable to cold, then even if I have great devotion for Krishna or at least I want to have strong devotion for Krishna, if I wake up in the morning when it is cold and come to the temple, my body will shiver. That’s just the way my body is. So even when I have to come to the temple and take darshan, I may have to cover my body properly in warm clothes and then I can come, I can be absorbed.
Now sometimes if my devotion is strong, I may tolerate the cold. But still it is distressing, it is painful. If there is no warm clothes available, I may still tolerate and focus on Krishna.
But if I have warm clothes, I will wear those warm clothes and then I will focus on Krishna. It will be easier for me to focus on Krishna. Somebody else may not have a body that vulnerable to cold and then we just directly focus on Krishna without needing warm clothes.
So just at the physical level we easily understand that we all are different and we may have certain needs at the physical level, which when addressed help us to focus on Krishna better. Similarly, for people who are emotional or people who are rational, they will have certain needs. So rational people, they will want to make sense of things.
If for example, they are not able to give up some attachment, then why am I not able to give it up? They will need some understanding of that. And then if they understand, okay, renunciation, it can be a result of past karmas. If I don’t have a past karma, maybe I may not have that renunciation.
Or they may understand, okay, this particular habit is very deep rooted in me because it is serving some need for me. Sometimes we think I am not able to give this up because I am attached. No, sometimes some people are say alcoholics.
Some people are simply social drinkers. If they are alcoholics, they drink. If they start associating with people who are not alcoholics, they won’t drink.
But some people drink as a means of getting relief from distress. Somebody who is a social alcoholic, if they start becoming devotee and associating with devotees, they may just give up their alcoholism. But somebody who is taking alcohol as a relief from stress and distress, even in devotee association, they may get stress and distress.
And unless they find a healthier way to address their need for relief, they may still find the craving for alcohol becoming overwhelming. So often our attachments or our habits or our cravings are unhealthy expressions of healthy needs. And if that healthy need is addressed, then unhealthy expression will stop.
So if that healthy need is not addressed, then unhealthy expression will still keep going on. The point I’m making is somebody who is rational, they may need a rational explanation of why something is happening. And to the extent somebody gives that explanation, then they’ll be peaceful.
Otherwise, their emotions will fixate. Why is this happening? Why? Why? Why? On the other hand, if somebody is more emotional, if their emotions are very greatly affected, if somebody just comes and gives them emotional support, I know some devotees, they say, if some senior devotee just gives them a long warm hug, they feel so comforted. I’ve got an extension in my spiritual life now.
I can keep fighting because I feel loved. I feel warm. So some people may just, when they’re emotionally distressed, they just need emotional support.
And if they get that, they’ll be able to move on. OK, this thing went wrong. I couldn’t do this.
It was a terrible, terrible thing that happened. I succumbed to this. But devotees still care for me.
Somebody still loves me. Let me move on. So basically, our emotionality and our rationality will determine.
It is not that rational people don’t have emotions. It is that rational people’s emotions are also directed according to rational channels. That means, for an emotional, rational person, if a question, answer doesn’t come, this consciousness gets locked over there.
I need this answer. I can’t move forward without this. So for an emotional person, their emotions are caught in something.
And if they get emotional support, emotional warmth, then they can move forward. For somebody who is rational, sometimes you hug people also. They just don’t want to hug.
Some people don’t. They’re not so very touchy. Don’t be so touchy-feely.
So they don’t like to be hugged so much. They say, OK, don’t hug me. Answer my question.
So what we have to see is that each of us has particular needs and we have to find out that devotee association or those channels where those needs get addressed. So if somebody is emotional, are they more likely to experience an aversion? Possibly, but not necessarily. It is yes, if somebody they liked very much and then that person turned away from them, they may become averse to that person.
But emotional person, if they find somebody else whom they can connect with, they may even forget this person and move on with their life. So rather than thinking that this is an advantage and this is a disadvantage, we just focus on whatever is our nature, whatever is our need, accordingly we try to serve Krishna. So if we feel both emotional and rational, then whatever is a component that we need to have addressed, we have that addressed and we move forward in our spiritual life.
Thank you. So we worship Radha Krishna, but Radharani is not explicitly mentioned, does not appear in the Bhakti tradition till the 15th, 16th century. So why is that? Now two different things are there.
There is a historical understanding of Bhakti and there is a transcendental understanding of Bhakti. So historically certain aspects of what is transcendentally existing in the spiritual world manifest at a particular time. It is not that say Krishna did not exist before Krishna appeared in this world.
Krishna appeared several thousands of years ago. Again here historians and Vaishnavas may vary about the specific dates. But if you consider, even in Ramlila, there are devotees of Ram who existed long long ago and they are also talking about Krishna.
So even in Krishnalila people are talking about Ram. There is a Ramopakhyan in the Mahabharata also. So the point here is that there is transcendental which exists in the transcendental world and there is historical where that transcendental manifests in this world.
So the reductionistic view of religion, academic scholars basically, they sometimes view religion simply as a historical phenomena. They have various prisms through which they view religion. They may view it as a historical phenomena, as a sociological phenomena, as a psychological phenomena or as a pseudoscientific phenomena.
There are four broad ways. But in all these four ways, actually they don’t get to substance of religion. Substance of religion is God and love for God.
So academic scholars of religion can know about God. They can’t know God. What is the difference? It’s like a child who is sick.
The doctor may know about the child. Doctor knows the blood platelets composition, urine composition, stool composition, this, that, so many things. Doctor may not have a personal relationship with the child.
The mother may not know about the specific details, but the mother knows the child. So what happens is, yes, religion has a historical effect. Religion has a sociological dimension to it.
Religion has a psychological dimension to it. But all these are effects of religion. But the academic study of religion studies only these.
It doesn’t study the substance of religion, not what causes these because that is transcendental. So if we study religion as a historical phenomena alone, then we miss out on the substance of religion. So with that qualification about the historical approach, let’s move to the substance of the question now.
There is the general understanding in the bhakti tradition that God is a person who has personal associates with whom he reciprocates love. At the same time in the different scriptures there is different understanding of God given. So we could say Vishnu is God at home, sorry God in office.
Although he is God at home also, in Vaikuntha he lives over there, but the mood is more regal and majestic. Krishna is God at home. So now the God at home is a very intimate aspect of God.
Now we may know about the Prime Minister of a country, the President of a country as they are in office. But at home they may have a nickname, they may have their personal life. We may not know so much about it.
If we read say the official Gazette of India or official book of India, there might not be much mentioned about the personal life. So that’s not relevant for the official manual of official book of India or America or UK or whatever. Similarly most of the texts within the broad Vedic canon, they focus on God in office.
That’s why there is much more reference to Vishnu and relatively speaking there is a lesser reference to Krishna and even lesser reference to Radharani because the relationship of Krishna with Radharani is quite esoteric. Esoteric in the sense that there is the understanding that their love is in the Parkiyaras. Swakiya means where Krishna is married with his consort, like we say Rukmini, Satyabhama in Dwaraka.
But Parkiya means there is love outside the bond of marriage. In normal circles it is considered immoral. But when it is directed towards Krishna, it’s trans-moral.
It is not immoral is below morality, trans-moral is above morality. Bhagavata concludes by describing, sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja. Give up all duties and surrender to me.
In the case of Arjuna that means you may have a duty to your elders, but for my service you have to give up that duty. You have to fight for me. You have to fight even against the elders.
It’s an extremely difficult task that Krishna demands from Arjuna. So now for a woman, especially in traditional society and any civilised society, her chastity is considered a very great dharma. So in bhakti we learn to give up the bad for God, bad things, sinful things we have to give up for God.
But in bhakti sometimes we may even have to give up the good for God. So impiety has to be given up for Krishna, but even piety has to be given up for Krishna. The gopis demonstrate giving up even the good for God.
The gopis through their loving relationship they demonstrate that actually even the relationship with one’s husband, that has to be given up for attaining God. In that sense the gopis are demonstrating Sarva Dharma and Parityajya in an extraordinarily lofty way. And this understanding is quite esoteric.
And this is not so easy to understand. Of course I have many many classes on this topic and from a philosophical perspective we can explain that actually Krishna is the lord of everyone. So it is not that the gopis are being unfaithful to anyone.
And Acharya has also explained that the gopis were never married to others. It only appeared as if they were married. I won’t go into the specifics of whether this is immoral or not.
I am focussing on the principle of how there can be esoteric details that are not so easily understandable. So Krishna as God is revealed in the bhakti scriptures and he is God at home in Vrindavan. But the specific details of his life they are not so easy to understand.
That’s why the intimate details they are not so easily revealed. Of course I would say 15th-16th century is a very late idea. Radharani is mentioned in the Brahma Vyavarta Puran.
He is mentioned in the Brahma Puran, in the Padma Puran also. And the Bhagavatam, the tradition understands it to be 5000 years old. But Jaidev Goswami was not 15th-16th century.
He was at least 13th-14th century. 13th century. So it is at least 200-300 years before that.
By that time Chaitanya Mahaprabhu appeared in the 15th century. Jaidev Goswami was already an established saint. Sridhar Swami has also talked about Radharani in his Bhagavatam commentary.
So Sridhar Swami’s commentary was already, both Jaidev Goswami was very established. Sridhar Swami was also very established. At that time for a work to become established, it would not be that today you write and publish on the internet and it becomes globally famous.
It had to be circulated. It would take years upon years. You can see at least 100-200 years before Chaitanya Mahaprabhu appeared, it must have been there.
And even before him there have been authors like Bhavabhuti, and there have been many other singers like Chandidas and others who have also glorified Radharani. So basically, because the revelation is confidential, it is not directly revealed in the scriptures. And just because it is from our perspective today, it’s historically revealed at a particular time.
That does not mean, firstly, that it didn’t exist before that. Second, it existed at the spiritual level before that. And even at the material level, how do we know whether something existed or didn’t exist before that? If we consider, in India, the atmosphere is very hot.
So even if something is written down on paper or even in leaves or whatever, it doesn’t last for long. So suppose a thief has stolen cash and gone away from a bank and you find the footprints of the thief and you find the bag in which he stole the money. Just finding the footprints of the thief or even finding the bag does not mean finding the cash.
So similarly, for us, the textual evidence is only one evidence. Just because we don’t have, even if we assume, this text appeared at this particular time and before this, we don’t have any text mentioning this. Now how do we know that there were no other texts at that time? How do we know that those texts were not preserved at that time? We don’t know that.
So the texts could have been there and maybe because of the atmosphere, maybe because of the vandalising by the invaders, those texts could have been lost, if we complete this point. More importantly, we don’t see, I’ll conclude with this point, we don’t see any of the other traditions. If, say, the concept of Radharani first appeared in the 14th, 15th, 16th century, whenever, we don’t see any other tradition condemning Oh, this is a new invention.
It is only today’s academic scholars who say. Now, if you see in the Shri Sampradaya also, there are great, say, the Andalas, one of the Alwars, and she has talked about what is about Vrindavan, and there are verses about Radharani also. On my website, I have answered this question elaborately.
And there is a reference from the work of the Alwars, where they are glorifying, not from the Alwars, I think from Vedanta Ishika’s work, who is one of the prominent scholars in the Shri Sampradaya. He’s also glorifying Radharani. So just because the texts are not available does not mean that transcendental Radharani is not there.
And even historically, Radharani might have been there, but the text might not have survived. So if it were just a recent invention, then why didn’t the contemporary scholars at that time criticise that? There is no record anywhere in the major traditions, either in the other Vaishya Sampradayas or other Sampradayas, saying, you know, where is this Radharani been invented from? Why are you people worshipping it? So that means that they didn’t consider that as a, one reasonable explanation for that could be, they accepted Radharani’s presence. So historically, as per the knowledge that we have, we can say that Radharani became prominent in the tradition at particular time.
But the historical is not the transcendental. And the historical evidence that we have does not necessarily reflect the historical reality. It is, a standard saying in history is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
So therefore, the tradition has worshipped Radharani for a long time. And there is a whole theology about how Radharani is the exalted devotee of Krishna. And therefore, if we are trying to practise Bhakti, we may consider the academic approach to religion or the, not necessarily academic, I’m not using a negative word, that’s just one approach.
We may consider non-devotional approach to religion. But if you want to experience God, if you want to experience love for God, then we have to focus more on the devotional approach to religion. Thank you.
Last question. Jiva Swami says that out of one lakh lakh texts which are in the Vedas, barely one to two percent is remaining right now. That also is additional evidence.
Yes. Thank you very much. Shri Mat Bhagavatam Ki.
Shrila Prabhupada Ki. Kaur Bhakta Vrinda Ki. Not Shri Mat Bhagavatam.
Chaitanya Chaitanya Tamrad Ki. Jai. Jai.