​Rasa Lila or rash lila 2- The historical misunderstanding

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Welcome back to the second part of our discussion on Ras Neela. So before we go into question and answers, I would like to speak the second part of this and we will complete that and then we can have question and answers. I think I will speak for 30 to 45 minutes and then we will have maybe an hour or so for question and answers.
So I talked about philosophically how the Ras Neela demonstrates those who are attracted to the reality instead of reflection and similarly we can also become attracted to the reality by understanding the Ras Neela first philosophically. So I will talk a little bit about how historically the Ras Neela has been misunderstood and what the consequences were of that. So Sahajiyaism is a school of thought which crept into Vaishnavism and which distorted Vaishnavism.
So sahaja means easy or cheap. So those who took the exalted activities of Krishna, very cheaply, they are called Sahajiyas. The technical word is syncretism.
Syncretic means when two ideas are brought together and mixed together and syncretism of Vaishnavism and Shaktism. So normally most of us may have heard the word Sahajiyaism. Sahajiyaism means they actually imitated Krishna’s past times or they meditated Krishna’s past times prematurely.
Actually that’s true but there is much more to that. There are two broad ways of approaching God or approaching spirit. One is by the separation of matter and spirit and the second is by the engagement of matter in the service of spirit.
So separation of matter and spirit is the Vedantic mode of analysis. Bhagavad Gita talks about this. The soul is different from the body.
Actually you give up the body, you give up matter and move towards spirit. That is the Vedantic way of analysis. Analyse the separate matter and spirit.
And there is another way of approaching the spiritual that is called Tantra. Tantra is the idea that through matter one can approach spirit. So Giti Varshi is an expression of Tantra.
The word Tantra often has a negative connotation. But Tantra itself means the method by which through matter one can approach spirit. There is left hand Tantra and there is right hand Tantra.
Tantra itself is a big subject. I won’t go into that. But left hand Tantra is often inauspicious.
It is dark. But Giti Varshi is also a part of Tantra. So we have Tantra essentially is approaching spirit through matter.
Sometimes some people ask where in Bhagavad Gita does it talk about Giti Varshi? Does the Gita talk about Giti Varshi? Well Madhyaji is there in the Bhagavad Gita. They worship me. Offer their homage to me.
There has to be some manifestation of Krishna to whom the homage is offered. So in that sense that can be said it is referring to Giti Varshi. But as I said because the Bhagavad Gita is coming from a different frame of analysis.
It is focussing on separation of matter and spirit. That’s why it doesn’t talk much about Giti Varshi directly. That’s not because Giti Varshi is not according to Bhagavad Gita.
But every frame of analysis has a particular focus. And the focus in the Bhagavad Gita’s case is on separation of matter and spirit. Whereas in Tantra the focus is on utilisation of matter for the service of spirit.
So this approach is taken by another school of thought called Shaktism. Shakti, basically Shakti is the worship of the Goddess. But it is not just the worship of the Goddess.
It is actually the idea that this whole universe is a combination of Shakti and Shiva. Prabhupada also talks about this in some of his purports. That Shiva is the animating principle and Shakti is the energy.
And everything that happens in this universe is a combination of the two. Which is true. But there are some distorted forms of Tantra.
Shaktism is very tantric overall. Tantric means that it focusses on using matter to approach spirit. Some of you may have seen in the traditional Indian temples, sometimes some people, they act as if they are possessed by some God or Goddess.
And they start dancing wildly or they start speaking wildly. Sometimes they are sacred, sometimes they are imagined, or sometimes they are enacted for the sake of getting attraction. But the principle is that the idea over there is that that deity has entered into that particular person.
In some cases it is possible, it may happen. But what the Sahajiyas did was they took this idea of Shaktism and they mixed it up with Vishnu. So when they say that, when they perform Rastila, they don’t just say that, not just that they are thinking about Krishna’s esoteric pastimes.
Okay, that may not be so bad. But they actually, they imitated Krishna’s Rastila. And they rationalised that imitation by saying that actually when we are performing Rastila, so the man says that Krishna enters into me.
And the woman says that Radharani enters into me. And when we are enjoying, actually through us Radha Krishna enjoys. This is a terrible, terrible misperception.
Not just a wrong understanding, but it is a grievous rationalisation where the transcendental is used to rationalise the sensual. And not just sensual, sensual can be moral and sensual can be immoral. So the immoral things were rationalised.
And this created, so Chetan Mahaprabhu came and he actually described the exalted love of the Gopis and especially of Radharani for Krishna. But subsequently the Sahajiyas came and Sahajiyas completely distorted Vishnu. And by the time of Shri Bhaktivinod Thakur, Bhaktivinod Thakur came at what is historically called the time of the Bengal Renaissance.
Renaissance means there is a rejuvenation of thought at that time. Just like it happened in Europe, similar nomenclature is over here. And India had been ruled by foreign rulers for a long time.
When the Islamic rule was there, Islamic rule was, you know, a lot of temples were devastated. The culture was quite strongly damaged. And overall the broad Indian culture became more insular in order to protect itself.
But Islam was never an intellectual competitor. Islam was never considered an intellectual threat. But when westernisation came to India, it brought two separate strands.
One was Christianization and the other was industrialisation. Now both of these challenged the traditional way of living intellectually. Because science and industrialisation, how can you believe in unscientific, mythological kind of things? What is the rationality for that? And Christians, they criticised the Hindu for existing forms of belief saying that, you know, they are so terrible.
So basically they singled out Krishna worship and Kali worship. This Kali worship is so ghastly and Krishna worship is so immoral. So these two forms of worship, they became like central targets of Christian missionaries who were trying to divide Hinduism and trying to convert Hindus to Christianity.
And at that time, various organisations, various thinkers at that time, they came up with different ideas for defending Hinduism. Many of their ideas were actually misconceived. Some of them were right.
Their intention was simply to protect dharma, but they were trying to protect their understanding of dharma. Often their understanding was itself not very precise. But the important thing is, at that time, this was the time when Bhaktivinod Thakur appeared.
Now Bhaktivinod Thakur was in a very special position. He was not born in a Vaishnava family. He was actually born in a Shakta family.
But then by his search for the truth, he came across Vaishnavism. And he was also, at that time, see the Britishers when they ruled India, the Britishers never really felt like making India their home. And Muslims came to India, they just started living in India.
The Kings also came and stayed in India. The Emperors lived in India. But for Britishers, actually to go to India was like a punishment.
Anybody who was deputed in India, you are being punished to go to that land of snake charmers and all kind of diseases and all kind of terrible things. In fact, Rudyard Kipling wrote a famous poem. He said, actually, you know, the rest of the world is so uncivilised.
But it is the burden of the white man that he has to civilise everyone. So they thought actually they are doing good to the rest of the world. So when they came to India, at that time, they targeted both Vaishnavism and Shaktism primarily.
And Bhaktivinoda Thakura, so when the Britishers came to India, they really didn’t want to make India their home. So they decided for managing India, they need to have some interfacing. So they had Indians educated in English medium.
And those Indians were known as Bhadraloka in Bengal and had similar names in other places. So they were English educated, they were rationally thinking. And so they were the people who tried to defend the Vedic Dharma from the criticism of the Westerners, Westerners and Christians.
And Bhaktivinoda Thakura was a member of this Bhadraloka. And at that time, Vaishnavism was simply seen as a licence for begging and for immorality. Somebody is a Vaishnava, they will go and do kirtans and people will do some charity.
So anybody who can’t earn a living, they start singing kirtans and people do charity. This is a licence for begging and a licence for sensuality, licence for immorality. So at that time, Bhaktivinoda Thakura was born around 1814.
And he wrote most of his books starting from 1865 onwards till around 1905. He departed from 1915 approximately. So towards the second half of the 19th century, he was living.
And at that time, he had this challenge of how to explain Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Or explain Vaishnavism in general. Why Gaudiya Vaishnavism? Because Gaudiya Vaishnavism focused on Krishna.
And Krishna was the target. So he went deep into the tradition and he pointed out various scriptures. Now Krishna is exalted but also he is transcendental.
And we cannot imitate him so cheaply. And he started a tradition of great caution in approaching Krishna. And after him, Bhakti Santra was even more cautious.
And he would quote this. Fools rush in where angels knew to tread. It’s a biblical saying and it basically applies to simple activity.
But Bhakti Santra Thakura adapted it and he said that, you know, those who rush in to Ras Tila, trying to understand it, studying it, imitate it, they are like fools. And even the truly saintly people, they are angelic, they are very cautious. They are very reverential in entering it.
And that’s why we have to be careful. Actually Prabhupada himself was also very cautious. Time and time again he warned that you should not, that Ras Tila is not to be prematurely imitated.
It should be very reverentially treated. Now this scripture, if you see from the historical light, because Krishna Ila was sometimes used to rationalise immorality. And actually Krishna Ila is trans-moral.
To differentiate between trans-moral, first people have to first come from immoral to moral. Then they can go to trans-moral. So Prabhupada emphasised basic human principles of self-control, of self-discipline.
By that we can very well understand the spiritual principles. So Prabhupada on one side was very cautious. The whole Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy is Radharani is the greatest devotee and we worship Radharani.
Raghunatha Goswami said that actually we are worshippers of Radharani. And it is because Radharani loves Krishna, so we offer some respect to Krishna also. That is the mood of Gaudiya Vaishnavas.
But if you see Prabhupada’s Bhagavad Gita as it is, in the whole Bhagavad Gita as it is you search, there is only one reference to Radharani. And that reference comes in the invocation and Prabhupada is translating the prayer. There is no other reference to Radharani at all.
Prabhupada is extremely cautious. Now, sometimes this caution is made into an absolute ban. That is not what Prabhupada wanted.
You know, once Prabhupada, some devotees, some person, some new person, I am one of the editors of Back to Godhead. So, I studied the history of Back to Godhead quite a bit. So, one person submitted an essay on Radharani.
And Prabhupada said, no, we cannot publish this. This is not for Back to Godhead, this is for general readers. And afterwards, there is no mention of even the Gopis in the Back to Godhead.
And then one devotee said, Prabhupada, the Gopis are described in the 10th Canto, and then he was so exalted. Can we not mention them? Who said that? We have to worship the Gopis. We are not to boycott the Gopis.
Boycott is a typical Anglo-English word. We are not to boycott the Gopis. So, Prabhupada was very cautious about the 10th Canto of Bhagavatam.
He would say, no, read the 1st Canto, 2nd Canto, then come to the 10th Canto. But then at the same time, Prabhupada also gave us Krishnamukha. And Krishnamukha, he has actually not edited out the Rasila.
He has given the Rasila. He has given it philosophical backing, philosophical substance to help us understand. But he has given it.
And Prabhupada wanted Krishnamukha also to be distributed widely, publicly. So, the idea is, we should not keep Rasila at such a high pedestal that we can never appreciate it. At the same time, we cannot bring it down so much that we start taking it cheaply or misunderstand it.
So, in a reverential mode of approach, we can understand the sweetness of these pastimes. And as I said, he was cautious, but he gave us the whole legacy of Bhagavatam in which it is the Gopis love which is the topmost. And with reverence, with respect, we can approach the Rasila.
So, now I will talk about sentiments. There are sentiments and there is sentimentality. Sentiments are important in Bhakti, but sentimentality is not.
So, we can analyse this in terms of four categories of people. The materialists are detached from Krishna. They are detached from Krishna and they are attached to Maya.
They are attached to matter, material things. The sahajiyas, they are actually attached to Krishna. They like to hear Krishna’s Rudras.
They like to sing Krishna’s names. They are attached to Krishna, but they are also attached to Maya. They also engage in sensual things.
And they often have no self-mastery. Impersonalists, they are actually devotees of detachment. They are detached from everything.
They are detached from Maya, but they are detached from Krishna also. They think, we are attracted to the impersonal Brahman. So, the devotees have this balance of detachment from Maya and attachment to Krishna.
And Bhakti, Pareesha Anubhava, Viraktir Anubhava. The Bhagavatam says in the Lalit Canto that when there is Bhakti. What happens when there is Bhakti? Bhakti leads to Pareesha Anubhava.
The experience of God who is transcendental. That God who cannot be experienced by normal means. He is experienced through the practise of Bhakti.
And when that experience comes, what is the result? An experience so fulfilling that one does not crave for any other experience. Viraktir Anyatra Chah. One becomes detached from other things.
And the same sequence was there in the earlier verse from the last panchadhyaya, last verse. Bhaktim param bhagavati patilabhyakamam Hridhrogam ahashvapahinoti chirunabhiya Parabhakti enters into the heart and all selfish desire goes away. The process of Bhakti is actually this process of attachment to Krishna and detachment from Bhakti.
And this principle applies to our general practise of Bhakti and our specific approach towards the exalted pastimes of Krishna. In our practise of Bhakti, if we focus too much on detachment. No, I will keep this up.
I will not do this. If we define our Bhakti in terms of our detachment. That means, because I have given this up, therefore, I am advantaged.
And because I am not able to give it up, therefore, I am a good part in it. No, actually we are having a negative focus on it. Essence of Bhakti is our connectedness with Krishna.
And if we focus on that, we can actually steadily move onwards in Bhakti. When we consider our worldly attachments or our worldly desires, how they work is, if we consider an electric charge, the electric graph is like this, it is moving on. But sometimes suddenly there is a hike, there is a surge in power.
So like that, our desires, they are at a normal level and suddenly they go up. And suddenly you start feeling angry, suddenly you start feeling greedy, suddenly you start feeling lusty. So the desires suddenly sometimes hike up.
And when those desires hike up, at that time resisting them may seem impossible. At that time we may have a lapse and we may slip, we may fall. And if we have defined our Bhakti in terms of detachment alone, Oh, I fell at that time, therefore, I am detached.
We just keep wallowing in that, oh, I did this wrong thing, I did this wrong thing, I didn’t want to do that, but I did it. And then that spike comes, we fall at that time, and after that, the spike is no longer there. But at that time we are thinking, why did I fall at that time? And afterwards, sometimes the spike comes again.
And again we fall. And then our idea gets confirmed, you know, I am really good at Bhakti. I am never going to give up.
So actually, when the spikes come, things may not be in our control. But in between, things are in our control. So if you are focussing on, if you understand Bhakti primarily in terms of connection with Krishna, that irrespective of what happens in the spikes, in between you stay connected with Krishna.
And if we stay connected with Krishna in between, that connection will purify us. That connection will strengthen us. And then eventually when the spikes come, we will be better equipped to resist them.
So that’s why our focus should always be on connecting with Krishna. Not worrying so much about detachment. Detachment is important.
But detachment shouldn’t be the defining basis of our devotion. A defining basis is how much can I connect with Krishna. So we may fall down, but we don’t have to fall away.
Fall down is a particular standard, we fall from that. Fall away means we give up the practise of Bhakti. Now we may not give up the practise of Bhakti in terms of stopping the practise entirely.
But we may, if we become disheartened internally, we may give up striving to connect with Krishna. Internally. And if we stop striving to connect with Krishna, then the purification doesn’t happen.
The higher taste doesn’t come. And then again next time the lower taste comes, then we get annoyed. We fall from that.
That’s why our focus should be on, when we are practising Bhakti, Okay, how can I connect with Krishna? How can I stay connected with Krishna? In between some desire, okay, that’s bad. It’s not that everything is alright when the spikes come and we do something wrong. But that’s not the end of the world.
The spikes will come, they will go. And we have to move on steadily. So what happens is, we are meant to be Krishna conscious.
But if we are too focused on detachment, then we become very mind conscious. Mind conscious means, first when the spike comes, at that time we succumb to it. The mind tells, come on, enjoy that, enjoy that, enjoy that.
Indulge in that. We enjoy that. And the mind is so cunning, that first it makes us a criminal, and then it becomes a judge who punishes the criminal.
That means, first the mind makes us do it, and afterwards, you fool. Why did you do that? You are good for nothing. You are stupid.
Your resolutions are of no use. You are hopeless. And first the mind makes us do wrong, and then it beats us for doing wrong.
So what happens? In both cases, if the spike is there, the mind has made us do wrong. And if the spike is no longer there, the mind is beating us for doing wrong. In both cases, we are simply mind conscious.
But instead if we focus on being Krishna conscious, Okay, that means, whenever the spikes are not there, at that time we try to wholeheartedly access God. And when the spikes come, at that time we will have the strength to resist. Even if we don’t have the strength to resist, even if we fall, actually immediately we can rise and we can move on.
And gradually it’s true. So we shouldn’t be detachment-centred. We are being Krishna-centred.
And by Krishna-centredness, detachment will come gradually. Now, I was talking about this because in approaching Rastila, both extremes are possible. That one extreme is we prematurely enter into confidential pastimes.
But another extreme is that we never discuss Krishna’s pastimes at all. We never approach Krishna’s pastimes at all. Then, actually the sublime sweetness of Gaurav Vaishnavism, we stay deprived of it.
The pastimes of Krishna, there is very great sweetness in them. And our Acharyas are actually meant to give us that sweetness. So, now with respect to the Rastila, Prabhupada was very practical.
Prabhupada explained this, quoted this verse also that by hearing Rastila, our sensual desires will go away. But then some devotees ask Prabhupada, but what if, even by reading Krishna’s book, sometimes by reading some descriptions over there, if our sensual desires are increasing, what should we do? Prabhupada says, don’t read. Don’t read those sections.
The idea is what? If I am convinced that that is the reality and this is the reflection, then reading about the reality will actually detach me from the reflection. But if I am still not philosophically convinced enough that that is the reality and this is the reflection, then if that reality is reminding me of the reflection, then better don’t read about it right now. But the idea is that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t read about it at all.
Especially if in the association of senior devotees, if we hear them in a very respectful, cautious way, then that can actually give us glimpses of the uniqueness of Gopiyo Vishnu contribution towards world theology. There is a revelation of God in all religions of the world. But the Gopiyo Vishnu tradition has something special, something very special to read about God.
And that speciality we can access. That’s why it is said, Shraddhaanto Shunyatavarnanamya, Shraddhaanto te Anushunyat. We are in proper synopsis of so many books, and we can be eliminated by hearing this.
So when we are practising Bhakti, we focus on trying to become more and more attached to Krishna and we should also see that attachment to Krishna leads to detachment. And it will organically happen. As we become more and more attached to Krishna, then the mind may still become excited.
I want to enjoy this, I want to enjoy this. But after some time, we start realising that no, there is nothing so great about this. Okay, the mind is getting excited, but I don’t have to get that excited.
Gradually the excitement itself will fade. The agitation will fade. But that should happen by the practise of Bhakti.
But we can’t bring the effect before the cause. The cause is Krishna Bhakti. The effect is detachment.
But when we bring the effect before the cause, that means we expect detachment for the practise of Krishna Bhakti. Then it becomes problematic. So the cause is Krishna Bhakti, the effect is detachment.
Bhakti Pareeshaan Bhava Viraktiranyate Chau. And yes, if I regularly practise Krishna Bhakti, and still detachment is not happening, then we may have to see what is going wrong. Maybe some things we are not doing right in Krishna Bhakti.
Maybe sometimes we are exposing ourselves to certain temptations too much. Or some conditionings may be very strong, and that’s why their eradication may take some time. So if the cause is not producing effect, then we may have to investigate why that is happening.
But the important thing is, it is the cause that we have to do first. Krishna Bhakti, then the effect of detachment will come. Now moving on.
So there is material emotion and there is spiritual emotion. Spiritual emotion is the fruit of purification. Fruit of purification means, that when we approach Krishna Leela, anybody nowadays, many of the stories from the Puranas, they are depicted in movies, they are depicted in TV serials, and they are treated as just like any other entertainment.
At one level, this is making Krishna Leela accessible to people. We could say at that level it is good. But at another level, because it’s a non-philosophical understanding, it is reduced to just another level of entertainment.
So when you say people watch some Krishna Leela, now maybe they see how in Mahabharata, Abhimanyu, he fights so heroically and he becomes a martyr. And they see that and they cry tears. Or they may hear some pastimes of Krishna with the Gopis, and then how the Gopis are crying in separation from Krishna.
And they may get tears. But then that programme gets over and they change the channel. And the same people who are crying in Abhimanyu’s past, you watch a cricket match, Virat Kohli gets out, they start crying at that time.
Or the same people who are crying and shedding tears when the Gopis are crying in separation from Krishna. Later on, there is some Bollywood or Hollywood movie in which the heroine is separated from the hero. And they hear that song and they start crying there also.
So here what is happening? The spiritual and the material, both are simply treated as sources of emotion. You all want some emotional stimulation. And Krishna Leela is simply seen as a source of emotional stimulation.
When that happens, then we do not actually get purified. That’s why the spiritual emotion that comes, that comes after we are purified. So when a person is attracted to Krishna Leela, that person is not so enamoured by worldly things.
And the steady practise of Krishna Bhakti will give us the spiritual emotion. So the purification comes by the steady practise of Krishna Bhakti. So we chant the holy name, we associate with devotees, we study scriptures, we do services.
By that, we gradually become purified. And even if there is no, too much overt emotionality in our discussion of Krishna Katha, in our performance of service, in our doing kirtans, that doesn’t matter. This is purifying us.
And as it purifies us, spiritual emotion will awaken. So sentimentality is sentiments without purification. So what happens in sentimentality? The person is driven by sentiment.
Oh, I feel like doing this. I do this. Today I feel like chanting.
I chant 64 hours a day. Tomorrow I don’t feel like chanting. When I’m chanting, I take out the mealware.
Somebody changed from 108 to 1000 BXBs over here. What is happening? So when I don’t feel like chanting, why should I chant? So when we are driven only by sentiments, sentiments will come. But we don’t have to be driven by our sentiments.
Sometimes I feel good, sometimes I don’t feel good, but still, I keep practising bhakti. So when we do that, in our practise of bhakti, we get sentiments, that’s wonderful. When we hear Krishna Katha, I can feel those spiritual sentiments.
We don’t have to go into too much analysis whether the sentiments are material or spiritual. Suppose we are participating in kirtans, and sometimes we feel really very ecstatic. Sometimes we take darshan, and we feel so captivated.
We don’t have to go into too much of analysis. If we feel emotion in relationship with Krishna, we are grateful. Yes, I’m feeling an emotion in relationship with Krishna.
But I don’t make that emotion the basis of my devotion. I don’t make that emotion as the basis of my practise of bhakti. Because I’m getting this emotion, therefore I’m an advanced devotee.
And if I’m not getting the emotion, what is the use of practising bhakti? Emotions come, they are wonderful. But right now for us, in the sadhaka stage, investing emotion is more important than getting emotion. Investing emotion means whatever way we can.
Even if I don’t feel prayerful, I try to cultivate as prayerful a mood as possible, and try to take darshan of Krishna. Even if I don’t feel prayerful, as prayerful as I can, I try to chant the holy names. Srila Prabhupada would say that, even if you don’t feel like chanting, still chant.
And by that gradually the feeling will come. So investing emotion means we don’t have to worry too much how many emotions I’m getting right now. It doesn’t matter.
If we keep practising, emotions will come. And they will come in a big flow eventually. Sentimentality means we let our emotions determine our bhakti practise.
Then we stay very unsteady. Unsteady is actually just the least of the consequences. Sometimes in the name of sentimentality we may end up doing harmful things also.
So we may, as said our sahajiyas are very extreme. But even as devotees, if we are driven only by sentiments, we may do wrong things and we may rationalise them in the name of bhakti. We have to be careful in our practise of bhakti.
That’s why our bhakti is, if sentiments come, if spiritual emotion comes, the important thing is we stay committed in the practise of bhakti. And in this Srila Prabhupada’s example is paramount. Srila Prabhupada’s devotion was demonstrated through his dedication.
Srila Prabhupada could have stayed in Vrindavan chanting Radhe Radhe Shamshaam. And he could have done that 24 hours a day. Prabhupada struggled so much.
He travelled all over the world. He met people who were, actually from the Vedic perspective, the West itself was degraded. But the hippies were degraded even from the perspective of the West.
And Prabhupada went to those people. He lived among those people. He lived among people whose only regulative principle was to break all regulative principles.
And that was his compassion. So what was his devotion? His devotion was not just in absorbing himself in Krishna. He was always absorbed.
His devotion was, how can I help others to come to Krishna? And with that dedication, he was able to bring Krishna in the lives of billions of people. And in one sense, you know, the gopis demonstrated Sarva Dharma and Paritricha. How? By giving up everything for the sake of Krishna and giving up their homes to go to the forest.
In the external sense, the gopis went to the Vrindavan forest. Prabhupada left Vrindavan. But Prabhupada’s principle was Sarva Dharma and Paritricha.
Prabhupada gave up everything for the sake of sharing Krishna’s decision with everybody. As an old man, elderly people, if they are pious, their aspiration is that I should leave my body in a sacred place. Prabhupada left that and went to America.
When his sponsor was Sumati Murari, Prabhupada came to her and asked her, you know, I want to go to America to fulfil my spiritual master’s instruction. Sumati Murari, she was a pious lady, but she just couldn’t understand what was moving Prabhupada. She told Prabhupada, Swamiji, if you want to speak Bhagavatam, you come to my house.
Every evening I hear Bhagavatam. Prabhupada did not want to speak that kind of Bhagavatam. It was just a ritual recitation among pious people.
He wanted a transformational rendition of Bhagavatam. Transform people’s lives. And Prabhupada practically begged to her.
And she said, she is well-intentioned. Swamiji, you are so old. America is so cold.
How will you live there? Prabhupada was determined. I have to go to carry out the instruction of my spiritual master. And his devotion was in that dedication.
And similarly, when we practise Bhakti, we, as I said, the speciality of the Gopis is not just the Madhurya rasa. The speciality of the Gopis is their selflessness in the Madhurya rasa. So if we try to cultivate selflessness, selfless service attitude in our services, then actually we can move onwards towards Krishna.
Through whatever we are doing. In Krishna’s mission, we serve him by trying to take up more and more responsibilities. Then through that selflessness, we become purified.
And as we become purified, then our heart becomes alive to relish Krishna’s infinite blessings. And we can see actually every service as an opportunity to grow in selflessness. I conclude with this point that sometimes we see our material relationships and our spiritual relationships as competitors or as contradictory.
I have to give up my material relationships to develop my spiritual relationships. Yes, in some cases it may be true. But that’s not necessarily all the time.
The principle is if we see spiritual relationship is that I am selflessly centred in Krishna. But if you consider any relationship, every relationship forces us to become selfless to some extent. If I am alone, I can do whatever I want.
If I am in a relationship with someone, I have to consider the other person. If parents are there, if a man and a woman are there, they can do whatever they want. But if they have a child, now they have to think of the child.
So basically, even our worldly relationships, they can help us to become more selfless. It’s not entirely purely selfless because those people are connected with us. But still the principle is that if we see it in this way, I want to grow more and more, then we can see every service, every relationship, every responsibility as an opportunity to grow in selflessness.
And as we grow more and more selflessness, the more we can become absorbed in Krishna. And the more we are absorbed in Krishna, the more we can relish Krishna’s vastness. So Sri Prabhupada, once he was asked, I was in lecture, he says, now what is Krishna consciousness? How do we know? Now, what is Krishna consciousness? Now, different Acharyas could have done different explanations.
He says, always thinking of Krishna, always chanting Krishna’s name, always longing for Krishna. These are all correct definitions. But Prabhupada has such a practical understanding.
He says that if you go in a temple, and if you see the deities, and if you feel that the deities are asking you, that Krishna is asking you, what are you doing for me? If you feel that Krishna is asking you, what are you doing for me? Then you are Krishna conscious. So Prabhupada brings Krishna consciousness down to a practical level for us. Now, we have a relationship with Krishna, that relationship is through service.
So when we go in front of Krishna, Krishna asks, what are you doing for me? And we try to have some small thing to do for Krishna. Some of us may be able to do big things, some of us may be able to do small things. But if we have that relationship of service, then through that relationship, we are actually doing Krishna consciousness.
And we are Krishna conscious in a healthy way, in a purifying way, by which ultimately, we relish the exalted pastime of Krishna, which is the Rasa Leela. I’ll summarise. I talked about how the Rasa Leela has been misunderstood historically.
So during the, traditionally the Rasa Leela was understood as pure, exalted. And that’s how the Acharyas wrote commentaries on it. And relish the exalted pastimes of Krishna.
But over time, the Sahajiyas, which was like a syncretism of Tantra and Vaishnavism, where Sahajiyas not only emitted Krishna’s pastimes, but they imagined that Krishna was entering into them and enjoying food. Which is a grievous rationalisation. And such immoral practises, they became the target of Western writers, Western thinkers.
They were either scientific or they were Christian. Both of them targeted. And the broad Hindu culture was targeted for, has become very brutal, ghastly in terms of Kali worship, and very immoral in terms of Krishna worship.
So Bhaktivinoda Thakura was at that time. And he, in order to defend Vaishnavism, actually highlighted the exaltedness of Rasa Leela, and the caution in approaching it. And what he started? Subsequently, Raghavendra Prabhupada also continued that.
And the Rasa Leela has to be approached in a very reverential way. So that’s why Prabhupada said that, first read the cantos of other cantos of Bhagavatam, then come to the 10th canto. At the same time, he also reveals Krishna Leela.
He didn’t want us to be deprived of Krishna Leela. So, but with proper philosophical understanding, when we approach Rasa Leela, then we can actually become enriched by understanding this exalted pastime. And for that, how we can properly approach Rasa Leela, I discussed these four things.
Then with respect to Krishna and Maya. So what is the state of materialists? How would materialists live with Krishna and Maya? Detached from Krishna. Then Sahajiya is? Detached from Krishna and Ramayana.
Actually there is not real attachment to Krishna. Then the impersonalists? Yeah, detached from both of them. Actually, unfortunately, should be attached to Krishna.
And then WOTs? Attached to Krishna and detached from Maya. And then in that connection, we discuss now the practise of Bhakti. We don’t become too detachment conscious or inability to become detachment conscious.
Focus on being Krishna conscious. The spikes of desire, sometimes we may fall, but we don’t get too disheartened by that. We focus on what we do in between the spikes.
We connect with Krishna and gradually we will overcome the spikes also. And same way, when we are practising Krishna Bhakti and approaching Krishna’s pastimes, such as Rasa Leela, we focus primarily on understanding Krishna. And when we understand Krishna, then we understand the realities and detachment from the reflection will come.
So if we find ourselves not being able to understand, if we start getting agitated by hearing Krishna Leela, then we pause for some time. Wait for some more purification. Then we will be able to approach Rasa Leela.
So it is different between sentiments and sentimentality. When we are just driven by sentiments, when all our decisions are determined only by sentiments, then that is sentimentality. But if we get some sentiments, rightness and spiritual emotion while practising Krishna Bhakti, that’s fine too.
We can take it as a gift from Krishna. But we don’t see that as the marker or definer of our emotions. We see our devotion in terms of our meditation, our commitment to practise Krishna Bhakti.
Brahmapada demonstrated that. Rather than just chanting Krishna’s name constantly in Vrindavan, he actually went around sharing Krishna’s name. He did so much inconvenience for that purpose.
But that was his devotion to Krishna. That was ready to take up sacrifice selflessly for the sake of Krishna, sharing Krishna’s message. And similarly, at our stage, if we just think that I will recite Krishna’s esoteric pastimes and I will get purified, that is unlikely to happen.
We can definitely hear them in the association of human devotees. But more importantly, we cultivate a service attitude. And with that service attitude, the purification that will result, that will make our heart right with spiritual emotion.
And if you consider spiritual growth in terms of a growth in selfless service attitude, then every relationship, every situation, every service is an opportunity for us to grow. And Prabhupada defined Krishna constantly, practically in terms of what am I doing for Krishna. And with this attitude of contribution, there is natural purification that comes.
And from purification, we can have appreciation for Krishna’s advanced pastimes. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.
So… Questions? So I think you had a question, Mataji. You said that Krishna was just eight years old at the time of Ashtanga. Then how is it romantic? Yeah.
How could it be considered immoral? Oh, yeah. See, there’s two different things over here now. There is Krishna’s pastimes as they are manifested in these words.
And there is Krishna’s pastimes as they are determined within the spiritual world. So when Krishna manifests his pastimes in this world, I think there is this whole dynamic, there is this tension between transcending dharma and protecting dharma. Transcending morality and protecting morality.
So one of the ways in which this is done is Krishna actually was just an eight-year-old boy at that time. And therefore, there is no male-female attraction also. So in that sense, when Krishna performs his pastimes in this world, one way the Acharyas explain that Krishna is not going to be immoral is by saying that he is just an eight-year-old boy.
How can there be anything immoral about it? At the same time, in the spiritual world, Krishna is Kishore. He is 16 years old. And that is the age at which he performs his pastimes.
So Raghavendra was 14 and a half years old. Krishna is 16. And that day he will perform pastimes.
So the explanation of that idea of divine romance that applies to how it is enacted internally in the spiritual world. How do we know the ages of Krishna? I think they describe them in the Goswami literature, in the Anvrindavan Sampradaya. I think they describe them.
Gopal Guru Goswami, he describes ages in his Govind Dhana Paddhati. But broadly speaking, it’s very clear that Anandanand Jampu describes that there is Baal Vrinda, there is Pauban Vrinda, there is Kishore Vrinda. So Kishore Vrinda is clearly when he is a teenager.
So if he is a teenager, when he comes over here, there is a biological age and a psychological age. Sometimes people are 20 years old, but when a small thing goes wrong, they start running like a small child. So the biological age and psychological age doesn’t always match.
So when Krishna performs pastimes, of course Krishna’s body is spiritual, but just in terms of analysis over here, Krishna performs pastimes of a 15-16 year old boy, even when he is 8 years old. Krishna is just 8 years old, 9 years old. At that time he is such a powerful warrior, that he goes and kills Kamsa.
And not only kills Kamsa, that is actually one type of heroism anyone can do. But after that Krishna appointed an advisor for the others. They were consulting about how to make decisions.
So Krishna will perform pastimes in this world also. There is this Kishore, that he will perform a pastime of a teenager, but for the purpose of protecting dharma, of not disturbing the minds of people who will question that Krishna is immoral, Krishna also makes it appear that he is just 8 years old. And that way he transcends dharma and protects dharma.
Transcends morality and also protects morality. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Such a wonderful seminar. I have got two questions which are interrelated. The first one is about the Prakriti and the Prakriti bhava.
Now you mentioned about Prakriti bhava obviously in detail, but I wondered your opinion in this world, in the material world, the Satya bhava is considered to be the moral morality and the Prakriti is considered the immoral thing. But it is exactly the opposite in the spiritual world. So I have read that the Satya is actually an illusion in this world, because Prakriti is a real rest.
So I wanted your comment on that statement. And the second question was… So where have you heard this? I want to know the context. Mahatma Prabhu has written a treatise on Prakriti.
And he has taken a lot of commentaries from Bhagavad Gita. Mahatma Prabhu, he is a Shiva Prabha disciple. He lives in Brazil.
So he writes blogs. So he mentions that because Prakriti is the true bhava, what Krishna wants to say about the spiritual world, Satya is moral here, but it is actually an illusion of Prakriti. So it is a reflection.
So when it dissolves into your… Yeah, okay. So is the Satya in this world an illusion, because ultimately Prakriti is the reality? Yes. The Prakriti is the reality in the sense that ultimately, you know, actually Krishna, whatever he wants for reciprocating love with his devotees, that is what happens in the spiritual world.
And the spiritual world is eternal reality. Now, in this world, it is an illusion, in the sense that actually I may say that these are my children, this is my family, but actually they don’t belong to us. The relationship is there, but if nobody is there, it’s temporary.
So now the temporary can be approached in two ways. One is the temporary can be rejected or dismissed, that is one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it, the temporary is important while it exists.
So you see, the Bhagavad Gita itself is the more dynamic side. Krishna tells Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita 2.13 that You are not the body of the soul. And right in the next two words, Krishna refers to Arjuna by two names, which are both related with the body.
Mataras Prashasti Kaunte, Shito Shri Sukhadukada, Agama Paiyanti, Stam Siddhistha to Bharata. So Kaunte, I am Bharata. Bharata means a descendant of Bharata.
Kaunte is the son of Kunti. If you are not your body, then how are you the descendant of Bharata? How are you the son of Kunti? See, there is, philosophically, it’s true that we are not the body. But while we are living in the world, the body’s reality is also reality.
So Prabhupada explains that by force, that actually Krishna is, Prabhupada writes that belonging to a respectable dynasty brings responsibility to act respectively. Essentially, that’s what he says. So the idea is that, one understands that I am the soul.
But acting at the level of the soul is not easy. And if any material designation can inspire us to act dharmically, then that is uncool to do. So, for example, yes, to tolerate is not easy.
But, oh Arjuna, you are the son of a great queen. You can do great things, so therefore tolerate. So the idea is, the material, if it comes in the way of the spiritual, it has to be rejected.
But the material, if it can assist us in the spiritual, it will be rejected. Krishna Prabhupada would do that when, for example, he brought his American disciples to India and they were doing the first Pandal festival. Prabhupada says, the whole world sees that you are Americans and the leaders of the world.
Now what is the use of you all being Americans unless you do something special for Krishna? Prabhupada’s classes told him, you are not an American. But the function of the body is self-explanatory. The same Prabhupada, when he is speaking to Indians, he says in Hindi, Bhagavad Gita is an Indian text.
But to teach Bhagavad Gita in India, we have to bring foreigners. You learn Bhagavad Gita and you teach. There is a lot of market.
Actually, Bhagavad Gita is an Indian book. But you Indians are not teaching it. In India, I have to bring foreigners to teach it.
But you learn it, you teach it and there is a big market all over. So what is Prabhupada doing? If the Indian identity is favourable for Bhagavad Gita, Prabhupada is using it. So, from the ultimate spiritual perspective, the relationships of this world, the relationships of this world, they are to be given.
But while living in this world, they can be important, they can be useful. So we use it. Swakhiya, if it can be used in the sense that I have a relationship and that relationship makes me responsible and that relationship helps me to function in a proper way, then that relationship becomes unimportant and we can use it.
So ultimately, no one belongs to me. That is true. So in that sense, Swakhiya is false.
But while practising, while living in this world, if it is favourable for Bhagavad Gita, we should act according to the nature of that relationship or that designation. So just looking at the epitome of Parikra and Parikra of Raslila, as you said, is the epitome of the feelings. Vipulambabhav is even superior to coming together.
And Krishna wants to ascertain Vipulambabhav. That’s why he comes to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. So how do you then correlate Vipulambabhav with the Raslila? I’m not talking of superior or inferior, but I’m talking of just as a continuation.
So how is the Vipulambabhav related with the analysis of the Raslila? Yes, that the Raslila is all about selfless love for Krishna. And that is demonstrated. Now, within love, there is this dynamic of union and separation.
And both of them add to each other. So there is a prayer in the Stotra, in the Paddyavani, where Radharani is saying that, Krishna, I prefer separation to union with you. Because in union, I see you at only one place.
In separation, I see you everywhere. Now, that’s true, but that is expressing an emotion. But in terms of practical action, Radharani is eager to see Krishna.
If Krishna comes to meet her, she will say, Krishna, I don’t want to see you. I prefer separation from you. She is not going to say that.
She will be delighted to see Krishna. So, the Vipulambabhava, the separation, that is actually, it increases the anticipation for the union. And in that sense, it adds to the flavour of the relationship.
But we cannot say that Vipulambabhava alone is the highest. Vipulambabhava, it culminates in Sainam, in Milagam. And again, when there is separation, again there is union.
And that way, there is eternal intensification of ecstasy in the spiritual. It’s continuous. It’s continuous.
Yes, please. Very nice to meet you. Thank you for coming.
It’s very pleasant to come. Thank you for making the Rasamita very accessible to us. Because it is one of those kind of, we don’t go there.
So, you’ve illustrated that, that we should. It’s something that obviously, expert guidance has to sell. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Can I just clarify? Please, please. Are you saying that we can perform Svartiya here, as married couples? I was talking in general about all designations, whatever you want to ask.
Svartiya, Parakiya. I’m just asking, if you presented Svartiya can be performed here, in this material way. I don’t know how you interpreted that.
I wasn’t quite. If you were, I’ll just say yes or no. And then I’ll kind of explain something.
Not exactly. I mean, Svartiya and Parakiya are words which are primarily in relation with Krishna. And to say that, you know, if I’m doing my family duty, I’m saying I’m doing Svartiya over here.
I think it’s a little inappropriate. I just took the question out of the specific terminology and into a broader philosophical context. And I explained it in those terms.
I wouldn’t say that, while we are performing a relationship, we can talk about those relationships as Svartiya. But you can make your comment. Well, no, I mean, you’ve said it now, and that’s very helpful.
And I was just reading here, something I’ve put together. So this is from the Abhivedha book. So it says, Svartiya and Parakiya, conjugal love of Godhead, have no existence in the material world.
And Parakiya is not exhibited anywhere in Vaikuntha, but only in the portion of Goloka in Vrindavan, known as Vraja. So Svartiya, what we understand, is that stage set up where Krishna has us arranged to be performing our duties, and everything is very safe and predictable. If you don’t have that level of predictability, you can’t have intense emotion in the Parakiya Ras, where Krishna is the only person you can have Parakiya with, is with Krishna.
Where it’s unpredictable and challenging and will put us on the floor in tears. It’s only Krishna that can pick us up. We try to do that with Jivas, which we often do, Parakiya kind of sense of things.
Usually putting ourselves into a lot of pain and agony. And that unpredictability is often what we challenge each other with, in order to say, do you love me? But that’s not the role of the Jiva soul in this world. So that’s where we mix in.
And Prabhupada says that conjugal love is only in the spiritual world. But marriage in this world is only a concession. Because it doesn’t relate to Krishna directly, it’s not anything that we can really make a comparison with in the spiritual world.
So as Prabhupada mentions a number of times, it’s only a concession. In order to put in some sort of comfort by being with each other. There’s nowhere near love.
Yes, thank you. I’m not telling you what you did or your problem now, but I would just like to get a bit more of it. Thank you.
Thank you. I’m not a devotee. I’m somebody who’s been very closely connected to Temple and is going for over three decades now.
I’m a political activist, actually. And I’ve been really thinking a lot, since I started coming back regularly here, about how actually… Firstly, I’ve been thinking about how the activist community has quite a lot in common with the movement here. Because we’re preachers of a kind.
We’re extremely deeply concerned about the state of the planet. We’re concerned about inequality, poverty, you name it. We’re concerned about it.
And when I’m listening, I’m thinking that… I don’t know if this is too generalised a question, based on what you’ve talked about, because it isn’t directly related. But what I’m concerned about is this. There seems to be an increasing polarisation, generally, going on between different movements, if you like.
You know, this political movement isn’t going to accept that religious movement, and this religious movement isn’t. And it’s not getting better, it’s getting worse. Even though there are many people now, including myself, and I’m sure many people in this room, who are deeply concerned about what is going on.
Islamophobia has become almost fashionable now, to hate people who come from an Islamic background. This government, particularly, has made it acceptable. And I think this has probably been going on throughout history.
But, generally speaking, to love God, seems to me… My interpretation, until this time now, is that to love my fellow woman and man is the way that I learn to love God. Because they’re right next to me, right now, starving, dying of AIDS, addicted. You know, these people that you talked about, that Srila Prabhupada came to, they’re the people that I’ve been working with, because I’m an ex-heronetic myself.
And my only life partner died of AIDS. So, this is how I’ve learned to love. But I think that the polarisation that’s going on right now is so profound, that I cannot see that… You know, because I listen to all of you talk about Kali Yuga, and that we’ve got, you know, possibly another 4,000 years.
And the idea that we have another 4,000 years of this, thank God, I pray, I won’t be here, you know. Surely, this is also the will of God. I know that there’s lots of suffering, but nothing happens without the will of God.
I think there’s the will of people. I suppose that I completely agree with you, but one of the best ways to serve God is through humanity. I couldn’t agree more with that.
Yeah, I think there’s the… I think, yes, there’s the will of God, but I think there’s the will of people. Speaking for myself, to be absolutely selfish, and have no humility, and be completely arrogant, etc., etc., etc. And so we end up in the terrible states we end up in.
And it’s almost like God doesn’t come into the picture. Krishna doesn’t even enter the… You know, it’s like we just do what we do, because that’s what we’re actually now. It’s fashionable.
It’s acceptable. If you live in the outside of the temple world, where I am based and situated, that’s what’s going on. You know, it’s absolutely acceptable to go to the pub and get completely high.
It’s absolutely acceptable, almost, to rape. And, I mean, you know, this is real. And it’s a deep and extreme tragedy, as far as I’m concerned.
Sorry. Sorry. Sorry.
No, it’s fine. It’s fine. So we see today a lot of polarisation happening, and people are getting violently antagonistic to each other, even in the name of religion and love of God.
Shouldn’t it lead to love for one’s fellow human beings? So what can be done practically about this? Yeah, actually, there is the understanding of religion in terms of rules and practises, and the understanding of religion in terms of purposes and principles. I just came from America. If you consider America and India, or America and Britain, the traffic rules are exactly the opposite.
One country will travel on the left side, another will travel on the right side. Now, the rules are opposite, but the purpose is the same. In both cases, the purpose is the regulation of traffic.
But the rules for regulating traffic, they are not just different, they are opposite. Now, if we just get hung up on the rules, say you are wrong and I am right, but if we have the understanding to move from the rules to the purpose, then we will see that both of us share a common purpose. So now, in general, people often get caught in externals, and when they get caught in externals, externally there are going to be differences.
There can be two different political parties, and they can be practically in each other’s throats. But if we look at it in a deeper level, in all political parties, there are some people who are exploitative. There are some people who want to do something for the nation.
So, if we keep, the more we look at externals, the more there is going to be polarisation. And this obsidian externals comes because of a lack of spirituality. Sometimes, even one’s religion can actually make one unspiritual.
Religion is supposed to make one spiritual. But if it just sticks to the letter of the law without going to the spirit of the law, no, that religion can actually make one unspiritual. So, when say people commit violence in the name of religion, then quite often, they are not worshipping God.
They are not worshipping the God who is revealed in scripture. They are worshipping a God who is simply a projection of their own conception. That means they are worshipping a God who hates the people whom they hate.
That God is simply a projection of their imagination. And same way, in any field of life, when people get too caught in extremes, then there is the aggressive attack on others, aggressive denigration of others. And it leads to very distasteful kind of incidents.
Yes, we are seeing this more and more in American elections. It has become very distasteful. Here also, as you said, things are happening.
Now, we understand at one level, this is because of the influence of Kali Yuga. This age is the age where the lower kind of mentalities grow more and more. Generally, when we say that whatever happens is God’s will, we have to be a little cautious about that.
Now, there is a difference between God’s will and God’s sanction. God’s will means what he wants us to. Let me complete this.
God’s sanction means what he allows us to. See, God does not interfere with our freedom. Okay, yeah, I agree.
I will come to that point. So, see, in any situation, if there is something which we can do about the situation and something which we can’t do. So, what we can’t do if we worry too much about that.
If we get too caught in that, it only leads us in a feeling of helplessness or frustration. And it is very disheartening for a period of time. But if we focus on what we can do, then we can become small agents of change.
Suppose at this moment, suddenly the power goes off. Now, one option could be, yeah, we could groan, we could curse, where the power has gone. We might do that, but then after that, we will do it for our mobile, turn on our flashlight.
And the flashlight can’t replace the main power. But still it gives some light. So, it’s always better to light one candle or one flashlight, no matter how small, than to curse the darkness.
And all of us have the power to light our own small lights. And if we look only at the darkness, even after I light my light, I think, how much darkness, what is the use of this light? But if I focus on the light, naturally the area around me will become illumined. So, each of us can be not just agents of change, we can also be radiators of change.
Because we are all influenced by people around us. So, anyone who has a desire to make a positive contribution, they need to focus on what is in their power to do. And there are things which are beyond our power.
Even when Krishna was here in this world, at that time, there was an evil king, Duryodhana. He just refused. Krishna went and petitioned.
Let’s have peace. Let’s avoid war. But he was not ready to listen.
So, even God does not force his will on anyone. Even God respects individual free will. Sometimes some people just misuse their free will.
We can’t do anything about that. If they misuse their free will, their actions will have consequences. And those consequences will hit them in due course.
But we can focus on what is in my power to do. And as you rightly said, there are different kinds of activists and devotees also. There is a lot of similarity.
We could say devotees are spiritual activists. Spiritual activist means, like Prabhupada said, we want a revolution of consciousness. So, with spiritual consciousness, if whatever causes we are having, we are inspired by, we can bring sustainable changes.
Pollution is a big problem. At a practical level, we need to counter pollution by decreasing the effluents going to water, decreasing the toxic gases going into the air. At the same time, at a deeper level, if we see, why are people sending such toxic substances? That is because of a lack of consciousness.
Because people are so self-centred that they are not aware of what they are doing or they don’t care about what they are doing. So, that expansion of human consciousness from selfishness to selflessness, that happens by spirituality. So, spiritual activism, actually, it can become the foundation on which other forms of activism can have a more sustainable impact.
Sometimes it happens that some people are activists for a particular cause and without a spiritual foundation, they make some contribution, but then people don’t change sustainably. Before I was introduced to Krishna Consciousness, more than 20-25 years ago, I was part of a social welfare organisation. So, I was a college student, but I used to go as a part of that organisation’s drive to slums.
I was studying in Pune and I used to educate slum children, like free tuitions. And I found that at that time, many of these slum children, most of the slum children, actually, their parents were alcoholics, fathers were alcoholics, and a lot of domestic abuse in their houses. So, I felt really by teaching English or history or mathematics, how much am I really helping? So, I was doing that, then we decided as a part of the organisation that we should try to also help the fathers to get off alcohol.
So, one of my friends was much more into suicide than I was. So, he would go to a nearby village and he actually made the whole village free from alcohol by his efforts. And then one evening, he came back.
I had gone to the nearby slum in the city and he came back from the village and he was crestfallen. I asked him, what happened? He said, just a few days ago, there was an election and in that election, the local candidate, he had brought two truckloads of alcohol for free distribution to everyone. And not only the fathers, but even their kids had taken alcohol.
So, at that time, I started thinking that we worked so hard, but there’s this total relapse. And there was a time when actually I was introduced to bhakti and I started practising it. I also had my weaknesses.
I still have many weaknesses. At that time, I was notoriously short-tempered. So, I found that just by practising bhakti, my short temper went down considerably.
So, then one of my friends, a close friend, he was just a nice boy from a very cultured family, but he was just sinking into bad habits. And he just somehow, he started having a programme in my hostel room itself and he also started practising bhakti and he was transforming, just effortlessly gave up all bad habits. So, I found that actually, this was a way in which I could contribute to society better.
So, what happens sometimes, there is social activism and then spiritual activism. So, spiritual activism is, or spirituality is done without caring for society. Then it doesn’t have much positive contribution.
On the other hand, if social activism is done without any spiritual, spiritual awareness, then again it is not going to sustain. So, if people who, individuals who already have the zeal to make a change in the world and then they get a spiritual orientation to their lives, then actually they can make a far greater contribution than what would otherwise be possible, either by people who are only social activists or people who are only spiritualists without the zeal of activism. So, you have the opportunity to combine both and make a sustainable contribution.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Can you explain in the Yogamaya section, the difference between ignorance and forgetfulness? Now, my question is, in Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says, mama eva akshaya jiva labhya, we are all part and parcel of Krishna.
So, by default, at root level, there should be no ignorance. So, what’s the difference between that forgetfulness and ignorance? Okay. In the ultimate sense, we are all parts of Krishna.
So, there is, ultimately what we have is forgetfulness only. Prabhupada says, problem is forgetfulness of Krishna. But we could say of ignorance in terms, in a functional sense, from this life’s perspective, there are many people, Prabhupada would say, people in the West are ignorant of Krishna.
People in India are forgetful of Krishna. They know about Krishna, but they don’t care about, they don’t really know Krishna in terms of his transcendental value. People in the West don’t know about Krishna at all.
So, from ultimate perspective, everyone of us is forgetful. But from a, from a, this life perspective, there is a difference between ignorance and forgetfulness. Yes.
I mean, just picking on the theme of activism, and you said that we have a lot of influence because we are in connection with people around us. So, I mean, today’s lecture was very good in terms of at least getting a conceptual understanding of what’s Ras Teetha and what is reflection and what’s reality. But when you are approaching people who have no concept, and you just explain to them, how would you do that, I mean, for people who probably are more materially motivated.
I mean, again, that comes to the point where you completely ignore this, and if you ignore this, then the unique thing which you have is not being explained. Yeah. Or maybe there are people who have preconception of what it is, and then you cannot challenge them or explain them correctly.
What should be the approach? So, if we are talking about Ras Teetha to people, you people, and you don’t have time to give an elaborate explanation, how should we explain? See, when we are sharing spiritual knowledge, their purpose is to take people one step higher from where they are. So, if they have no knowledge, we give them some knowledge by which they they not only, they feel, they get somewhat, they get some understanding, and they feel more open to enquire further. It’s not that in one interaction, we are going to transform their lives and take them from ignorance to enlightenment.
It doesn’t happen like that. So, in general, when you find out what is the step from which is the best for going to take them, according to their level and according to my capacity. So, let me, Prabhupada himself gave an example.
Once some devotees asked Prabhupada that, you know, Prabhupada, when we tell the scholars that in the that there was king Ugra Singh, he had some billions, millions and millions of bodyguards. So, the Bhagavatam is some astronomical figure. So, they laugh at us.
They say, how could so many people have lived in one city of Dwarka? Where were their homes? Where were their toilets? How did they manage? Now, Prabhupada could have answered, Krishna is inconceivable. Krishna can’t do anything. It’s a valid answer.
Prabhupada, gave a very pragmatic answer. Now, all those thousands of verses in the Bhagavatam, was that the only thing in the Bhagavatam you found to speak to them? So, we say, one of the offences to the holy name is to instruct faithless people on the grounds of the holy name. Now, one understanding of this offence also is that to instruct people in things that they cannot have lived.
See, everybody is at a particular level. And, if you tell them something, which at their level is just not believable to them, then that is also an offence. You should tell them what is acceptable for them once they are pious.
It’s like weightlifting. If a weightlifting trainer, if a person has a capacity to lift, say, 10 kg weight, and he has 50 kg weight, you know, it’s going to injure the person. So, like that, we may injure people’s faith by giving them things which they are not ready for.
So, the first thing is when the choice is up to us, we should speak things which click to them. One small thing also clicks, it moves onwards. Now, in the case when people already have misconceptions, a strong misconception, then at that time, say, education has two parts to it.
One is creating faith. The other is also creating doubt. Creating doubt in their own preconceptions.
So, for example, if somebody already, hey, why do you worship Krishna when there is no God? Then, you could just turn it around. You could ask the same question to saints who have given up everything. They have no interaction with this world and they are worshipping Krishna.
Why do you think they are worshipping Krishna? Now, could you think of something more to Krishna than what you are thinking about? Or, Krishna has already said that, you know, Krishna has already said that, how could he have? So, basically, we have to do what we can either in giving understanding or in creating doubts about their preconceptions. So, in some cases, we may not be able to change their misconception completely. So, just give them some food for thought.
If we just come off all out and say, you are wrong, then they become very defensive. And what happens is, they may not also have the capacity to think also. If somebody is having a particular understanding, it takes time to change the understanding.
So, better give them some stimulus for thought. So, if possible, avoid a non-confrontational topic and just take a topic which will elevate them from where they are. But if a confrontational topic comes up and if you don’t have the time and the opportunity to actually give a full understanding, then just create some doubt about their preconception.
And then you get back. And then, yeah, I have never thought of it this way. They get some questions and then they become more open.
And maybe in future interactions, we will, we can be your others. We can get them to, they will become more open to understanding Krishna. Prabhupada is a pure devotee, but in the Markini Bhagavad Dharma, what he says is, he says, Krishna alankrita koribara khamata tomara He says that you can make my words understandable.
So, Prabhupada says that by that by your will, everyone has come into illusion and by your will, they can come out of illusion. So, please make my words in such a way, understandable, they will come out of illusion. So, we don’t see ourselves as the sources of enlightenment.
We see, we see ourselves simply as one agent in people’s progress towards enlightenment. So, Krishna, let Krishna speak something to us and let’s say Krishna will guide them to someone else, will speak something over there and they will gradually move on. So, basically, we try to take them one step ahead from where they are.
It’s a nice answer. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Thank you Krishna. Thank you for coming if you want to.
You’ve been asking quite well for part of your association, but thank you for coming. Thank you. Very interesting.
I’ve got a couple of points. First of all, I think, expansion is mainly planned. Sometimes, for devotees that are already Krishna conscious or aware of Krishna, are not always willing to participate in discussions that they have put up, like political issues, religious issues, and so on.
Sometimes they resort to just switching off completely to new things. And, I think that we can engage more people by having these discussions. Sometimes, I feel like, this was a closed subject, you know, devotees are like, oh, well, I’m already on the path of bhakti.
This doesn’t now concern me. I’ve got Krishna in my life. And, how can we encourage discussion like this more? so people don’t feel like there’s such a segregation between I’m, you know, a devotee, and people are activists, or whatever they are, depending on their religious views, right? Yeah.
So, so engagement in social issues by devotees can actually help in stimulating discussion and making bhaktis more relevant to people. But sometimes some devotees just think that this is, we are practising bhakti, there’s no need to get involved in these issues. So what can we do about this? See, bhakti is not monochrome.
It’s not just one colour. That means different devotees will have different understandings of bhakti. So we can envision bhakti more like a set of concentric circles of expanding radii.
So, some devotees will say, I’m just chanting Hare Krishna, I worship the deities, I chant Bhagavatams, and I’ll go to Krishna, that’s all I want to do. And yes, I will share the same thing with others, let them come to Krishna. They’ll also come to Krishna.
That is one kind of outreach. That’s wonderful. But Prabhupada was actually the first Acharya in our tradition who has put social commentary in scriptural commentary.
That means, if you read Vishwanath Jagadapur’s commentary, Vishwanath Jagadapur was living at a time when the Muslims had just devastated Vrindavan and he had just restored Vrindavan to some of its old glory. But in his whole Bhagavatam commentary, he doesn’t even once mention anything about Islamic invasion of India, about Islamic desecration of holy places. Why? Because for him, scripture is meant for exposition in scriptural terms.
So Prabhupada was concerned about social issues. Now, of course, Prabhupada offered a direct, usually offered a direct spiritual take on social issues. He did not get too involved in discussion of social issues.
So the principle is that Prabhupada didn’t want devotees to be involved in social issues. Prabhupada wanted devotees to write spiritual perspectives in Back to God magazine, also current issues. So definitely he wanted that.
In fact, he told Satsvarupa Maharaj to write a whole book about how worldly solutions won’t work without Krishna consciousness. So that means he wanted to study the worldly problems and explain that. So Prabhupada was definitely a socially engaged spiritualist.
Now the nature and the extent of the social engagement, that can vary. Some devotees may feel there’s no need for that. Some devotees may feel yes, this is very important.
So if we have a particular inspiration, then we need to associate with like-minded devotees. And then, some devotees may be situated in a central circle where they focus only on Krishna Bhakti. Others may want to be situated in a broader circle where they are practising Krishna Bhakti, but they want to engage with the greater issues that connect us with society also.
Not every devotee can do that. Not every devotee needs to do that. Especially with respect to political issues, that can, discussion on politics can easily become Prajalpa.
It can just become mundane talk. And then, then the spiritual association just becomes a extension of the mundane association that we are having elsewhere. So we have to be careful about that.
So rather than talking about social issues in the general devotee community, we can talk about these issues among devotees who are specially interested. Not just interested, who are ready to do something about this. See, most people when they talk about politics, they talk and they don’t do anything.
The only thing probably people do about politics is cast their vote once in four or five years. Isn’t it? Not doing much, but if somebody is actually engaging, commenting and explaining. So I would say that, just like we have one thing which Prabhupada encouraged, scientific outreach.
He said devotees should become trained in science and present the spiritual message in scientific language. So similarly, some devotees can do it in the field of politics. But just as in the normal classes in our movement, we don’t have to talk about science.
Even if a devotee is doing scientific preaching, the normal class in the movement, they will talk primarily about scripture. They bring in some science. So the normal channels of the movement, they can focus on direct spiritual instruction.
But there can be alternative channels where devotees with specific interests can engage in specific issues. And actually, when you say Bhaktivinoda Thakur says that, I long for, I foresee a moment in future when the Vaishnavas will be, when the judges, high court judges will be giving tilak. So now what does this mean? How is it likely to happen? One way, you could say that devotees gain political power when they appoint devotee judges.
Which can happen if Krishna wants. But that may seem to be very far away. Another way that could happen more realistically is that devotees actually become such good judges that the social government appoints them.
And they are devotees and still they are also committed judges. So now to come to that level of competence, devotees have to engage in these subjects. So these discussions can be in specialised circles for people who are interested in those.
And there is no need to think that devotees are not interested in this, they are not at all, they don’t care for the world. They are focussing Bhakti, practising Bhakti, that is good. But we can find like-minded association and discuss the subjects in that association.
Thank you. I have a question. Yeah, please.
If we have to consider that the spiritual is a reflection of the material, I’m sorry to interrupt. Where do you get all the energy from? What is that reflection? Correct. So, if the material is a reflection of the spiritual, then how do we have own energy? Is there something in the spiritual world? See, the material world is not just a reflection of the spiritual world.
It is a distorted reflection. Just like there might be a beautiful moon in the sky, but when it’s reflected in the water, I can see the moon. But if the waves are moving too much, I may not see a spherical object, I may see an elliptical object or a long object.
So there can be distortions. So it’s not necessary that everything that is there in this world has to be there in the spiritual world. There are certain essential principles which define the operation of this world.
They are present in the spiritual world. But the specifics that are there in this world needn’t be present in the spiritual world. So now, is time present in the spiritual world? Yeah, yes and no.
See, Krishna defines time as the destroyer. So time in its role of destruction or in its role of control, that is not present in the spiritual world. It is not that, see, we all want to do something, so time runs out and we have to go.
No, it’s not that Krishna is performing the Rashtrila and he thinks, oh, time is over now, I have to go. Krishna can expand time. So when we say time is not present in the spiritual world, that means that time is controlling and destroying, which is not present.
But time as an assistant for Krishna’s life is present. There is morning time when Krishna is bathed by Yashodamayi, served by Yashodamayi, then they send him off to the forest. And there is daytime when Krishna performs pastimes with his Gopas and with the cows.
And there is evening time when there is a reunion with Vrindaman and Yashodamayi. And then there is pastime to go to Jhapna at different times. So time as an aid to Krishna’s life is present.
But time as a controlling agent, that is not present in the spiritual world. Question inaudible. Question inaudible.
Group chanting for world peace, does it have an effect? Yes, definitely. Individual chanting? Yes, definitely. When we chant the holy names, basically it acts at various levels.
At the first level, it acts to elevate our own consciousness. We become purified. We become elevated by that.
And as we become more purified, then we make more constructive contribution in this world. Rather than being part of the problem, we become part of the solution. Along with that, just chanting of the names, it sets off spiritual vibrations in the atmosphere.
And these spiritual vibrations also have positive effects on the rest. So certainly if we see problems in the world and if we inspire to chant more, pray more, etc., then that is a very noble desire. Ultimately, inspiration cannot be legislated.
So some people may actually feel inspired to do something. They may feel like, okay, I want to help in raising people’s consciousness by sharing the spiritual message, by sharing the spiritual culture. Others may feel, I can assist you in raising spiritual consciousness by just chanting more.
So whatever way we feel inspired to contribute, we contribute. Bhaktivinoda Thakur, especially in the later years of his life, he was an I-Code magistrate and he was quite an activist kind of person where he did a lot of work for reforming the society of his times. But as his body grew old, then he just focused on chanting.
He would chant 64 rounds every day, more than that. Hours and hours he would chant. And his vision was that the chanting of the holy names was setting off whole vibrations in the world.
And that will benefit society. That’s also something very wonderful. And all the more so if a group of devotees can come together and do that, then that can set off very powerful vibrations, which at a subtle level will benefit the people and contribute to making a change.
Yes. Yes, sir. So, if we say by Yoga Maya, Krishna can also be covered, then how is this different from the Mayavadi argument that we are all gods in disguise but we are perverted.
So actually, Krishna, as I said, he is the actor who is directed by the director. So Krishna is also a script writer. That means Krishna is being controlled, not against his will.
He is controlled by his own will. And he can come out of that control at any moment. So, for example, in the Damodarilal, which is going on, in the Damodarilal, which we recited in Damodarashtakam, Krishna at one moment is helpless and he is bound by his mother.
He is tied by his mother and he is not able to free himself. And the next moment he is thinking, Oh, my devotee Narada promised that I will deliver these treats. So how is that possible? Krishna, when he wants, he can just remove the covering.
He can just come out of Yoga Maya spell and immediately act in his omnipotence. So, the next moment, Krishna doesn’t just remember what Narad Bhoomi has done, has told, but he actually has the strength to bring down those treats. And that’s why, कुवेरात्म जो बद्धम उत्ते ही वयद्धवर् त्वया मोचितव भक्ति भाजव कृतव चिरू The speciality of this meditation is that, you are baddhu, you are bound, but mochitav.
Normally, those who are unbound, they free the bound. But you were bound and while staying bound, you freed those who were bound in material existence. मोचितव, you liberate him.
So, Krishna, he is never under illusion. Even when he is under illusion, that is by his will. So, personally, some of the Mayavadis say that we are all under, we are all gods in disguise.
The problem is that we have to do a sadhana for enlightenment. We can’t just come out of it, it is not by our will. And so, Leela is that which is voluntarily accepted for pleasure.
It is voluntarily accepted for pleasure and Krishna can just end it, whatever role he has taken to Leela at any moment. But what we are going in is, mayavad mental existence is forcibly imposed for suffering. It is not voluntarily accepted for pleasure.
We grow old, we get diseased, we suffer. To call this as Leela, we actually completely misunderstand and misrepresent what Leela is. This is what we are undergoing against our will.
And the very fact that we need a sadhana for enlightenment, it indicates that we are not God. We have to actually take the grace of God to overcome illusion. And Yogamaya is acting by Krishna’s will.
So, it is very difficult. Please come back to me. Yes, please.
Slightly scientific kind of question. If you are saying spiritually that what is in the spiritual world is what is reflected here, in the context of say, is it possible like the dinosaurs didn’t exist, when the humanity did? How I correlate this with the spiritual world? If the spiritual world, does it mean that one day humanity does not exist, it might not, the spiritual world might not exist. If it is reflecting the same as in the spiritual world.
Let me see if I understand the question right. You are saying that we see in the material world the reflection of the spiritual world, but then there are certain things which sometimes exist in the material world, sometimes don’t exist at some time. Dinosaurs used to exist, now they don’t exist.
So, if in future, humanity may not exist. So, then will the spiritual world exist or not? Yes, the spiritual world is not based on our existence. Krishna specifically says in 8.20, परस्तस्मात्तु भाववन्यो यक्तो यक्ता सनातनान् यहस सर्वनेशि भूतेशु यश्यत् सुननेशु that when there is another world beyond this destructible world and when all in this world is destroyed, that part remains as it is.
So, when we say that this world is a reflection of the spiritual world, now what that means is, say if we consider a river, in the river, sometimes the river may get dried up. When the river gets dried up, there is no reflection over it. But that does not mean that there is no moon in the sky.
The moon is still there. So, the existence of the reflecting mediums simply determines whether the reflection is seen or not. The existence or non-existence of the reflecting medium doesn’t determine whether the original is there or not.
So, like that, in this material world, sometimes humanity may exist, sometimes humanity may not exist. But this is like something in the reflecting medium because of which the reflection is not seen. But the spiritual world is real and that will continue to exist.
So, in extrapolation, would it be possible that by tomorrow morning, humanity might not exist? Hypothetically. So, is it possible to say that by tomorrow morning? No, no, no. What I’m trying to get at, primarily to understand, is are we thinking too deeply into what is unthinkable? What is unthinkable in this context that you are saying? In the simple sense that if humanity does not exist tomorrow, like dinosaurs didn’t exist, and if it is a reflection of the spiritual world and there is nothing to compare with, why are we today here? Why am I wondering whether I’m going to be there tomorrow or not? So, if it’s possible that tomorrow nothing may exist, we may not exist.
Yeah. So, are we just, say, thinking too much about imponderables, unthinkable things when we are thinking about the future, thinking about the spiritual world, or whatever other things like this? See, the nature of, not just nature, the distinctiveness of human beings with actually the capacity to think about things beyond the known, beyond the immediate. Animals, they are simply driven by the body urges.
Food, sleep, sex, shelter, that’s what drives them. Humans also are driven by this. But humans have the capacity to think of things beyond these urges.
Newton saw the fruit falling. Like when the monkey was seeing the fruit falling, the monkey just picked up the fruit, ate it and gone. Yes.
Many humans would have done the same thing also. Yes. But Newton, let me complete this.
Newton, what he did was, he asked the question, what made this fruit fall? And that question led to the whole development of, not just the theory of gravity, but it sort of set off the engine by which modern science developed. So, basically, it is the capacity to think beyond the immediate. That is what distinguishes humanity.
And that is what enables humanity to make special progress. So, in our same capacity, science basically takes it deeper into the material level and tries to understand the functioning of the material world better. Spirituality takes that same question beyond the material to the spiritual.
Einstein said that all sciences, religions and arts are proofs of the same tree of human knowledge. The same human intelligence, when it requires a particular direction, it comes up with science. One direction will come up with art.
Another direction will come up with the spiritual direction. So, it is possible that this can, that the exploration of things beyond the immediate can just be idle speculations or idle ideas. But when they are guided or when they are complemented by some methods for transformation and realisation.
Now, I may sit here and speculate, maybe God exists, maybe God doesn’t exist, maybe the spiritual world exists, maybe the spiritual world doesn’t exist. This way, Prabhupada said, philosophy without religion is just mutual speculation. So, that means, if there is a translation of this, Newton has just proposed some theory, but if there is no experiment to prove that it is true, it will not be of much use.
So, similarly, if along with the philosophical understandings, there are some practises which we do. The practises give us deeper understanding and realisation of higher spiritual reality. And from the perspective of those practises, or from the perspective of philosophy, even if in the future humanity doesn’t exist, we as souls will continue to exist.
Bhagavata explains that we are our, that we are bigger than our biology. We are basically the body, the mind and the soul. So, the body may be destroyed.
And it is considerably possible, let’s say, some weapons of mass destruction come up, they are used by some hot-headed people. No, humanity may wipe out. But still the soul will continue to exist and the soul’s spiritual evolution will go on.
Later on, when this planet becomes habitable again, or according to any cosmos, this is not the only place where life exists. Rather, this is where life exists. Basically, the soul’s spiritual evolution will go on, irrespective of whether this earth is habitable for humans or not, whether humans exist or not.
So, your soul, my soul, is on an ongoing spiritual journey. And to the extent we require spirituality, and to the extent we practise spiritual processes for raising our consciousness, to the extent we are moving forward in this journey. And for some of us, this journey may be completed in this lifetime.
For some of us, this lifetime may be a part of the journey. And we continue on in the next lifetime. So, there is the possibility of the feeling that ultimately all this is just futile.
What is the use of thinking about all these things? But then we can look at it in another way and say that, okay, even if I don’t think about the spiritual, still everything is futile. I am going to grow old, get diseased and die. So, that way if I see, if I don’t enquire about spirituality, I live materialistically, I am going to lose everything.
So, what is the use of it all? If you just think of the pointlessness, it is not just that spirituality is pointless. Even materialistic living is pointless. I am going to lose everything ultimately.
So, you know, the scepticism is good. But you know, we have to be sceptical about scepticism also. I have to evaluate.
Scepticism can only tell me what is wrong. Scepticism can never tell me what is right. For understanding what is right, I have to go beyond scepticism to exploration.
Okay, this makes some level of sense. Let me explore it to find out what it is all about. So, Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita, that there are three obstacles to your path.
Raga is attachment to this world. Bhaya is fear of what is out there. And Krodha is not a sign.
It is frustration born of inability to decide whether this is right or that is right or what is right. So, Prabhupada was in that sense very pragmatic. Once in New York, after a class, some young man came to talk to us.
Swamiji, your philosophy sounds like that of a Buddha. Prabhupada did not get into an elaborate discussion about the difference between Vaishnavism and Buddhism. Do you follow Buddha? Follow Buddha, follow Jesus, follow Krishna, follow someone.
Don’t just talk. If we move from the philosophical analysis to the best of our capacity, when we move on to some experiential practise, then we will ourselves realise whether the path is giving us access to higher reality or we need to explore some other path. But by endeavouring in this way, even if we don’t come to a right path right now, that endeavour itself is actually expanding our consciousness.
That endeavour itself comprises a step forward on spiritual evolution. And eventually, we will come to the path that is right for us and we will progress much more rapidly as we do today. I am trying to endeavour, but there are certain questions which are still which are still not answered for me.
And that’s what I am trying to get to, basically. Maybe we can talk some other time. If you have some specific questions, we can discuss.
Otherwise, the general discussion will go on for a long time. We will have to stop the Q&A there. It’s getting quite late.
Okay, it’s fine. We’ll get back to you later. You can talk after.
I’m going now to be afterwards. We are actually giving one class, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday. I would like to thank, I told you, it was a loud Hangover.
Thank you, Hangover! Thank you, Hangover.