Ramayana Phoenix Fall 2018

Ramayana series 1 – Comparing Dasharatha and Dhritarashtra – What we do is not as important as why we do it

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?ref=embed_video&v=1940775015969924

Ramayana series 2 – Ravana’s recklessness – Attachment makes us overvalue things

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?ref=embed_video&v=287382915216771

Ramayana series 3 – Shurapanakha’s manipulativeness – Exploiting others’ weaknesses doesn’t make us strong

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?ref=embed_video&v=308409816438309

Ramayana series 4 – Sita’s faithfulness – The strength of devotional acceptance

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?ref=embed_video&v=286441101975842

---

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna. Thank you very much for coming today evening and I’ll be speaking on the Ramayana. I’ll take specific characters and we’ll see what we can learn from them.
Today I’ll focus on Dashratha and we’ll contrast the decision taken by Dashratha with the decisions taken by Dhritarashtra. If we look at our life, it’s like a journey and on a journey if you’re going say driving on a long road, so quite often the road is straight. We just move along that road but at periodic intervals we come to intersections and if we take a wrong intersection, wrong turn, then you can go far away from the destination.
So like that in our life, there is a normal routine which we follow but during the course of our life, sometimes life brings us to intersections and if we consider our journey by driving, the destination will be shaped not just by how we drive on the straight road but also which turn we take at the intersections and primarily by that. So like that if we look at our lives, there are certain moments in our life which shape our destiny in substantions. Those are the times when we take some fateful decisions.
They can be positive, they can be negative. So the scriptures, the Bhagavad Gita, the Bhagavatam, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, they all focus on guiding us about how to make decisions. So if we are driving along the road, if we have set the destination, then automatically we are told, turn right, turn left.
Now the GPS can guide us provided there is a destination clearly. Now if you don’t have a destination, then GPS may also become disoriented. Where do you want to go? So the first basis for us to make any decision in our life is that there has to be a destination.
But then life does not always provide us a clear-cut destination always. So we may decide, okay, I want to grow in my career, I want to expand my family, I want to grow spiritually, I want to do this, I want to do that. These are broad directions we have.
So when people take certain decisions, it is not just the moment when the decision is to be taken, oh you turned left, you could have turned right. The moment of decision is a moment which we prepare for consciously or unconsciously by all that we have done earlier. So our value, so when we are faced with a particular situation in our life, will you do this or will you do this? At one level, such choices come at every moment.
But major choices come at certain moments. When we study scripture, it is important for us to approach them properly. So this talk will be a little, the first part will be a little philosophical before I move on to practical applications.
When we study ancient books, how do we study them? We might just hear them as stories or nice stories to learn something from them. But how do we learn something from them? They could just be entertaining stories. Now we have Krishna Leela depicted very attractively in programmes like Little Krishna or we also have now animated depictions of the Ramayana and Mahabharata and these are primarily for entertainment.
Entertainment is also a human need. But the scriptures are meant not just for entertainment. They are also meant for enlightenment.
So we could say that we have the body, the mind and the soul. So the body needs food for nutrition. The mind needs some entertainment for creation.
It’s a need of the mind. We need breaks from our regular life. But beyond that, the soul needs enlightenment.
Enlightenment is an ultimate knowledge of values. So if we approach scripture simply as stories, they’ll purify us because their stories connect with Krishna. But we may be stuck at the level of the mind itself, just seeking some entertainment from it.
But if we want to be nourished spiritually, then we need to approach them for the purpose of enlightenment. And enlightenment means, again, enlightenment is not just suddenly we start seeing a light everywhere or suddenly light fills our heart. No, enlightenment basically means we understand what is the purpose of our life and how to achieve it.
That is the essence of enlightenment. That sadhana sadhya sreshta nama nishchaya. We all have some sadhya, some goal and we have some sadhana means.
So what is the goal of life and what is the means to achieve that goal? Knowing these two things is the essence of enlightenment. And then enlightenment is a journey. It is not that we come to an enlightened state and we stay static over it.
The journey goes on, but then the journey takes us closer and closer to our Lord. So for approaching scripture for the purpose of enlightenment, we need to see that scripture describes certain incidents, which are literal incidents. So I’ll talk about a concept called the ladder of abstraction.
It might seem a little complex, but it’s a simple concept. Ladder of abstraction means that this is like a ladder. At the bottom of it are specific details.
At the top of it are universal principles. Have I talked about this last time when I had come? So the ladder of abstraction basically means if I say today, come and say that, today I will speak on how the population of polar bears in Alaska is going down. How does it relate to us? We just get details without any context.
It doesn’t make any sense for us. Even if the content is meaningful, it will not be meaningful to us unless there is some context to it. So if I say, actually our ecology is in great danger.
We will face imminent shortages of vital necessities of life. Now life itself will be threatened. And one indicator of that is how the population of the Alaska bears is going down.
What has happened from there? There is a specific detail. But from that specific detail, we go into a universal principle. The principle is that the environment is getting degraded.
And then, so we could say that at one end, there’s a two-way ladder if we have like this. So at the other end of the ladder is the polar bears population going down. From there, there’s a general principle at the top of the ladder.
That is that, okay, the environment is degraded. And from there, we come down the ladder. How does it matter to me? So basically, similarly, if you study scripture, scripture gives in detail certain incidents that happened thousands of years ago.
So that is like at the bottom of the ladder of abstraction. Certain incidents happen, they themselves could be entertaining. But from there, we rise up.
What is the universal principle? And then, we come down the ladder of abstraction to our side. How does it apply in my life? Now, how it applies in our life is something which each one of us has to investigate. That is something which will require introspection, maybe discussion with our friends, well-wishers, guides.
But if we stay stuck only at the level of details, then we won’t learn the universal principles and we won’t be able to apply. So now, with this background, let’s look at the first major heart-wrenching incident in the Ramayana. The Ramayana is filled with karunya rasa.
Karunya rasa means, actually, it’s a rasa of agony, rasa of distress. If you look in one perspective, Ram’s life is filled with distresses. And yet, he responds to all of them in a very principled way.
And that is why his character is considered so glorious. So while Ram was going to be coronated as the king, as the prince regent and then the king, a whole conspiracy happened. Kaikeyi was somehow misled by Manthira, and Manthira told her, Dad, if Kaushalya’s son becomes the king, you will become her maidservant, and your son will become his servant.
Your son may be banished or may be even killed because Ram will not tolerate any competition. There’s no basis to her arguments. But somehow, she persuaded Kaikeyi.
And then she told Kaikeyi, Dad, you should use the two benedictions you’ve been given long ago. And Dasharatha came that evening in a mode of celebration. At one level, he was going to retire.
So you could say that some sadness is there. But for him, it was a joy that his son was now competent. His son was going to become the king.
And Dasharatha was delighted in that idea. So he came happily to his palace. And he came to Kaikeyi first.
And Kaikeyi was in the mourning chambers. And she was in such distress. And she slowly but surely, emotionally pressured him.
And Dasharatha was aghast. When Kaikeyi told that, I want two benedictions. What were the two benedictions? Exile Ram for 14 years and make him the king.
Now, when she said like this, it was so shocking. He couldn’t believe. Why would she ask something like this? And thereafter, Dasharatha begged to her, stop it.
If you want Bharata to be the king, let him be the king. But don’t send Ram to the forest. I cannot live without him.
And what fault is he? Why should he be sent to the forest like this? He said, now you have given me your word. Will you dishonour your word? And the question comes up over here. That Dasharatha, to honour his word, sent his son to the forest.
And Ram also gracefully went to the forest. That Dasharatha tried everything to try to stop him. But it plunged him into an ocean of sorrow.
Such sorrow that he actually couldn’t bear that eventually he died. And the whole kingdom of Ayodhya sank into an ocean of lamentation. This may raise the question, if we consider, was Dasharatha Maharaj’s word of such importance that if one’s word causes such great distress, that is one still obliged to honour the word? So basically, going back to our point of making decisions, I’ll explore this theme further in our future classes.
But broadly, the Mahabharata says that there can be three parameters for deciding what to do. You can look at the intent, the content, and the consequence. The intent is, why am I doing something? The content is, what am I doing? And the consequence is, what is the result of what is done? So when we have to make a decision, say, if a doctor recommends that this person’s leg is badly injured and is filled with infection now, the remaining body may also get infected.
So we have to amputate the leg. Now that’s a serious thing to amputate the part of a body of someone. Now when that is to be done, say, OK, how is this going to result? What is going to happen by this? From a medical point of view, that is what is advisable.
But then, for that person, can we get a prosthetic limb? How important is the functionality? What functionality is possible with the limb? So basically, we’ll have to look at all these three factors. And sometimes we can foresee the consequence. Sometimes we can’t foresee the consequence.
So with these three frameworks, if we look at the content, what happened to the Ashwath Maharaj? He was born as a Kshatriya. And in every situation in life, wherever there is a power, there has to be a fetter. Fetter means something which restrains the power, restricts the power.
If anybody gets unchallenged power, then that can be very dangerous. When, say, if somebody becomes a dictator, then if that person has nobody to challenge them, then they can do terrible things. Power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. So Kshatriyas, especially those who are kings, they have enormous power. And to ensure that they don’t abuse their power, they are trained very deeply to honour their word.
That when they become the kings, they may give a word of honour to the priests who enthroned them as the king, that they will serve the citizens. There are traditions where people take vows, this is what I will do, this is what I will not do. Or there may be that when they make a promise, I will take care of this, then they stick to that.
So the word of honour enables people to, even if later on some other situation changes, sometimes some emotion changes, then morality, it is said sometimes, morality is simply lack of opportunity. Many people who are moral, they are moral just because they don’t have an opportunity to be immoral. But if they got an opportunity to be immoral, many people would act immoral.
So then, if future situation comes when they can abuse their power, but if they have given a particular word at a particular time, they will stick to that word. And that way they can be protected from their own lower side. This principle of keeping one’s word is very much emphasised in the scriptures.
Now let’s contrast before we go further in analysing Dashrath’s decisions. Dashrath felt that I have to honour my word. And he had a natural affection for his son.
Intense affection. Every parent has affection for their child. But in his case, Dashrath had not got a child for a very, very long time.
And he had tried a lot, eventually, by doing great yajnas, he had finally got not one child, but four children. Still, Ram was the first child and Ram was expected to become the next king. So he had special affection for him.
At this point, even if we don’t consider the point that Ram is God, the Ramayan is such that Ram doesn’t always assert himself to be God. He sometimes manifests extraordinary power, but the mood of the Ramayan is that Ram is an ideal human being. So therefore, if you consider, I will talk about this at three levels, this particular decision.
If there is a family attachment to one’s son, one’s child, that’s naturally there. But then if there is a word of honour, say there is a high court judge who has to make a particular decision against a particular person who has been accused, a defendant. And say the defendant happens to be his relative, his child.
And in most situations, the judge will be told to recuse from that. But if there is a panel of judges, somebody else can take up the role. But a king is only one.
A king can’t recuse from that responsibility. So, if we consider, there is a principle of acting honourably, and there is a principle of acting affectionately towards one’s family members. So this is a conflict.
And Dashrath chose to honour his word. Of course, in this case, Ram had not done anything wrong. So it was not that Ram was a wrongdoer, but it was the principle that he had to honour his word.
Now we could say about this, there is another principle, that Ram is God. And one of the concluding principles in the Bhagavad Gita is sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja give up all varieties of religion and just surrender to me. So when that is stated, what does it mean literally? It means you give up everything for my sake.
And there are examples when Arjun does that. Say, for example, Arjun, when he is fighting the war on the 14th day, and he has to shoot Jayadrath. So he has to reach Jayadrath, but he is not able to reach him.
And finally, when he comes very close to Jayadrath, eight warriors come suddenly and block him. And he is despairing, he knows that if he can’t reach Jayadrath, he will die. Then Krishna arranges for the sun to be covered.
And then, Krishna tells Arjun, shoot now. Though Arjun lowers his bow and is disappointed, Krishna says, don’t lower your bow, take the Brahmastra, place it on your bow and point it towards Arjun. And at that time, Arjun doesn’t ask any questions.
And then, Krishna removes the chakra and the sun appears again. The last few rays of the sun appear and Arjun shoots Jayadrath. At one point, Arjun doesn’t ask questions to Krishna.
So, if you are doing something for the purpose of the Lord, you can put aside all other considerations. So couldn’t Darshana have said, Ram is God, for his sake, my word is important, but he is more important. So this could be another level.
There are some Sri Vaishnavacharyas who say that actually, Darshana acted wrongly. Because, why did he have to honour his word more than the word of God, more than his, more than the Lord? But that is out of affection. Why did Ram have to go to the forest? Why did Ram have to suffer like this? Another understanding about this, the fourth level understanding is that, actually, this whole thing was the Leela of the Lord.
So it was Ram who had been asked to appear by the Devatas. And the Devatas influenced Kaikeyan Mantra, so that Ram would go out of the forest and eventually challenge the demons and work on the demons. So, he acted for the service of the Lord.
However, this perspective, if we take everything as the Leela of the Lord, then there is hardly anything to learn from it. Whoever does whatever, it is a part of the Leela. Yes, that level is also wonderful, just relish it at that time.
But, in order to learn something, let’s look at these three levels. So, in the case of Ashrath, he felt… Do we need this? Am I audible? Or no? Is it unpleasant? Doesn’t it sound unpleasant? No? Maybe to me it is sounding unpleasant. Is it okay? Or you can’t hear now? I think this is moving with my head.
It’s echoing. Okay, fine. Can you hear me now? Thank you.
So, in the case of Ashrath, he felt that he has to honour his word. But, he had to place a stone on his heart to actually send Ram out. Now, let’s contrast this with Dhritarashtra.
Dhritarashtra, he actually arranged twice for the Pandavas to go to the forest. Not just once, but twice. The first was, it was not actually sending them to the forest.
He was sending. Actually, you could say not twice, but thrice. First was, he sent them to Varanavarta.
And he told them, Oh, there is a nice festival over there, you just go over there. And when he went over there, he knew that Dhritarashtra was going to do something. And Dhritarashtra didn’t tell him what he was going to do.
Dhritarashtra said, They may go and they may never come back. So, they said that, sometimes, some people act ignorant, or they stay ignorant. Say, somebody is telling us some controversy or something, you know, you don’t tell me this, I don’t want to get into all these.
We know something is wrong, so Dhritarashtra said, He is going to do something wrong. I don’t know what he is going to do. So, he did not pay any attention.
He knew he was sending the Pandavas to their death. That was the first time. The second time was, when the Pandavas came back, they won the hand of Draupadi.
And when they came back after that, at that time, he gave them half the kingdom. But the half that he gave was, a forest. Khandav is a complete forest.
It’s like saying, suppose after this programme we have prasad. No, suppose prasad is there. But, so when we are serving prasad, say, if there is one item which is cooked very nicely, another item is not cooked so nicely.
Then, suppose we give one item to one person, and the other item, which is barely edible, to somebody else. What is this? This is completely unfair. Multiply this example thousands of times, and then we have, a kingdom that is flourishing, and a kingdom that is completely barren.
Forest. So, now, we may sometimes say that, actually, we should, that sometimes, eco-friendly living means living in the farm, or living in the forest. But, that kind of living is good, but you cannot rule a kingdom like that.
If you are to rule a kingdom, you need towns, you need cities. So, if we consider the ancient culture, in the ancient culture also, there were villages, and there were cities. We see that, Vrindavan is a village, Mathura is a city.
So, the Pandavas were sent to, something which is practically a forest. Second time he sent like that. Third was, of course, when the gambling match was there, and the gambling match, they lost everything.
And, when the gambling match was real, and the Pandavas had to go to the forest. Now, if you consider Dhrashtra, for him, the Pandavas were not his sons. They were his nephews.
But still, because, they did not have their own father. So, he was like their father. Traditionally, when there were joint families, the children of one’s brothers, one’s sisters, they were also like a part of one’s own family.
And, if, so the whole joint family, the heads took responsibility for everyone in that family. So, Dhrashtra was expected to take that father figure role for the Pandavas. And, the Pandavas always treated Dhrashtra like a father.
But, Dhrashtra was blinded by his attachment to his son, Duryodhana. And, because of that, he couldn’t think of anything favourable for the Pandavas. So, we all have multiple attachments.
And, we cannot be, we cannot say that, I will be detached from this, I will be attached to this. When we live in the world, we do develop different, our attachment goes in different directions. So, the important thing is that you have a sense of perspective.
Sri Prabhupada explains, the definition of intelligence is to see things in their proper perspective. That means, in this case, okay, I have attachment to this, I have attachment to this also. This is important for me.
That is also important for me. But, when a situation of conflict comes, which is more important? So, for Dhrashtra, to be attached to Duryodhana was natural. He is the father, and Duryodhana is the son.
So, it’s natural. However, when one thing causes perversion in other things, that is where the problem comes up. When one, we become so attached to one thing, that for that one thing, we are ready to destroy other things.
That’s when it becomes very dangerous. For us, each attachment is, it helps us to, the word attachment generally has a negative connotation. But, we could use the word affection.
We use the word attachment to Krishna also. Make your mind attached to me, Krishna says. So, now, when we are going through life, going back to the earlier metaphor of the journey, we all have to take decisions.
I have come to this road, should I go this way, or should I go that way? Now, our decisions are not just our decisions based on the situation or the particular choice that we have. If we say, especially when we are acting in relationships with people. So, if I come to a crossroad over here, if I do this, this person will be pleased.
If I do this, this person will be pleased. Then, it’s not just like an objective choice, should I go here or should I go there? Based on the kind of attachment we have to a particular person, we will be pulled in that direction. So, if this thing will please this person, this thing will please this person.
Then, if my attachment to this person is stronger, then I will be pulled much more forcefully in this direction. And this person has lesser attachment, then I will be pulled much lesser in this direction. So, each of our attachments pulls us in a particular direction.
In the case of Dhritarashtra, in the case of Dasaratha, he had a natural affection for his son, but he also had a natural sense of honour. So, his sense of affection for his son pulled him. I cannot let my son go to the forest, what fault is he in? But, his sense of honour pulled him in this direction.
Now, in the case of Dhritarashtra, he pulled in, his sense of attachment towards Dhritarashtra pulled him in one direction. And his sense of attachment towards his, whatever sense of obligation he had, he didn’t really have much attachment to the Pandavas, but whatever sense of affection, obligation that he had, knew they are part of my own family, that made him consider also, that he has to take care of them. He knew in his heart that he was treating them unfairly.
But, this force was pulling him so strongly, that in a particular direction, that he just got completely lost. Now, let’s look at this, from the perspective of Ram and the Pandavas. In a sense, Ram was wronged, in a similar sense, the Pandavas were wronged.
Ram was wronged, for no fault of his, he was sent to a forest. Pandavas were wronged, for no fault of it, they were just attempted to be burnt. But, is Dhritarashtra’s situation similar to Dashrath’s situation? Not at all.
It’s, what we do, is important. But in what context we do it, that is even more important. So, if we consider, Dhritarashtra was, Dhritarashtra was not bound by the word of honour, he was bound simply by his affection to, attachment to Duryodhana.
But, Dashrath was bound by the word of honour. So, unless we look at the content, at the context in which something is being said, or something is being done, we can often misunderstand things. If suddenly someone comes to you and says, I forgive you.
Thank you. What did I do to deserve forgiveness? What wrong did I do? You know, first of all, I forgive you, this is a meaningful sentence. But, if somebody suddenly comes and says, I forgive you, it is meaningless, what do you mean? Thank you for forgiving me, politely, thank you for forgiving me, but what did I do wrong? So, without looking at the context, if you make certain statements, intrinsically they have some meaning.
But, unless you look at the context, what do they mean over there? In terms of, in terms of the consequence, I was talking about intent, content and consequence. In terms of the content, both the Pandavas and Ram had to go to the forest. In terms of intent, it was, Dashrath had absolutely no desire that Ram go to the forest.
And Dhritarashtra also did not really desire that the Pandavas go to the forest. He just wanted the Pandavas out of the way. My son should become the king and you do whatever you want.
So, the only way to get them out of the way was to send them to the forest. if we consider in terms of this intent, Dashrath’s intent was to, he was bound to some extent by the word which he had given to Kaikeyi. Dhritarashtra had no such binding.
He had never promised anything to Duryodhana. Even if he had promised, he was not bound like that. So, here we see, in terms of the consequence, in terms of the consequence, when Ram went to the forest, he actually ended up freeing the forest from the influence of many demoniac people.
And that was the great positive that he did. When the Pandavas went to the forest, it’s interesting, in the Ramayana, there is a kingdom, and the Rakshasas live in the forest. Of course, the Rakshasas have their own kingdom also.
But it’s also a part of, it’s outside the kingdom. But in the Mahabharata, the demoniac forces live in the kingdom only. In their own family.
So, in the Ramayana, the war happens outside. But in the Mahabharata, the Pandavas come back, and the war happens next to their houses, next to their kingdom itself, in Kurukshetra. So, in terms of consequence, ultimately, both in the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, the world is freed from Adharma.
The world is freed from Adharma. The demons like Ravana are removed from the world. And similarly, the demoniac elements like Duryodhana are removed from the world.
But, if you consider, in the case of Dashrath Maharaj, Dashrath Maharaj did not, he couldn’t survive just a short time away from Ram, and he left his body, he left the world. However, Dhritarashtra lived for a very long time. He lost all his sons, and still he continued to live.
And then, Ram, eventually, Vidura had to come and urge him to renounce the world. So, we see that Dhritarashtra, the word itself means Dhritarashtra, one who is very attached, attached to the kingdom. So, now Dhritarashtra was so attached to the kingdom that that attachment blinded him to everything else.
And, it is said that Dhritarashtra had to lose everything before he lost his attachments. He had to lose everything. He lost all his sons, he lost his royal honour, and finally he gave up attachment.
Now, Dashrath Maharaj, on the other hand, he lost his life remembering Lord Ram. His departure was extremely auspicious. Dhritarashtra, even when he passed away, even when Vidura came and instructed him, still, he could not make sense of things.
He couldn’t actually devote himself to Krishna. He was elevated, but he could not be liberated. In the case of Dashrath, he was elevated to the supreme destination because he lived his life in a mode of service to Ram, and when he left his life, also, he left his body, he was absorbed in remembrance of Ram.
And thus, their dispositions and their destinations are extremely different. Although, externally, their actions may seem to be similar. It was the ultimate consequence for Dashrath and for Dhritarashtra.
For Dashrath, he was elevated. Circumstantially, sometimes, he may become bound to do certain things, which is unavoidable. But, A, our intent is not to hurt anyone.
And eventually, that good intention will be reflected. So, if we look in the whole Ramayan, no one blames Dashrath here. Even Kaushalya, she is hurt, grievously hurt, but she doesn’t blame Dashrath.
Ram never blamed Dashrath. In fact, Ram, when he meets Jatayu, and Jatayu tells him that, Oh, I was a close friend of Dashrath. Then, Ram says that, Oh, Jatayu, by coming in your presence, I feel I have come under the shelter of my father once again.
Blessed to be here with you. So, he always holds Dashrath in a very reverential position. In fact, the Ramayan is arranged in such a way that after Ram brings down Ravan, then the gods come in the sky to appreciate the extraordinary feat that Ram has done.
But along with that, Dashrath also appears. And Dashrath also blesses him. And Dashrath tells him that, You have honoured my word now.
You have honoured my word. In 14 years you have been exiled. Please go back to the kingdom.
So, we see that Dashrath, the dilemma that he faced, he did not just honour his word. It was rather he furthered the plan of the Lord through that. So sometimes, when we are put in situations where we just don’t have an option, this is the way I can act, and this is also the way I can act, but this is just not an option open for me right now.
Then, we can either become resentful why our options are so restricted, or we can move forward, doing the best in our situation. And eventually, if we maintain a service attitude, if we maintain a mood of trying to do our best for the service of the Lord, then Krishna will bring good even out of the bad. So, sometimes, when we are constrained by our situations, we want to do certain things, but it is just not possible for us.
At that time, Nandshila Prabhupada, in 1922, when he met Bhakti Santhosh Thakur, was so inspired by Bhakti Santhosh Thakur. He felt, I should dedicate my life to sharing the message of Krishna-Bhakti with everyone. But Prabhupada just got married, he had a child, and he said, I cannot neglect my responsibilities.
His heart was there, I want to dedicate my life. But, he continued his responsibilities for almost 40 years. Throughout it all, he was doing all that he could.
Now, if you consider Shri Prabhupada’s life, the first 40 years, or 43 years practically, since he met Shri Bhakti Santhosh Thakur, he had very little result. He was constantly constrained by his circumstances. He just couldn’t find a way.
First, he was constrained because he had so many social, familial, financial obligations. Then eventually, he was constrained by the socio-political, socio-economic conditions of India. Prabhupada was just too fascinated with politics at that time, thinking that political change will bring a brighter future for us.
He was too captivated with economic development. So, he just had no interest in culture. So, Prabhupada was also constrained, but he kept doing what he could in his situations.
And then, eventually when he came to America, Krishna arranged for Prabhupada to come to America just at the right time. 1960s was a time of counter-culture where people were exploring alternative ways of learning. Many other spiritual teachers had come before and they had created intrigue interest, fascination about Indian spirituality.
Prabhupada was the first person who came and taught about bhakti in a big way. And he captivated the hearts of thousands and thousands of people. So, when sometimes circumstances constrain us and they don’t allow us to do what our heart wants to do, then at that time, we just operate within that situation.
We keep moving forward. And eventually, we find that Krishna will create a way for us. So, we can’t always be grateful for all situations, but we can be grateful in all situations.
Sometimes those situations are so restrictive that we just feel helpless, we feel frustrated. We can’t be grateful for those situations. But we can be grateful in all situations.
Yes. What can we be grateful for? We can be grateful that Krishna is with me, that I still have an opportunity to practise bhakti. Even if these limitations are there, let me take one step forward.
One step forward. And when we do this, we find that Krishna will brighten the way for us in due course. And thus, no matter what life throws our way, we, by having that intent of serving Krishna, and being grateful that at least I have knowledge about connecting with Krishna, at least I can do small things to connect with Him, I can do this much in this situation, we can move forward.
And eventually, Krishna will reveal His plan by which, even through all the obstacles and reversals, Krishna will bring out good for us. As ultimately it happened, for Dashrath, Ram, Ram’s glory became established of how he was such a principled son who was ready to give up his claim to kingdom just to honour his father’s word. How he was such a powerful warrior that he could defeat and overpower the demons in their own capital with a motley army of monkeys.
How he was such a heroic son that he honoured his father’s word for fourteen long years. And thus Ram was glorified, and the world was freed from adharma, and Dashrath Maharaj’s word was vindicated. When Dashrath Maharaj faced this whole situation, suddenly, Kaikeyi is speaking like this, he did not know what was going to come in the future.
He did what he could in that situation, and by the Lord’s arrangement, things worked out wonderfully. So similarly for us, if we stay faithfully trying to serve the Lord in whatever situation we are in, whether they are constrained or unconstrained, we will find that Krishna will work out good for us. I will summarise what I spoke, and you can have a few questions.
I spoke on this theme today, I compare Dashrath Maharaj and Dhritarashtra, and we focus on the theme of decision-making. I started by talking about how the epics can be studied for entertainment, if you just see them as stories, but they can be studied for entertainment, enlightenment, if you see them as a basis for decision-making. And for that, we look from the specific details in scripture to the universal principles, and then we look at how those principles apply in our lives.
So we go from the bottom of the ladder of abstraction, specific details, we rise up to the universal principles, and we come down the ladder of abstraction again to our side, to see how it applies. And then, talking about when we have to make decisions, our life is shaped not just by how we go through our routines, but especially how we act in certain defining moments, like intersection, when life brings us to. And when we have to take decisions at that time, it is not just what we feel at that moment that will make us take the decision, or what we think.
It is all that we have done previously that shapes our thinking, that shapes our attachments, and we are pulled by our attachments in particular directions. So when we are making a conscious choice to make a decision, we can consider our intent, the content, why we are doing it, the content, what exactly are we doing, is it right or wrong, and the consequence, what will be the result of this. And based on these three factors, we can make decisions.
Now, Dashrath Maharaj, we discussed four levels at which we can see his action. One was that he considered that he was acting. The ultimate level is that it’s all the Leela of the Lord.
Another level, we could say he had his affection, he was at this crossroads. One was he had to do right to his son. So that affection brought on him that, let me stay with you.
Then he had his word of honour, by which he had to go, to tell him to go to the forest. But beyond that we can say two more levels. He’s Ram, he’s God, for him everything else can be given up.
But then in that perspective also, Ram had a plan, that he was going to free the world from demons. So Dashrath Maharaj’s action, in terms of content, he sent Ram to the forest. But his intent was, actually, not to do something selfish, not to do something for his own attachment, but it was to honour his word.
In contrast, when Dhritarashtra sent the Pandavas to the forest, not once but thrice, it was because he was so attached to Dhritarashtra, that he got blinded by that. So based on what kind of attachments we have cultivated, when we come to crossroads, we are forcefully pulled in particular directions. And Dhritarashtra, what he did was unconscionable, because it was selfishly motivated.
Dashrath was not selfishly motivated, at all. And Dashrath departed from the world remembering Ram, and thus he attained the supreme destination. In contrast, Dhritarashtra, he stayed attached for a very very long time, stayed bound and deluded, and eventually when he was liberated, then he couldn’t think of Krishna.
He was elevated, but he didn’t get the supreme destination. In terms of the consequence of Ram’s actions, or Dashrath’s actions in the case of Ramayan, Ram was glorified, and the world was free from Adharma, from the demons who were spreading Adharma. Similarly, the Pandavas were in the forest, the Pandavas’ glory came out, and then the world was free from Adharma.
But the Adharma was inside the house itself. Dashrath had nothing to do with the Adharma that Ravana was doing, but Dhritarashtra had everything to do with the Adharma that Duryodhana was doing. So ultimately, if sometimes we are put in constrained situations, where we just don’t have any options, we are just forced to act in particular ways, then rather than resenting, we can still be grateful.
Even if we can’t be grateful for all situations, we can be grateful in all situations. And if we do the best we can in that situation, eventually Krishna will bring out good from it. Because Brahmapada was extremely constrained in his desire to serve Krishna also for almost 40 years.
But in the last 10 years, Brahmapada arranged for Krishna to be in a situation where wonderful results came out of it. So like that Krishna can bring out good from whatever difficulties we may face because of our situations, because of our circumstances. Just stay faithfully serving Krishna.
Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. Are there any questions or comments? Yes, please.
So you talked about Dhritarashtra. Dhritarashtra’s wife, Gandhari, was also there when Pandavas were getting into the palace. Even she didn’t say anything.
She could have said something, but she didn’t say anything. But it was finally Gandhari’s curse that even brought Krishna out of that. I mean that was one of the things that was told.
So what can relate to that? Gandhari did not even do her duty. But then she was one of the reasons how Krishna was sent out of Duryodhana. So if Gandhari did not do her duty at all, then in terms of restraining Dhritarashtra or restraining Duryodhana, then why did her curse have so much potency that it applied on Krishna and caused the destruction of Krishna’s dynasty? First of all, no curse can act on Krishna unless Krishna wants it to act.
So Krishna chose that he had to end his leela and he had to end the reign of the Yadus on the earth. So the Mahabharata describes, actually the Mahabharata is understood at three levels. One is it’s an earthly fight between two dynasties.
Then it’s also a cosmic fight where the Devatas descend to the earth and then the Dhanavas ascend to the earth. So Duryodhana and the Kauravas, they are actually Dhanavas who have come there. The Pandavas and their people on their side are Devatas who have come there.
So it’s a cosmic battle with the earth as a place where that battle happens to take place. Sometimes if you consider, say, World War II or some big wars, the two armies, they are marching towards each other and it’s in a small village somewhere which no one has heard about. The two armies confront each other.
Then that village becomes famous. Now if in that village on one side, there’s a river in between, one side one army is there, other side another army is there, that whole village will become filled with so many weapons and warriors. But after the war is over, then if those weapons and warriors all stay in the village, that’s not required.
So for that particular time when the Mahabharata war takes place, actually everybody, there are powerful forces from the higher levels of the universe as well as the lower levels of the universe. They all come on the earth. And then when the Adharma is removed, then those forces have to leave.
So those forces are not required over there, so they leave. So similarly, Krishna just needs a pretext for the Pandavas, for the Yajus to leave the earth. And when it is said that Gandhari’s curse was the cause, it was not that Gandhari’s curse was the cause, Gandhari’s curse was the instrument.
It was Krishna’s plan that was the ultimate cause of it. Gandhari’s curse became simply an instrument for that to happen. It was that Krishna wanted to remove them, and Krishna wanted to have, it is described that some of the Leelas of Krishna are Asura Mohan Leela.
Asura Mohan means the pastimes which are meant to delude the demoniac. Just like normally when we take darshan of the Lord, we become free from illusion. We have worldly desires.
We behold the beautiful form of the Lord, our worldly desires go down. But when the Lord comes as Mohini Murthy, and the Asuras see him, what happens? They see him or her, whatever, and they say, Mohini Murthy. They get deluded.
Sometimes the Lord comes in a form, or the Lord does something which is actually meant to delude the demons. The Lord’s departure from the world, Jeeva Goswami explains, is the Asura Mohan Leela. It is a pastime meant to delude the demoniac.
That Lord, who had actually gone to the abode of Yama, and come back, abode of death and come back, bringing those who had gone to the abode of death, and bringing them back. That Lord, how could he possibly have been killed because of an arrow hitting his foot? Wounds to the foot are not fatal at all. Unless they get infected and they get complicated.
So, when Krishna was Arjun’s charioteer, Krishna was right in front of Arjun. So many arrows, Bhishma’s arrows hit Krishna. And Bhishma was far more powerful a warrior than any random hunter somewhere in the forest.
And Krishna’s forehead was bleeding. That means the arrows hit him on the forehead also. But Krishna did not fall at that time.
How could an arrow by some unknown hunter in the forest hitting his foot affect him? So, if we consider from the perspective of logic, there is no logical reason why that should happen. But this is a pastime arranged by the Lord. So, those who want to look at reality from that perspective, Krishna gives them the opportunity to get from that perspective.
So, that’s with respect to how the Pandavas were destroyed, how the Yadus departed from the world. As far as Gandhari’s curse having potency, it is described that when we do dharma, any kind of dharma, we get some power. So, she did some adharma.
Or rather she did not actively stop adharma from happening. She was herself aghast. She was not in that assembly.
Generally, gambling, whenever gambling matches take place, it’s like a man’s activity. That’s why when Draupadi was called there, everybody in the royal assembly was aghast. How can a woman be called there? A woman should not be called over there.
So, later on she came to know Gandhari that such a terrible thing had happened in the assembly. And she was aghast at what her son had done. And she actually did a lot of fasting and penances so that her son would be protected.
Protected not just from the reactions of the wrongdoing that he had done, but protected from the evil intentions that were within him also. He could be purified of that. So, she was faithful to her husband.
And that is her chastity. She was faithful to her husband that she covered her own eyes with blindfolds. But she also tried her best to atone for Duryodhana’s previous wrong deeds, misdeeds.
And actually, when Krishna comes as Shantidutra, and Duryodhana doesn’t listen to Krishna, at that time Dhritarashtra calls Gandhari. And he tells Gandhari, please you speak to him. Gandhari speaks to him also.
Duryodhana is so insolent at that time, he still doesn’t listen to her. And Krishna tells Gandhari later that you yourself, when she curses like that, he says, I accept your curse, but you yourself know that your son was at fault. And that’s why she had all her power, she had enormous power, and when she finally saw that 99 of her sons had been killed, then she took off her blindfolds, and when she took off her blindfolds, she saw Duryodhana.
And when she glanced at Duryodhana, she infused him with such power that he could not be killed. But Krishna also tells her at that point, you did not bless Duryodhana that you will be victorious. If she had such mystic power, she could have empowered Duryodhana, and you will kill Bhima.
But she did not bless him like that. Because she knew what Duryodhana had done was wrong. But because of her maternal affection, she felt at least he should not die.
But of course Duryodhana came with his thigh covered, that’s why he was hit on the thigh and he was killed. So, the point is, Gandhari, she acted circumstantially in a particular way, and Krishna used that curse as a means for furthering his own plan. But how did her curse have that power? The curse was, she herself had led a life of virtue.
And she had tried as much as possible to stop Duryodhana from being wrong. But Duryodhana, if he was not ready to listen to his father, he had outgrown any tender feelings he might have had for his mother, by which he would listen to her. So she couldn’t do much about it.
Okay? Thank you. Any other questions? I have a question. Thank you very much for your wonderful lesson.
And another thing that I wanted to ask was, related to how Prabhupada was addressing how Krishna was cursed by Gandhari, that he would be the cause of the destruction that she faced with her children. Now, also in Dwaraka, when Samba, the grandson of Krishna, had that imitation in his womb, I mean, all the time we understand that Narada Muni, he’s very clear to that image, many times. And especially coming to Krishna’s dynasty, he’s very affectionate.
Now, usually Narada Muni is not, like, found in that midst of assembling. And is it right that where Samba approached in order to examine the power of the sages, that Narada Muni was the chief person that was there at that assembly of the rishis? Okay. Was it Narada Muni who, when Samba was cursed, was it Narada Muni who was one of the agents who cursed him? Or was it the chief among them, sages? Well, he was definitely one among the sages.
Parvat was there, many other rishis were also there. When he was cursed, Within the picture, we see Narada Muni. Yeah, Narada Muni is often seen over there.
Now, sometimes, Narada Muni is seen as a person who shows dissension. He causes conflicts. And Narada Muni doesn’t cause conflicts.
He actually, you could say, becomes the trigger for those who want to fight. So, he’s not the cause. He’s the trigger.
They say, if a trigger is pressed, a bullet will be shot. But you can’t sue the trigger if a person is killed. Somebody pressed the trigger.
So, Narada Muni, it’s the bullet which causes the wound, and it is the person who wanted to kill that presses the trigger. The trigger is simply something which sets the action in motion. Similarly, Narada Muni is the person who sometimes sets things in motion.
He’s not the cause of it. He’s not the bullet and he’s not the shooter. He’s the trigger.
So, in this particular case, Vallabhacharya in his Bhagavatam commentary explains that Samba is always anarthasuchak. Samba, among the sons of Krishna also, just because somebody is son of Krishna doesn’t mean that everything that he does is right. He may also do wrong things.
And in fact, if we see, before that, at the tenth night of the Bhagavatam, there’s a pastime of Nruga. Nruga is a king who has been cursed to become a lizard because he offended a Brahmin. And then, it is Samba who runs and gives the news to Krishna that we have found a lizard over here.
Please come and help us rescue it. And Krishna tells the past life story of that. The whole story of the past life of that lizard is told.
And that time, Krishna very strongly tells his sons, headed by Samba, that such are the dangerous consequences of offending Brahmins. Be extremely careful. Never offend Brahmins.
So, in a sense, that incident is a pointer to what is going to happen in the future. Krishna gives a caution. Don’t do like this.
Don’t offend Brahmins. So, it was, again, as I said, the whole thing was a plan of the Lord. And it is Asura Mohanlila.
But through it also there is this lesson that he shouldn’t have taken things so previously. And the sages sometimes have great prophetic powers. But if one starts using those prophetic powers to act, to just have fun with, then it is a dangerous thing to do.
It is, say, if somebody has a WMD, a weapon of mass destruction, and somebody allows a child to go and play with it. Child presses one button and the whole city can blow up. Isn’t it? Something like this.
For great power it has to be approached with sufficient reverence. So, Samba knew about the power of the Brahmanas. He had seen himself the power of offending Brahmanas, what the result would be.
And yet he acted brilliantly. So, in that situation, it was something which was very unfortunate, but Krishna had given abundant warning before. So, Naramuni can’t be blamed for that.
Naramuni was rigour for what happened. It was the recklessness of his sons which caused that to happen. Can we talk one-to-one after this? Is that okay? Any other questions? How do you develop the sense of journey when you reach to that intersection? I know your past activities drive your decision and that drives your destination when you reach to that destination.
How do you maintain that sense of life? How do you make sure when that intersection comes, you take the right decision? How can we ensure that when the intersection comes, we make the right decision? Life doesn’t come with a guarantee of right decisions. Sometimes we make the right decisions and sometimes we make the decision right. That means, sometimes we are able to take a right decision, sometimes we take a wrong decision.
But it’s not that life is absolute. If this is a wrong decision, it means you are doomed. Sometimes it’s a wrong decision, but we make the best of the bad bargain.
We make the decision right. It’s okay, it’s a bad decision, but now what is the best thing I can do? So, we have to move forward like that also. It’s not that we can keep life on a pause button till we figure out what decision to make.
Life is going to keep moving forwards. Sometimes we have the opportunity to deliberate and make a decision. Sometimes the decision has to be taken immediately.
We can’t even deliberate at that time. So, basically, if our life overall has a good compass to it, compass is what points the overall direction, then if this is the direction which I want to go, if I come to this intersection, will I take this or this? Sometimes we may take a wrong turn also, but then if our compass is good, okay, I can make course correction from here. So, if we have the opportunity to deliberate and make decisions, then we can also pause, pray, consult with some guides, some devotees, senior devotees, friends and write down the pros and cons, pray over them again and then maybe keep a certain amount of time frame for making the decision, don’t rush into the decision.
That’s when we have the opportunity to do all this. We can do this. So, broadly, write down, pray, deliberate, consult and make a decision.
But when we don’t have that opportunity, we have to take the decision immediately. We just take some decision and move on. And if it doesn’t work out right, then we make it work right.
We make the best out of it. If we have the compass right for our life, then even if we take a particular turn wrong, we’ll realise it is wrong and we’ll come back on the right track. But if we don’t have a compass itself, then it will be very difficult to figure out what is the right decision.
Those who are committed to nothing can get distracted by everything. So that’s why, unless we have a compass, we have no reference point for deciding what is the right decision and what is the wrong decision. Or to make a wrong decision right also.
So, rather than worrying about how I’ll make a right decision when I face a crossroad, we can focus right now on refining our compass. That means if we start practising bhakti diligently, connect with Krishna when we can, then our heart’s attraction to Krishna and connection with Krishna becomes strong and then that becomes our compass. Can we stop here? Thank you very much, Swamiji.
We have been hearing Ramayana and Mahabharata stories from childhood, but I never ever thought about that we can compare.