The Gita’s two endings point to the same end

[Bhakti Shastri class at Wellington, New Zealand] Video1: Video2: Video3:

Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.

Hare Krishna So today as a part of the Bhakti Shastri class, I'll discuss something about the context and the purpose of the Bhagavad Gita in terms of its two endings and what they teach us. So the Bhagavad Gita is probably the book, the only scripture in the world or the only philosophical text in the world which has such a dramatic context. At one level, the Bhagavad Gita begins with an intriguing question.

Sometimes some questions are very interesting because they are, their answers are not very easy to know. Sometimes some person may ask a question, I also have this question, I want to know what the answer is, that's what interests us. Sometimes a question may be so straightforward that again we get interested.

Such a basic question, why is this person asking it? This person knows the answer, I know the answer, why are they asking? But sometimes the intrigue in a question may be because it is so straightforward as to not worth being asked also. So actually the Bhagavad Gita begins with a question like that. The first verse of the Bhagavad Gita is yatraashtra vacha dharmakshetre kurukshetre samavetaya yotsavaha maamakaha paandavaaschaiva kimakurvata sanjaya The question is kimakurvata, what did they do? So he is saying that on dharmakshetra, on kurukshetra, the two armies assemble for the purpose of fighting.

maamakaha paandavaaschaiva, my own sons, the Kauravas and the Paandavas, what did they do? So actually he is telling in the question itself, they assembled for fighting. And what did they do? He is not even asking who won the war. That would be a reasonable question to ask.

What happened? Who? So it's like, say, everybody, after program there is prasadam. After everybody sat down for prasadam and chanted the Mahaprasade prayers, what did they do? Obviously they ate prasadam, isn't it? Now, if somebody is asking question like this, and after they sat down, suppose they sat down at a table for eating prasadam, what did they do? So then, maybe something else is going on. Maybe somebody has put some poison in the food and does someone know? Maybe somebody just before they eat the poisoned food, sometimes in movies you have it, somebody is about to tell, eat the poisoned food, no, don't eat it, don't eat it, don't eat it, something there.

Somebody comes running and tells them, don't do it. So, when there is a self-evident question, self-evident question means the answer to it is self-evident. If they came for fighting, if they assembled for fighting, what did they do? They fought.

So if there is a self-evident question, then it points to something that is not evident. If somebody is asking, what did they do after they sat down for eating food? That means there is something more going on over here. So like this, Dhritarashtra is asking, what did they do? That means he is asking, they came for fighting, did they actually fight? What happened afterwards? He is apprehensive that because it is a dharmakshetra, a virtuous place, that might influence the Pandavas who are dharmic favorably and his own sons who are adharmic unfavorably.

So two armies have assembled for fighting. But he is considering, are there any other factors involved? Did those forces have any influence? What happened? So the Bhagavad Gita begins at one level with this conversation, this question, what happened? And Sanjay at one level begins a linear narrative. He says, राचार्यमुपसंगम्या राजावचिनमब्रवित् He says that Dronacharya was approached by Dhritarashtra and he spoke.

And then he starts narrating what is happening over there. Krishna starts speaking in a mode of instruction from the second chapter. 2.11 is the first verse, he speaks in a mode of instruction.

The first verse that Krishna speaks is 2.2. In 2.2 there he speaks two verses. They are more of not philosophical instruction, they are more like a pep talk. Puck up man, don't be so negative, just do it, you can do it.

You are Arya, you should not be overcome by miserly weakness. That's what he speaks at that time. And before that, in 1.25 he speaks two words, पश्च, पश्च.

So the first beginning of the Bhagavad Gita we can say is the outer conversation. It's a framing conversation and that begins with Dhritarashtra's question. That in this conversation the camera focuses on the Kurukshetra battlefield.

And when the Bhagavad Gita begins, that is when Arjuna says, नयोत् सेति गोविन्दम् उक्त्वातू श्रीम भभुवान् नयोत् सेति, I will not fire it. So now when does this happen? सेन्योरुभयोर्मद्धे रतंस्थापयमेच्छित Actually, Arjuna tells Krishna, please take my army between the two battlefields. My chariot between the two armies.

And he wants to observe. So to understand how unusual this setting is, that right in the middle of a battlefield somebody starts having a long talk. Probably one of the most gripping things close to war that we in the modern world experience is sports.

They say that sports is like battles without the bullets. Often there is so much animosity there, so much tension there, so much fever there. Suppose there is a World Cup final between India and Pakistan.

There are 50,000 people in the ground and there are millions of people watching all over. A toss is done, the players have come out, the fielders are in position, the bowler is about to begin the run-up. And then the striker, the batsman taking strike, walks to the non-striker.

And both of them come in the middle of the pitch. And they start talking. And they keep talking.

And they keep talking. On and on and on. Everybody will become restless.

What is this? Normally if two batsmen are talking, well in everyday life everybody talks, you will be a little interested. But in the middle of a cricket match, in the middle of a sports, just before the match is about to start, in the middle of the pitch, when somebody starts talking, something is extraordinary. If the batsman has gone for strike, the striker tells the non-striker, I can't play this match.

What? That opening batsman is the main batsman in the team. I can't play this match. That's like Arjuna saying, I can't fight.

So, first of all Arjuna is saying I won't fight, that itself is dramatic. But Krishna and Arjuna having a conversation over there is even more dramatic. And the Bhagavad Gita has this dramatic setting to draw attention.

So, how did they go on like this talking? If we recite the Bhagavad Gita, it takes us 2-3 hours. If somebody is good at Sanskrit, normal conversation, it will take about an hour or so, a little more than an hour. But still for a full hour, how did the two armies just stop? Not fight.

It was actually Bhishma who was the commander of the Kauravas. Bhishma saw that Krishna and Arjuna were having some earnest conversation. And then he knew that these are not warriors who are trying to make some excuse for not fighting.

Sometimes in sports, if one team is playing very well, then other team, in order to break the momentum, they just stop playing. One player just acts injured, and then the physio has to come in, attend to the player. And then in this way, when time passes, the momentum is broken.

So, in tennis there are some players who are known to infamous, just when they are losing, they just take a break and go to toilet break or something like that. And that's called gamesmanship. Gamesmanship is the opposite of sportsmanship.

Sportsmanship means you have good behavior in sports. Gamesmanship means becoming in order to try to get the other player down. So, if the striker and the non-striker are known to be very sportsmanly, not having any gamesmanship kind of behavior, then if the two of them are talking, it must be something serious.

So, Bhishma appreciates that and Bhishma raises his hand and stops. And the coveralls stop at that time. So, both the armies, they stop and they watch.

So, the second, we could say the setting of the Bhagavad Gita is Arjuna saying, I will not fight. विस्रुज्य सशरं पापं शोक सम्वीग्रमानस 1.46, the first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita ends with this declaration by Arjuna that विस्रुज्य सशरं जापं He puts aside his bow and arrow. And he says that उद्वीग्र, he is dejected.

He says, I can't fight. So, the second setting or second starting of the Bhagavad Gita is Arjuna saying, I will not fight. Now, if you move forward beyond the specific point that I made in the Bhagavad Gita, I will come back to them in the later part of the class.

But at this stage, let's focus on the principle that these two frames are there. And then say for example, in a simple context we could say, there is a program. Today is a program.

So, at one level the program starts with the speaker speaking and the speaker's talk ending. But then, our experience of the program is not just limited to that. When we come to the program, how do people greet each other? What is the culture over there? After the program gets over, how do people talk with each other? So, we could say the program's beginning and end is the class beginning and end.

Also, we can say the program's beginning and end is the time we come to the program venue till the time we leave from the program venue. So, both matter. The heart of the program could be the talk.

But, sometimes, if somebody behaves rudely with us, somebody speaks something harshly to us, that may be remembered much more than whatever was spoken in the program. So, the Bhagavad Gita in that sense has these two layers. The first layer or the inner layer where Arjuna is asking questions and Krishna is answering.

That ends with Krishna's last words in 18.72 and Arjuna's response in 18.73. So, Krishna tells Arjuna that have you understood properly? Oh Arjuna, have you heard? Have you heard with one-pointed intelligence? Now, ekagrita can refer both to state of attentiveness and it can also refer to a level of consciousness that state of attentiveness. Be attentive, be focused. So, Krishna is asking Arjuna, have you heard attentively? Have you heard and understood what I spoke? So, ekagrita in that sense can refer to a state of attention.

So, if somebody is inattentive, then we miss the point. But, it can also refer to a level of consciousness. That is, when class is going on quite often, our mind goes off for walks.

When the mind goes off, we won't physically go off in the middle of a class. Our mind goes off, goes to our home, goes to our office, goes to a friend, maybe goes to the TV program. And then, if in the class there is a sudden joke, the mind comes, hey, I also want to enjoy.

What is the joke? So, like that, if we are distracted, then sometimes we miss the point. So, Krishna at one level is asking Arjuna, have you heard attentively? Have you missed anything important? Another understanding of the word ekagrita is that in the yogic description of how the mind moves towards higher levels of consciousness, there are states. There is bimudha, there is kshipta, there is vikshita, there is ekagrita, and then there is a nirodha.

That is, that means, that mudha, mudha is the mind in the mode of ignorance. Sometimes we wake up, and somebody speaks to me, what did he say? Nothing registers. And we are just completely tired, completely dazed because of sleep.

That is the mudha stage. And there is kshipta. Kshipta means we are agitated.

So, we could say mudha is like paralyzed. Just not able to think of anything. Kshipta is the agitated state.

Thinking of this, thinking of this, thinking of this, thinking of this. Sometimes, if there is a fan, the fan moves round and round. Like that, our mind also moves round and round and round.

But the difference is, when the fan moves round and round, it makes things cool. When our mind moves round and round, it makes things hot. This problem, this problem, this problem, this problem, again this problem, this problem, this problem.

Oh, no! Things are going terrible now. So, in the agitated state, just go round and round and round. above the agitated state is the vikshita.

Vikshita is a distracted state. What is the difference between agitated and distracted? Agitated means the mind is just going here and there. Distracted means I am trying to concentrate but I am getting distracted.

Say like now all of us are sitting and we are trying to have this class. Now if there are kids and there is no one to take care of kids. Suddenly if a kid cries, then all parents say, is it my kid crying? What is happening? So everybody gets distracted.

In distraction there is an attempt to concentrate but there is an inability to concentrate. That is the vikshita stage. So broadly we could say that the mudha stage is in the mode of ignorance.

The kshita stage is in the mode of passion. The vikshita stage is where we are trying to move from passion to goodness. Then there is the ekagrata stage.

Ekagrata stage is the stage where we become focused. So completely absorbed. This is the state of consciousness.

This comes when we are absorbed in some subject. And in the yogic analysis the last stage is considered nirodha. Niruddha you could say.

Niruddha means that there is complete cessation of material movement of the mind. The mind stops thinking of anything material. yatra uparamate chittam niruddham yogasevaya In the set of verses that describe samadhi in the Bhagavad Gita from 6.22-23, there it says yatra uparamate chittam.

Chitta, the consciousness stops moving about here and there. Niruddham, nirodha, that is the stage of niruddha. Yogasevaya, by the practice of yoga.

So basically at that time the person is not in any way affected by material reality. And the consciousness can become tuned to spiritual reality. So this is, in the yogic analysis, in this particular perspective, niruddha is the highest.

So ekagrata is not just a state of attention, but it is also a level of consciousness. So what happens is if we hear spiritual messages regularly, then our consciousness rises upwards. And it's not just information that we get when we hear.

Information is important. And the information is interesting, we become absorbed in it. That's good.

But that is not the only thing. People may get absorbed in cricket match. People may get absorbed in watching movies.

People may get absorbed in reading some novels. So many things which we may get ekagrata. I was once returning from an airport, from coming out of an airport in India.

And I had to go for a program. So at that time some very important cricket match was going on. And the cricket, somebody had arranged that the TV was there, just at the exit of the airport.

We come out of the airport and on the other side, there were more than 100 people crammed together watching. So it would have just taken me about 15 seconds to walk out from there. But the people were so eager.

They said, this is the climax of the match. We don't want any disturbance. So actually I was just waiting there for 15 minutes, till the match got over.

They said, let me go. It will take 15 seconds. No, we don't want to miss even one moment of the action.

So at that time, I was remembering how when the Gopis are seeing Krishna, they don't want their eyes to also blink for one moment. The same attitude is reflected and distorted. Now in a cricket match, it's not that every moment there is action.

After the bowler has bowled the ball, bowler runs back and comes back. There is some sensation. But still people don't want to miss it.

So actually the soul, by nature, wants to be absorbed in something. But if somebody gets absorbed in cricket, there is always some absorption in it. But that absorption doesn't lead to any transformation.

It's just one experience I have and the experience gets over after some time. So absorption leads to transformation when the absorption brings purification. When the object in which we are getting absorbed in, if that is pure, that purifies us.

Then that absorption is uplifting. Somebody can get absorbed in watching a very sensual movie. Then that is not going to lead to any positive transformation of their consciousness.

That's only going to trigger their lower desires. So when Krishna is saying over here, he's saying that it's not just have you heard attentively, but also means has your consciousness arisen, risen to the level of ekagrata. So just by hearing about Krishna, we become purified.

And when we become purified, our consciousness rises upwards till it comes to the level of spiritual perception, spiritual absorption, ekagrata. Now ekagrata is concentration. So this is not necessarily spontaneous absorption.

So when we hear, we get absorbed, there is a stimulus. We are hearing something and depending on what the speaker is speaking, how the speaker is speaking, who is the speaker speaking, that will all determine whether we get absorbed or not. An even more advanced stage is when we are spontaneously absorbed in Krishna.

Our thoughts naturally go towards Krishna. At least when there is a spiritual stimulus, we try to get our thoughts towards Krishna. So what Krishna is asking over here is, you were perceiving things earlier at a material level of consciousness.

That's why you are agitated. So now has by your hearing, your consciousness risen to a higher level? Has it come to the level of ekagrata? And if the consciousness has come to that higher level, what will happen? You will perceive differently. So Arjuna has your ajnana and sammoha, has your ignorance and your illusion been destroyed.

Pranashtas, they destroyed pranashtas. It's interesting, what is the difference between ajnana and sammoha? Ignorance and illusion. What do you think? Is there any difference between the two? Or is Krishna using repetition as a rhetorical device over here? Ignorance leads to illusion.

Yes, that's valid. But what is the difference between the two? Ignorance means not knowing. Illusion means incorrectly perceiving things.

Yes. Ignorance means not knowing. Illusion means false knowing.

So, the difference between the two. For example, if I am blinded, then I can't see what is ahead. But suppose I have a cataract, then I may see a hole to be closer than what it is, or I may see the hole to be bigger than what it is.

Basically, ignorance is no vision. Illusion is distorted vision. And in a sense, the two are related.

So when we are in maya, when we go into maya, maya is illusion. Maya is not hallucination. Hallucination means there is no object or something we are perceiving.

For example, if I see a mirage, there is some object out there, but it's not water. So when there is some object which is wrongly perceived, that is illusion. Hallucination means there is nothing.

Sometimes I feel somebody is there outside my house, and I go out with a no one there. So, the world is not false. The world is falsely perceived.

The world is not false. It might mean it really exists, but it is falsely perceived. Falsely perceived means we think this world is a place of happiness.

This world is plastic. This world will give me happiness. Happily ever after.

That is, there are two people over there, both of the people are real, but false perception, that is illusion. So, ajnana and sammoha. So for us, when we go into illusion, how does that happen? First, I forget that I am the soul.

First I forget that I am a part of Krishna. And after I have forgotten that, that is ajnana. And sammoha is that I take up some other identity.

I think that I am Indian. I think I am Australian. I am New Zealander.

I am a male. I am a female. All these kind of identities that we acquire, these are what we acquire based on illusion.

But their illusion means not that they are false. Yes, I am functionally speaking in a male body. I am functionally speaking in a female body.

This is true at a particular context. But it is not the ultimate reality of who I am. So what Krishna is telling is, Arjuna at the start of the Bhagavad Gita, he had a dharma sankat.

Dharma sankat was, all of us have different roles in our lives. We may have a role as a family member, as a husband or a wife, as a mother or a father. And we also may be, say, working in office.

So you have a role as a professional. And sometimes we are pulled in both directions. There is some urgent work at home, there is some urgent work in the office also.

So what should I do? So am I a professional who is meant to respond to the call of duty or am I a family member who should take care of the need of the family? Just as we can be pulled in two different directions, Arjuna at the start of the Bhagavad Gita was pulled in two different directions. He had his kshatriya dharma and he had his kula dharma. Kshatriya dharma was that kshatriyas are martial guardians of society.

They are meant to protect society from anti-social elements. So those who are aggressors, Arjuna as a kshatriya was meant to punish them. But Arjuna also had another identity as a Kurunandana.

Kurunandana is, he was a member of the Kuru dynasty. And he normally, if any of our family members, even if our relatives were in trouble, he would actually want to help them. So Arjuna was also a responsible member of the Kuru dynasty.

He would have wanted to help his family members. Now what does one do when the family member is the aggressor? So should he act as a Kurunandana and protect the Kurus, prevent the Kuru dynasty from being destroyed? Or should he act as a kshatriya and do his duty and fight? So it's like, say, if there is a judge. The judge is supposed to have the hearing for a particular criminal.

And the criminal is brought into the court, into the witness, into the box. He finds that that criminal accused is his own son. What should he do? In most situations, the judge would request.

I cannot, because there is a conflict of interest involved over here. Let somebody else judge. Arjuna could not do that.

He was a primary warrior over there. There was no substitute for him in that situation. So Arjuna was confused, which dharma should I follow? The Kshatriya dharma or the Kula dharma? And when he was confused in this way, Arjuna asked the question in 2.7. He says, So I ask you, what is dharma? If the Bhagavad Gita had simply been a question, a discussion between two warriors about whether to fight a war or not, then it would not have had such enduring interest for millennia, for millions of people.

It would just be a historical war document. But Arjuna, he had something, he asked a universal question. What is dharma? Now dharma can have different meanings.

At the most fundamental level, dharma means dharmate iti dharma, that which sustains. So there is a natural order to things. And to the extent we harmonize with the natural order, we have an orderly existence.

Just like if I am going in a plane, if I understand I am a passenger, I just go and sit with the passenger, the plane will function orderly and the plane will take me. But if I am the passenger, I want to go into the plane. So there is a natural order to how a plane works.

And if I understand my position in the natural order of how a plane works, and I do my part naturally, then the plane will function and move on. A passenger who acts as a passenger is harmonious. A passenger who acts as a pilot is disharmonious.

So when Arjuna is asking, he is asking, what is it that I am meant to do? That what is my duty? Duty not just in a legalistic sense, but duty in the sense of what should I do so that I can stay in the natural harmonious condition. Once I was at a, now Gita Jayanti is coming up soon in December, November, December it comes usually, Moksha Dayi Kadashi. So I was giving a talk at a Hindu function on Bhagavad Gita.

So during that program, there are some children who are reciting the Bhagavad Gita verses. It's a common thing, parents want their children to learn and recite some verses. So they recited important verses from the Gita.

And towards the end, they were reciting 18.66. So they recited, Sarva Adharman Paritejya, Mamey Kamsharanam Vraja, Aham Tvam Sarva Papevyo, Mokshai Shami Mashi Chaha. So what is wrong? So Krishna says, Sarva Adharman Paritejya, give up all dharma. And they had put it as Sarva Adharman Paritejya.

So then I asked them afterwards, asked the organizers, he says, this word is actually dharma, why didn't they recite as Adharman? He says, no, no, no, no. Actually, Krishna has come to establish dharma. Dharma samsthapanarthaya sambhavam yuge yuge.

If he has come to establish dharma, how can he tell Arjuna to give up dharma? So they were quoting from some Gita commentator, who was giving this reasoning. And he said, actually over the thousands of years, when the Gita was passed down generation after generation, somewhere, some transcriber forgot to put the O. And so he said that Sarva Adharman, what was originally Sarva Adharman, it became Sarva Dharman. And now we are putting back the original O. So actually speaking, at one level, it may seem sensible.

But if you look at another level, for Arjuna, he was already a dharmic person. For him, he did not have to be told to give up dharma. He did not have to be told to give up adharma.

He was not doing adharma of any kind. For him, the starting conflict was not between dharma and adharma. The starting conflict was between two dharmas.

If there are two duties which pull us, then which duty is more important? So this is, there is a, there is a moral, you can say there is a moral dilemma and there is ethical dilemma. Moral dilemma is when there are two choices, one moral and another immoral. What to do at that time? That's a moral dilemma.

Ethical dilemma means there are two choices. Both of them are right. But which is the most right at a particular time? Say somebody is working in office and they are offered some bribe.

Let's take this money and cover up this matter. Now to do it or not to do it is simply a moral choice. It's just one of, it needs some strength of character to resist the temptation for quick money.

But suppose some terrorist riots are going on and one of our friends is being attacked and a friend comes to our house and seeking shelter and he hides somewhere in the house and those rioters come and knock. Is he there over here? Now what should I do at that time? At that time one virtue, one right course of action is protecting the life of the friend. Another right course of action is also speaking the truth.

So both are right. But which is more right? So this is a, it's not that telling the truth is bad. But telling the truth at that time may be bad.

That's why one of the fundamental teachings of the Mahabharata and of the Bhagavatam itself, of the dharmic traditions is that morality is not always categorical. It is also contextual. Morality is not always categorical means that we cannot say that this is the category of right and this is the category of wrong.

And whatever falls in this category is right, whatever falls in this category is wrong. Speaking truth is good. Speaking lies is bad.

This is true. But in some cases speaking truth might be not the best thing to do. And we have to be careful at that time.

So there can be higher principles involved also. So in my school days, I learned this lesson quite a hard way. I used to read books on, various kinds of books.

Once I read a Christian book about how you should always speak the truth. So then I started applying it. And then, so when I was in my 10th standard, 9th standard attending, I liked history very much.

So in my first month itself, I had read the whole history book. And I had understood, I thought I understood everything. And then attending a history class, and in that teenage, there is also some arrogance, some impudence.

So when the teacher was giving class, I knew everything at that time. So I got bored and started yawning. So the teacher asked me, why are you yawning? Because I already know what I was reading.

Now, what do you mean? He said, I have read the full textbook. So maybe I spoke it in a little proud way at that time. The teacher got so angry, who do you think you are? He says, you asked me a question, I gave a truthful answer.

So the teacher had me take her to the principal. He says, how arrogant this boy is. So there is truthfulness is important.

But as I say that, Krishna says, Krishna says, speak truth, but speak truth in a way that is not agitating to people's minds. So speaking truth is a virtue, but it did not mean the supreme virtue. There are many different virtues in life, and we have to have a balanced sense of understanding.

So the point here is, for Arjuna, what he was facing was not a moral crisis, it was an ethical crisis. Ethical crisis means, among his two dharmas, one was a Kshatriya and one was a Kuru Nandana, which is more important? So sarva adharman prityajya, if we use that meaning, then the whole point of the Gita, the subtlety about what dharma is, that is missed over. Because Arjuna's confusion was not between dharma and adharma.

Arjuna's confusion was between dharma and dharma. There are two dharmas, which is higher. And Krishna's answer is that first and foremost, before you understand your dharma, before you understand your duty, understand your identity.

So you are not a Kuru Nandana, and you are not a Kshatriya. You are a soul. And as a soul, you are a part of the whole.

You are a servant of Krishna. And you are meant to serve, we are all meant to serve the Lord. And as a service to the Lord, you may act as a Kshatriya.

As a service to the Lord, you may act as a Kuru Nandana. So find out how best you can serve. That's why when Krishna is telling sarva dharman prityajya, he's following that up with maam ekam saranam vraja.

Krishna is not telling Arjuna, become adharmic. Or he's not, when he says sarva dharman prityajya, he's saying, give up all this confusion about various dharmas. Just understand the essence of all dharma is maam ekam saranam vraja.

Surrender to me. And while surrendering to me, if you feel that some dharma you're not able to follow, that will lead to some paapa, I will free you from sinful reactions. So, if we see now what Arjuna responds over here, kacchit agyan sammoha prashtas te dhananjay, Arjuna, has your ignorance and illusion been dispelled? This is 18.72. And 18.73, Arjuna replies, do many of you have Bhagavad Gitas? You can recite the version.

18.73. So, he's telling, he's answering Krishna's question step by step. Moha is destroyed. Krishna's question was, kacchit agyan sammoha prashtas te dhananjay.

Has it been destroyed? Yes, moha has been destroyed. And what about agyan has been destroyed? He answers that by saying, what happened? Nashto moha smriti labda, that my memory has been restored. So, actually the soul by nature has spiritual knowledge.

The soul by nature is spiritual. But that is covered over and that's how we forget. So, the agyana is destroyed through smriti.

If I remember, then whatever ignorance that is there, that is lost, that is overcome rather. So, nashto moha smriti labda. So, kacchit agyana sammoha prashtas, that is answered over here.

And how has all this happened? Tat prasadamaya acyuta. Oh, acyuta, it is by your mercy. This uses the word, acyuta is significant.

Actually, Arjuna uses the word acyuta in the last word that he speaks in the Bhagavad Gita. Arjuna uses the word acyuta also in the first word that he speaks in the Bhagavad Gita. Senayor umbhayor madhye, ratham sthapayame acyuta, yavade ta niri cheham, yodhukamana vasthithan.

It is 1.20, 21, 22, 23 when he is asking questions. He says that acyuta. So, oh Krishna, acyuta, what does the word acyuta mean? Oh, infallible one, one who does not let others down, who is unfailing.

So, oh Arjuna, oh acyuta, please take my chariot between the two armies, so that I can see who is assembled for fighting. So, and the end is an acyuta, oh infallible one. So, is it that when Krishna took Arjuna in the middle of the battlefield, then Krishna put Arjuna under illusion? No.

Arjuna's desires only put him into illusion. But Krishna guided him and fulfilled his purpose. He wanted to see who are the people assembled on the battlefield.

But by Krishna's vision, he got to see that, but he got to see much more. He saw that, got into illusion, but by Krishna's guidance, he saw the deeper reality. So, the infallible Lord, when we are guided by him, eventually we will be guided to safety.

The nature of this world is, we may all go through hell. Our relationships may go through hell, our mind may go through hell, our situations, social situations may go through terrible conditions. But if we go through hell, we need to keep going through.

We should stop there. Oh, everything is spoiled. Just keep going through, keep going through.

We, sometimes when we face problems, we get so overwhelmed by the problems that we just give up hope. But if we just keep moving onwards, even if there is darkness, even if there is delusion, even if there is rejection, we keep moving forwards. Krishna will guide us through that hellish situation towards greater spiritual realization, towards greater spiritual elevation.

So, Achyuta, Krishna is telling Arjuna, Arjuna is telling Krishna that, by your mercy, although I went into illusion because of my own desire, you have got me out of illusion. And then, Sthitosmi, now I am well situated. At the beginning of the Bhagavad Gita in 1.13, Arjuna was telling that, My mind is not staying at one place.

It is just wandering here and there. I am seeing auspiciousness everywhere. My mind is going wild because of that.

But now, Sthitosmi, I am well situated. Gatasandeha, whatever doubts I may have had, they are gone now. And then, what is the conclusion? I will do your will.

Sometimes we may hear a very inspiring, very good class and then we may go and tell, it is a very good class. It is a good appreciation. But at the end of the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna doesn't tell Krishna, good talk.

Okay, if the talk is good, what is the result? The result is, I will do your will. The Bhagavad Gita is not just a theoretical talk which is meant, very good talk. Bhagavad Gita is meant to be a transformational talk.

The Gita is not just a theoretical talk for which Krishna wants some appreciation. It is a transformational talk by which there is to be harmonization. Harmonization between the human will and the divine will.

So we see, Arjuna does not tell, I will fight. What does he say? I will do your will. He started by saying in 1.46, I will not fight.

2.8 or 9 also he said, I will not fight. But at the end, he is not saying, I will fight. He is saying, I will do your will.

That means his point is, he has understood that Krishna's instruction is not simply for fighting a war. Krishna's instruction is for harmonizing human will with divine will. And that harmonization can happen in different ways at different times.

In today's world sometimes, there is a lot of discomfort associated with religion talking about violence. Because there is terrorism and sometimes many of these terrorists, they draw from their sacred texts. And then, if somebody hears in Bhagavad Gita, Krishna is also telling Arjuna to fight.

Some people can become very uncomfortable. Is this a book that is provoking religious violence? But if we see, there is a big, big difference. What is the difference? I will say, I have a whole series of talks on this.

But I just mentioned three quick points. First is, we can look at the context. We can look at the content.

And we can look at the consciousness. The context is that before the Kurukshetra war took place, every possible effort was made to avoid the war. That is the context.

Sometimes we say, I did everything humanly possible. The Pandavas did everything humanly possible and everything divinely possible. Because Krishna himself went to Shantinikuta.

And despite that, there are some ways, sometimes people say no. Sometimes we are invited for some program. And we say, I would like to come, but I have this engagement, so I can't come.

That's a polite refusal. If somebody says, I will not let my shadow also follow your program. That is not just a no to the program, that is a no to the person.

It is a reply given with no desire for any kind of reconciliation or amicable conclusion. It is a no meant for rejection and insult. So when Krishna went to Hastinapur with his peace proposal, Duryodhana's response was like this.

I will not give enough land to even put the tip of a needle through. So it is not just a no to the proposal, it is a slamming no to the person itself. It is like somebody knocks on our door and we say, do you want something? Some salesperson, do you want this? He says, no, I don't want it.

And then the person goes away. But the person knocks on the door, we look at it, bam, they close the door in their face. So the point I am making is that the Kauravas were atrocious and they had no remorse, they had no desire for reconciliation.

That's the context. If we look at the content, in the Bhagavad Gita, in the whole Bhagavad Gita, 700 verses out of which say around 580 are spoken by Krishna approximately. Then, out of all of them, how much, how many are talking about war? There is not a single verse that talks about any war strategy.

And even when Krishna talks about war, he is talking more about from a spiritual principle. Asmātmaṁ patiṣṭhaye śovalam asmā. Rise and attain victory.

So the last reference, last call for Arjuna to fight comes in the 11th chapter when he's talking about the Vishwaroopa and he's saying that therefore you are going to attain victory. But there is no hate speech in the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna is not telling Arjuna, you know, Karna did this, Duryodhana did this, how can you be so weak? Fight! Come on, you have to take revenge.

No, Krishna is telling Arjuna, the same Bhagavad Gita in the same chapter, 11th chapter tells Arjuna to fight the war. But that same Krishna in that same chapter says, nirvairah sarvabhuteshu yah samāmeti pāṇḍava nirvairah sarvabhuteshu, without any animosity towards anyone. So fight as a dharmic duty.

Fight not for taking revenge. Fight for establishing dharma. In fact, one of the most dramatic verses which illustrates this difference between any ordinary war and the war that the Bhagavad Gita is calling Arjuna to is 3.30. 3.30 is mayi sarvāṇi karmāṇi sanyasya ādhyātma cetasā nirāśir nirmamobhūtvā yudhyasvābhigatajvarah.

So he's saying that, let's recite this verse, go to 3.30. It's an important verse for our point here. 3.30 in the Bhagavad Gita. mayi sarvāṇi karmāṇi sanyasya ādhyātma cetasā nirāśir nirmamobhūtvā yudhyasvābhigatajvarah yudhyasvābhigatajvarah.

So yudhyasvābhigatajvarah. Krishna is telling Arjuna, fight. But how should you fight? nirāśir nirmamobhūtvā.

Without any desire and without any possessiveness. And normally, people fight because of desire and possessiveness. You know, I have this much freedom, I want more freedom.

I have this much wealth, I want that much wealth. So sanyasya, now which, who would, if somebody was to take sanyas, why would they fight a war? He says renounce all the fruits of your work to me. And yudhyasvābhigatajvarah.

So possessiveness, desire, these are the power, these are the things which, because of which people want to fight. Krishna is saying no, not that kind of fight at all. So in content, Krishna is not telling us, the Bhagavad Gita does not contain any hate speech, it does not contain any war strategies.

In fact, it contains a message of actually universal well-being for everyone, detachment, spiritualization of consciousness. So in content, the Bhagavad Gita has practically no references which could be war-inducing directly. And then in consciousness, we see what is Arjuna's consciousness at the end? His consciousness is, I will do your will.

Krishna also is not concluding to Arjuna by saying, how? Now, are you ready to fight the war or not? That was not 18.72. Is your illusion dispelled? Has your knowledge, has your understood properly? Arjuna answered, yes, I have understood my illusion, my, I will do your will. So both in the concluding question and the concluding answer, there is no mention of war. If a book were meant to, if the conversation was meant to induce somebody to fight, then the speaker would stress that in the conclusion.

Isn't it? If you want, if you are going to tell someone, you will drive this car and go and purchase this. What do you have to purchase? From where? Here. So what is the primary call for action? We would, we would ask whether they will be understood or not.

And the person would also say, I have understood. There is no mention of war in either of those. So therefore, the Bhagavad Gita's essential message is for harmonizing human will with divine will.

It is not for fighting a war. The war was fought by Krishna, at Krishna's instruction by Arjuna. But that was only because the context demanded.

In every scripture, there is a contextual part and there is an essential part. The contextual part in the Bhagavad Gita is the battlefield. The essential part is the human wills harmonizing with the divine will.

The Bhagavad Gita is not a book of violence. The Bhagavad Gita is not a book of silence. The Bhagavad Gita is a book of transcendence.

Not violence, not silence, but transcendence. Transcendence means human beings harmonize with the transcendent supreme reality. And after harmonizing, how we act specifically, that will depend on time, place and circumstance.

If you look at the thousands of years, Bhagavad Gita has been a guiding book for people. But how many of the great Acharyas have told people, you are following Bhagavad Gita, arise and fight. It was only in the modern times, there was a Congress leader in India in the 1920s.

He wrote on the commentary of the Gita and he said that the Britishers are like the Kauravas. And we are meant to be like Arjuna. And this is the most self-congratulatory part.

He said, the Indian National Congress is actually, yes, the avatar of Krishna. So, none of the traditions have taken this kind of misappropriation of the Gita very seriously. So, traditionally, nobody has used the Gita as a book for violence.

So, one extreme is some people who are so apprehensive about the violence, they say actually the whole Gita is metaphorical. There is no war, there is nothing like that. But then that actually rips the Gita out of this context of the Mahabharata.

So, that does disservice because the context serves a very valuable purpose. So, one extreme is to deny the context and the other extreme is to focus only on the context. We want to avoid both.

The balanced understanding is the context is dramatic, but the context is also exceptional. So, anyway, this is one conclusion, one ending of the Bhagavad Gita. That is, karishye vacanantava, I will do your will.

This is how Krishna's message has the effect on Arjuna. Once my confusion is gone, I will do your will. If you move onwards from 18.74 to 18.78, the next five verses, it is Sanjay speaking.

And when Sanjay speaks, what all does he speak? He first appreciates how wonderful this conversation has been. He says, it is by Vyasatprasadashritvan, it is by the mercy of Vyasa that I heard this. Adbhutam Romaharshanam.

It's thrilling, it's astonishing. And then he says in 76 and 77, that is, rishyamichamuhurmuhur, rishyamichapunapunapa. So, I'm thrilled at every moment by hearing this conversation, by remembering, meditating on the form of Krishna that he displayed, tachcharupam samsuddhas, that by remembering that form, that is 76, 77.

And the second ending of the Gita correlates with its first big leak. Let's recite that verse now, 78. So, he's saying, where there is Krishna, Yogeshwara, who is the lord of mystic powers, yatra partha dhanur dhara, where there is Arjuna, there, there'll be victory, vijaya, shri, opulence, both the great power and morality.

So, Dhritarashtra's question was, kimakurvata, what happened? So, he said that, yes, the war was going to take place, but he's also professing what happened in the war. So, the dharma, that was dharmakshetra, so who is it going to influence, who is going to be influenced positively by that? That side, where there is Krishna and Arjuna, there'll be niti over there, there'll be vijaya over there. So, that is the answer to that question.

So, at the outer level, we see that Sanjay concludes the Bhagavad Gita with a declaration of victory, with a prophecy of victory for Arjuna. It's again significant, the name used for Krishna over is Yogeshwara. Now, Yogeshwara is also the name which is used in the 11th chapter in the Bhagavad Gita, when Krishna displays the Vishwaroopa.

Mahayogeshwarohari, that Yogeshwara lord, he displayed in universal form. Now, on what basis is Sanjay making this prophecy? That victory will be on the side of Krishna and Arjuna. That is based on what Krishna himself has revealed in the Vishwaroopa.

There he has said that, he has shown how all the warriors are getting destroyed and he's telling, that apart from you, everything, everyone else will be destroyed. So, Sanjay is basing his prophecy not on any independent power of judgment, but it's an inference from what Krishna has himself prophesied earlier, he has foretold earlier. So, the two endings of the Gita, one ending is, yes, I am free from illusion.

The second ending of the Gita is, yes, there is victory. So, at one level, they can seem two very different endings. One is talking about inner attainment, my confusion is gone, my doubt is gone, I am enlightened.

The one is talking about inner enlightenment, that is 18.73. 18.78 is talking about outer attainment, there will be power, there will be victory. So, are these two pointing to two different things? Inner attainment or inner enlightenment and outer attainment, outer achievement. Enlightenment and achievement, can they go together? The Bhagavad Gita says, the Bhagavad Gita's context says that they can.

The common element is, the Bhagavad Gita's stress in 18.73 is on enlightenment. In turn, illusion is gone, doubts are gone. And the outer is, enemies are defeated, victories attained.

But the common element in both is Krishna. In the element in 18.73 is Krishna, by your grace, I am free from illusion. Now, I will harmonize with your will.

So, the inner enlightenment comes when we surrender to Krishna. And similarly, when there is surrender to Krishna, there will be outer achievement also. Yatra, yatra Yogeshwar Krishna, yatra partha dhanudhara.

Where there is Krishna and where there is Arjuna, there will be victory. So, if we understand this point that enlightenment and achievement, the Bhagavad Gita says, can go together. But among the two, what is primary? Enlightenment.

It is Krishna's presence which enlightens us. The very nature of this world is, sometimes there will be success, sometimes there will be failure. And at one level, we may say that, I conclude with two points now, that at one level, we can say wherever there is Krishna, there is victory.

Isn't it? What is the need for mentioning Arjuna at all? If Krishna is there, victory will be there. So, why it is mentioned that Arjuna has to be there for victory? There is, many places people put a Gita saar. There is some Gita saar which people put in their shops or their homes.

And it's quite interesting. It says, jo hua, wo achcha hua. Jo ho raha hai, wo achcha ho raha hai.

Jo hone wala hai, wo bhi achcha hi hoga. What happened was good. What is happening is good.

What will happen is also good. I have recited the Bhagavad Gita hundreds of times till now. I never found any verse which comes anywhere close to this.

So, the Bhagavad Gita is not talking about what is happening. The Bhagavad Gita's central point is how we should respond to what is happening. It's about dharma.

Dharma means what am I meant to do. So, this, it can be some wisdom, it's like there is, tum saath mein kya laaye the jo khodoge. You came with nothing, you go with nothing.

So, why lament if you lose something? That sort of message is good. It can be somewhat spiritual. But it is not the Bhagavad Gita's message.

There are no Bhagavad Gita's verses that talk about that. So, the Bhagavad Gita's message is not about what happens. First of all, we can't say that everything that happens is good.

In life, bad things happen. When Draupadi is disrobed, nobody tells her, jo hua vachha hua. No.

See, whatever happens can be for good. It is not necessarily good. Good can come out of it.

But bad things are bad. It's not that just because we are devotees, that means something terrible happens in our life and somehow we have to think this is also for good. This is also good.

No, later on we will see and Krishna has a plan and good will come out of it. So, the point which I am making here is, why is Arjuna needed at all? Why not only Krishna? Because the whole point of the Bhagavad Gita is not about what God is going to do. The point of the Bhagavad Gita is what we human beings should do.

So, Arjuna is confused. What should I do? I should not fight his thinking. Krishna tells Arjuna, you should fight.

So, the point is that harmonize human will with divine will. So, it's true that wherever Krishna is, there is victory. But Krishna at one level is everywhere.

The point is, we, not where is God, but are we with God? That is the question. That are we, sometimes people say God is on my side. When in Europe, after the church split into Catholics and Protestants, there was a hundred year war between the two.

And both of them said God is on our side. The point is not whether God is on your side. The point is whether you are on God's side.

That is important. Anybody can claim God is on my side. I will have questions in a few minutes.

So, the Bhagavad Gita stresses that we human beings should harmonize with Krishna. And if we do that, then there is victory for us. So, this is about what we human beings are meant to do.

Bhagavad Gita is a call for human action. It is a very, it is not a humanistic book in the sense that it is not human centered. But it is actually for human beings to act.

It is a call for action, that book. And the second point is that in our life, it is not that for us as devotees, achievement will come all the time. But it is not that achievement will never come.

Prabhupada, when he was trying to share Krishna's message, for 30-40 years, it had no result. But then after that such a dramatic result came up. 10 years he spread the movement all over the world.

But throughout it all, Prabhupada's harmonized with Krishna's will. Surrendered to Krishna, doing his will. So, there is an inner result of enlightenment.

There is an outer result of achievement. The outer result will also come. But how it will come? That is by Krishna's plan.

So, once a person went to God and he said, you know, God, your skills are so great. So, he said, here for God, a few moments for us are, a few moments for God are like millions of years for me. A few paise for God are like millions of dollars for us.

So, he said, oh God, please give me just a few paise. So, God replied, in a few moments. So, Krishna has this plan which works according to his time.

And we need to, the external achievement may come, it may not come immediately. But the important thing is, if there is inner harmonization with Krishna, we will be satisfied, we will be contented. And that is reflected in the in-between verses, 76, 77.

At one level, Sanjay's mission fails. Krishna speaks the message to Arjuna. Sanjay repeats the same message to Dhritarashtra.

But Krishna is able to persuade Arjuna. And Arjuna's illusion is overcome. Arjuna becomes ready to fight.

But does Dhritarashtra's illusion go away? He hears the same message, but Dhritarashtra's illusion doesn't go away. The same message can act as light for some, and for some others, it acts like lightning. For those who are attached, it acts like lightning.

It's true. It is all true. But then, after that, lightning goes off.

What is the score in cricket? What is this? What is that? They come back to mundane consciousness. So, if one is very attached, then the message acts like lightning. So, for Dhritarashtra, he was so attached to Dhritarashtra, even the message came, it didn't last for long.

So, in that sense, Sanjay, he could say he failed. He repeated the same message as Krishna, but he failed. But in spite of that, what happened? He says, that's the samskriti, samskriti.

As I remember this message, as I remember the form of Krishna, result is, I am delighted. I am thrilled at every moment. Again and again.

So, what that means is that if we, the purpose of speaking about Krishna, the purpose of serving Krishna, the purpose of doing something for Krishna, there is an external purpose, we want to get it done. But there is an internal purpose that we want to connect with Krishna. We want to remember Krishna.

And that internal purpose will never be departed. Although the external purpose was not fulfilled for Sanjay, his remembrance of Krishna was enhanced. And by that remembrance of Krishna, he himself became contented.

He became deeply absorbed, thrilled in fact. So, similarly, if we keep this priority clear, why am I doing this service? Why am I speaking about Krishna? Why am I studying Krishna's message? Why am I distributing books? Whatever it is, why am I doing it? Yes, there is one external result. We want to get these things done.

But the internal point is, I want to connect with Krishna. I want to become devoted to Krishna. I want to absorb myself in Krishna.

If we keep that inner purpose in mind, then we'll never be frustrated. In the Bhagavatam, it is said that intelligence that is devoted to the Lord is never frustrated. But if the intelligence is devoted to some external result, then it may get frustrated.

There was one preacher who went to a particular program for a long time and not many people were coming. So, this preacher, he got very frustrated. He went to a spiritual master and he said that nobody is coming here for the program.

I think I should just quit over here. And he said, what do you teach a spiritual master about it? I said, the Bhagavad Gita. He said, you're teaching the Bhagavad Gita, but you're not living the Bhagavad Gita.

What do you mean? The spiritual master told that to a disciple. He said, Bhagavad Gita teaches, do not be attached to the fruits of the work. So, he was so shocked.

He said, we have spoken of that verse only. In fact, he told me afterwards, the previous week he had spoken on that verse. So then, he just, what am I doing? I'm just going there and speaking classes.

But am I really going and living the Bhagavad Gita? Am I trying to appreciate that mood, assimilate that mood? And he said that after that meeting with the spiritual master, he just surrendered. He said, Krishna, whatever you want, I'll just do this service. And next week when he went in that surrendered mood, it's almost like double the number of people came for the program.

And from that time, the program just started blossoming. So, he said that it was my attachment, my thinking that I am the doer. I will get the people and I want to show the world how many people I've got.

As long as having that, Krishna did not get the result. But as soon as I surrendered, Krishna, whatever you want, I'm simply your servant. By that mood I got, immediately the results came up.

So, for us, sometimes we may be doing something. We may have a family member who we want to also get them to bhakti, but they're not practicing bhakti. We may have some job which is taking us too much time and we're not able to practice bhakti.

There may be certain external situations which may be troubling us. You're thinking, when will this situation go away? Then I'll be able to practice bhakti. When will this change? But we don't have to.

Our external forms of bhakti may be interrupted by some external situations. But our internal intention of bhakti doesn't have to be interrupted. If I understood Krishna, whatever situation you put me in, I'm going to serve you.

This situation is not favorable for me. If the situation is resolved, I'll serve you. I can serve you more.

But even in this situation, I'm going to serve you. So, if that intention comes firmly, then even if there's an external frustration, still there will be satisfaction. So, as I said, the Bhagavad Gita is primarily a book of inner transformation, which will result in outer transformation also.

Once a disciple wrote to Shri Prabhupada, a Matali disciple. He said that, you know, my God brothers, my God sisters, they're causing me so much trouble. They're making me so discouraged.

So, Prabhupada replied, very beautiful reply. He says, actually, my God brothers also caused me so much trouble. He says, they gave me nothing but depression, compression, frustration.

But he said, there is no need to get discouraged. Because we operate on a platform beyond discouragement. We operate for serving Krishna.

Just keep serving Krishna. So, if you have that understanding, yes, I want some external result for the service to Krishna. But those external results are not what defines my relationship with Krishna.

My relationship with Krishna is defined by my internal intention. And if the intention is there, the connection with him will be there. And the connection is there, that itself will bring satisfaction.

So, intention establishes connection, and then that leads to satisfaction. And that way, we can actually understand the spirituality, the transcendence of Krishna's message. That even if external don't work out, still internally, I can see that this is really wonderful.

This is really spiritual. Because even when material things are difficult, still I am joyful, still I am satisfied. So, there is something special in this process.

The spiritual is real. Because material there's so much problem, I've been frustrated. But I'm experiencing relief, I'm experiencing shelter.

That means the spiritual is for real. It's like if the outside is very hot, and somebody comes in, come into the AC room, just be comfortable. But I come to the door of the AC room, and I open the door, and I demand that let the whole atmosphere become air-conditioned.

That's not going to happen. Just come into the room. Sometimes we have problems in our life, we expect, you know, I'm coming to Krishna, the problem should be solved.

That's like we open the door and expect the whole world to become air-conditioned. No, just forget about the problem, come into the room. Just absorb yourself in Krishna.

Once we absorb ourselves in Krishna, we will experience relief. And after we experience relief, after we experience comfort, coolness, then we can go out and deal with the heat also. Maybe at that time, the weather goes down, the temperature goes down.

Even if it doesn't go down, we'll be comforted and we can go out and deal. So we don't have to demand that the external problem be solved. What we can do is just gain the relief internally.

And that relief is always available for us. Krishna has some plan by which he'll bring out some greater good in the long run. We have to wait.

He said that when we are down to nothing, this has gone wrong, that has gone wrong, that has gone wrong. When we are down to nothing, Krishna is up to something. When we are down to nothing, Krishna is up to something.

So with that hope, when we practice bhakti, then we'll never be thwarted. Arjuna's Gandiva bow, he had put aside, I can't fight. By the end of the Bhagavad Gita, he picked up his Gandiva bow, ready to fight.

Similarly, life will make us discouraged. I can't do it. I give up.

So we put aside our metaphorical Gandiva bow. I can't do it. But when we hear Krishna's message, then yes, Krishna, I'm ready to serve you.

Whatever is required, I'll do. I am your servant. We also will get our hope, our determination back if we hear the message of the Bhagavad Gita and let it spiritualize our consciousness.

So I'll summarize. I spoke about how the two endings of the Gita point to the same end. That is the same end of surrender to Krishna, of absorption in Krishna.

I started by how the self-evident question at the start of the Gita, it indicates something which is not evident. So he's wondering, Dhritarashtra, there's some dharmic place, will it have some influence which will work against my sons? And the second starting of the Gita is Arjuna says, I will not fight and puts aside his bow. So Krishna gives the whole answer and he concludes by saying, oh Arjuna, has your doubt and delusion been gone? Have you come to the state of ekagrata? So ekagrata is not just a state of attentiveness, it is also a level of consciousness.

From mudha, which is in the mode of ignorance, kshipta, which is in the mode of passion, vikshipta is near goodness and ekagrata is from goodness towards transcendence and then nirodha is complete cessation of material activities, material motion of consciousness. So the Bhagavad Gita's message is not just interesting and absorbing, it's also transforming because hearing it will raise our consciousness. And the result of the raising of consciousness is that moha and ajnana will go.

Ignorance is to not know, moha, illusion is to know wrongly. And so to not know our identity as soul is ignorance. To assume that I am a male, I am a female, I am this, I am that, that is illusion.

So both of them will go. The Bhagavad Gita is not a book of violence or silence, it is a book of transcendence. So I talked about how the context, everything, how is the Bhagavad Gita not a book of calling for war? So the context, the content and the consciousness.

In the context, there is no, everything humanly and divinely possible was done to avoid the war. But Duryodhana was remorseless and reasoned. In the content, there is no hate speech, there is no goading against, reminding of the atrocities of the enemies where you have to fight, there is no mention of war strategies.

Even when there is a call for war, there is a call for detachment, for non-animosity towards others. So it is definitely not a warmongering book. And then in consciousness, Krishna is not telling Arjuna, fight.

And Arjuna is not also saying, I will fight. Krishna is saying, Arjuna, are you free from illusion? And Arjuna is saying, yes, I will do your will. So the Bhagavad Gita is not so much, the context of war is dramatic to draw attention.

Just like if we hear two cricket batsmen on a pitch, before a big cricket match, they are talking, everybody will wonder what they are talking about. So like that in the middle of a battlefield, when they talked, that creates intrigue. What did they talk? What was so important? So to consider the context to be metaphorical, or to consider the context to be essential, both are extremes to be avoided.

You see the context as drawing the attention towards the message in a very dramatic way. And the Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya, not Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya, that the Bhagavad Gita's conflict was not between Dharma and Adharma, it is between two dharmas, Kula Dharma and Kshatriya Dharma. And when ethical dilemma is there, when moral dilemma is there, we just need strength of character.

When ethical dilemma is there, two right options, which is more right, at that time we need a deeper philosophical understanding of things. That's what Krishna gives Arjuna. And that is, Arjuna, you are neither a Kshatriya, you are not a Kurnandana, you are a soul who is servant of Krishna.

Just serve. And then act in that mode and whatever is the best way for you to serve at that time. So one ending is, by hearing the Bhagavad Gita, we become free from illusion, we become free from agitation, we attain enlightenment.

Enlightenment means we harmonize with Krishna. The other ending of the Bhagavad Gita is, where Sanjay predicts victory for Krishna and Arjuna together. So there is inner enlightenment and outer achievement.

So the Bhagavad Gita is not so much about what God does. Everything that happens is not good. Everything that happens can be for good, if we respond properly to it.

And that proper response from the human side, according to Dharma, according to the natural order of things when we live, that is what the Bhagavad Gita calls us to. So the book is not about so much of what God does, but what we human beings are meant to do. And there will be inner enlightenment and outer achievement which comes together.

But sometimes the outer achievement may not come because Krishna has some other plan. So at that time, if we focus on the inner side, connection with Krishna. So Sanjay, his speech did not transform Dhritarashtra, but still because he was absorbed in remembrance of Krishna, he was satisfied.

Similarly, if you focus not so much on removing the heat from the outer environment, but getting ourselves cool by coming into the AC room. Don't expect a change of situation, but focus on the change of consciousness by absorbing Krishna. Then we will find that Krishna always offers shelter.

Even when the difficulties don't go away, still we get shelter of Krishna which gives us strength to face the difficulties better. So when we are down to nothing, Krishna is up to something. Thank you very much.

Hare Krishna. So are there any questions or comments? So this incident when you said that Pandavas did everything humanly and now make this request to Duryodhana to make this request to not go forward with this decision, there is something confusing for me because the Lord could have stopped the war if he wanted to. I mean he could have just changed the complete course of circumstances if he wanted to, yet he made a request to let the events play out.

So this seems to me in a way that the Lord is respecting the free will of humans. But on the other hand, some people also say that it is a large design that the Bhagavad Gita has been spoken and things like that. So if it is a large design, then it seems to me that there is no free will.

But at the same time, it seems to me that the Lord is allowing free will. And if the Lord knew that the consequence of free will would end up in this incident anyways, then why did he actually go to Duryodhana and make that request if he knew what the result would be? Okay, so if Krishna went to Duryodhana and asked, don't fight this war, avoid this war, then did he know already in advance that Duryodhana is not going to listen? If that is the case, why did he go? And if he went and still Duryodhana didn't listen, the war took place, then was it Duryodhana's defiance? Or was it because by that Bhagavad Gita was spoken? So was it all Krishna's plan? Krishna's plan, then can we say that Duryodhana's defiance? Actually, the interaction of divine omnipotence and human independence is very complex. It's a perennial question in philosophy.

If God is omnipotent, if God can do everything, then how do we really have free will? So if God can make me do anything that God wants me to do, where does my free will remain? Or if I am independent to do whatever I want to do, then is God really omnipotent? So can I do something against God's will? So the fundamental answer to this question is that human independence is by the arrangement of divine omnipotence. God has given us free will. So it's not that our free will is independent of God.

So we have something called Kshetra. This prakriti is material nature. In the Bhagavad Gita 13 chapter, there are six terms which Arjuna asks for classification.

One of them is prakriti, which is material nature. Kshetra is field of activity. What it means is that each soul has a particular field of activity, a particular sphere of influence that Krishna has arranged for that soul to have.

So elephant has a huge body with which it can crush other animals if it wants and may have a tiny sphere of influence. So by the past karma of those souls, one soul has got a huge sphere of influence in terms of a big body, another soul has got a small sphere of influence. Similar is the respect to human beings.

We human beings, based on our past karma, sometimes we may be in a very powerful, influential position. We can influence hundreds of people. A person like Hitler misled thousands, millions of people.

He caused death, so much violence and death. So now by his past karma, he was meant to have a particular Kshetra, a particular sphere of influence. Now how he influences that sphere is up to him.

That's his free will. But when he has that sphere of influence by his past karma, Krishna will not interfere in that. So people who were victimized by Hitler's horrible acts, Holocaust, we can say at one level, it was their past karma because of which it happened.

But Hitler had no intention that I am delivering them their past karma. He was simply thinking, they are on my way, my way I will destroy them. So he will get the karma for that.

Because he acted by his own desire, acted brutally. So generally, if a soul has been given a particular Kshetra by the Lord's arrangement, that Kshetra is not permanent. Hitler may have been very powerful, but then his power started ending.

He couldn't tolerate it. He committed suicide at that time. So the Kshetra is also not forever.

But while the Kshetra is there, a person has a certain level of influence and that person can act whichever way they want. They can act for good, they can act for bad. So by divine omnipotence, different souls are given independence, free will, and then by their past karma, they are given spheres over which they can exert their independence.

So Duryodhana had been given that sphere by his past karma. Now Krishna, when he goes to Duryodhana as a Shanti Yudha, in Radha Gopinath temple, I gave a Sunday feast class on this, when God fails, Krishna goes and Krishna fails at that time. But actually, that doesn't show God as non-omnipotent.

What it shows is God as extremely merciful. And although he is omnipotent and he could have crushed Duryodhana, but still he went to Duryodhana and asked him to use his free will properly. So the Bhagavad Gita reveals a vision of a God who respects human independence and appeals to human intelligence.

Krishna also does the same at the end of the Bhagavad Gita to Arjuna. He says, Vimrishshaita dasheshena yathecthakurum. Deliberate and decide what you want to do.

So that shows Krishna's consideration towards Duryodhana. He is not simply punishing him, trying to get him to make the right choice. And more importantly, that shows Krishna's love for the Pandavas.

Before the day when Krishna has to meet Kauravas for the peace proposal, he is staying at the house of Vidura. And Vidura asks him, Krishna, why have you come here? The Kauravas are not going to listen. They said Draupadi was dishonored in that assembly.

You may be dishonored. Please don't go there. Krishna tells, no.

I know that Duryodhana will not listen, but I want to make sure that nobody blames the Pandavas, nobody blames my devotees, that they instigated the war. I want to show that they did everything possible to avoid the war. It was only Duryodhana's obstinacy because of which the war took place.

So Krishna had both a compassionate purpose and a devotional purpose. Compassion towards Duryodhana and his own devotion, Krishna is devoted to those who are devoted to him. So his own devotional purpose for his devotees.

That's why he came. Now as far as speaking the Bhagavad Gita is concerned, yes, Krishna arranged to have the Bhagavad Gita spoken at that time in the Kurukshetra battlefield. But we have to understand that there are people who facilitated Krishna's plan by their devotional disposition and there are others who also participated in Krishna's plan by their anti-devotional disposition.

So those who have no intention to serve Krishna, they cannot be said to be devotees working devotionally. So Krishna could have worked out in some other way. Krishna could have spoken the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna could have created some other setting for speaking the Bhagavad Gita.

So Rupa Goswami says that devotion is, what is that? That which is done with the intention of pleasing Krishna, that is bhakti. So that's why we cannot rationalize Duryodhana's actions by saying that that led to Krishna speaking the Bhagavad Gita. No.

Because he was demoniac, so that's why he has punished for that. But Krishna is so expert that sometimes he can use the misdeeds of people also to bring about some good result. Some people may do wrong but Krishna can bring some good out of it.

But that does not make their wrong right. Their wrong is still wrong. But Krishna expertly uses the wrong to bring about right.

Does that answer your question? So sometimes associating with devotees can seem like Kurukshetra. There's so much conflict. So should we just distance oneself from the temple or from devotee association and just practice bhakti ourselves? There are different devotees who are of different natures.

And our philosophy is that we are all individuals. We are not just individual presently, we are irreducibly individual. Eternally all of us is individual.

So because we are individuals, all of us want to serve Krishna in a particular way, there are going to be differences. So Prabhupada asked about this question. Prabhupada said don't expect utopia.

Don't expect utopia means that don't expect unrealistic that everybody will go together. He said that you just serve Krishna and he says even in the spiritual world there is illusion. And there's confusion.

He gives the example that when Krishna is milking the cows and when he's milking the cows, he moves from one cow to another and Radharani is passing by. He says Radharani gets so captivated that he actually goes and tries to milk a bull. And he's trying to find, he's just looking at Radharani, he's absorbed in it.

So what has happened over here that is just the spiritual world also there can be illusion but that is out of devotion. Radharani is so devoted to Krishna, Krishna is attracted to Radharani. So in the spiritual world also there are right-wing gopis and the left-wing gopis.

So Chandravali's group is there, Radharani's group is there and there are conflicts among them. But those conflicts are meant to enhance Krishna's devotion. Chandravali wants to serve Krishna in one way, Radharani wants to serve in another way.

And because of that there are some differences. But both of them, their intention is to serve Krishna. So some devotee is there with Radharani, some devotee is there with Chandravali.

It's not a problem. It's not that they are trying to demonize or destroy the others. They are serving Krishna in their way, they are serving Krishna in their way.

Now so when the gopis don't expect utopia that means that there is going to be difference of opinion always. But what happens after the difference of opinion? See, difference of opinion is just a fact of life. But we can respond differently to difference of opinion in mode of ignorance, in mode of passion, in mode of goodness and in transcendence.

In the mode of ignorance, this difference of opinion, I will demonize and destroy those who have difference of opinion. Or basically in mode of ignorance there is just reckless action. I destroy others or I beat myself up.

So if I give up my bhakti or I demonize others and criticize them, then that's actually an ignorant response. Now we are not talking about essentials. No devotee is going to say that Krishna is not God.

The impersonal Brahman is the absolute. No devotee is going to say that stop chanting Hare Krishna mantra. No devotee is going to say that you can eat meat.

There is no difference over core principles. But certain practices, certain specific details, should we do this or should we do that, there can be differences over that. And when those differences happen, we have to learn to see those differences in perspective.

Once there was a Christian pastor. One group of people came to him and they said, during this part of our liturgy, during this liturgy, the religious ritual that they do, we feel that we all should stand up. The pastor said, yes, that's our tradition.

The other group of people came and said, during this part of the liturgy, we should sit down. Yes, that's our tradition. And both of them met each other and said, the pastor said, we should stand up.

The pastor said, we should sit down. So both of them came to him and they said, so you said that we should stand up to us, but you said that we should sit down to that. Now we are going to fight.

That's our tradition. Fighting is unavoidable. Conflicts in the sense that conflicts are unavoidable.

But when there is a mode of ignorance, it becomes destructive conflict. I just want to stamp out the others. In the mode of passion, when there is conflict, I want to prove I am right and you are wrong.

So I may not want to destroy you, but I want to become better than you. And in that process, I may push you aside also. I don't care for you.

In the mode of goodness, we see that actually there is enough room for everyone. The world is a big place. They can serve in their way.

Let me serve in my way. We all move on cooperatively. In transcendence, actually, we want everyone to thrive.

This one devotee, a group of devotees in one temple, they said, you know that last time the top book distributors, they distributed 80,000 books. So this time we have set a target that we will distribute 85,000 books. So the spiritual master told them, then they said, please bless us, Maharaj, that we can distribute 85,000 books.

So Maharaj said, yes, I pray that you distribute 85,000 books and you come last. What that means is everybody distributes more books. So that this message of Krishna goes far and wide.

So when there are differences of opinion, we don't have to become too disturbed by the presence of differences of opinion. And whenever there are differences, in each group, there will be some people will be in goodness, some people in passion, some people in ignorance. And whichever mode becomes more prominent at a particular time, the response will be that way.

So we have to know that I have come here to practice Krishna Bhakti. And I don't want to get involved too much in conflicts. So we have to see what is like, what group is most like-minded for us.

Bhakti Vedanta says we not only have to associate with devotees, we have to associate like-minded devotees. So if we find that, okay, in a particular group, the mood is what I like the most, I feel inspired to practice Bhakti in this mood. We don't have to criticize or offend other devotees.

But we just practice Bhakti in our situation. And the important thing is that we keep our purpose in mind. If we forget our purpose, Krishna, it is said, is Kalpataru.

So Krishna's movement is also Kalpataru. Kalpataru means it fulfills our desires. So if we come to Krishna's movement for any motive other than Krishna, if I come for prestige, actually, in which other group will I go? And as soon as I enter, people start going down to me.

It can happen anywhere. I can get a lot of prestige over here. If I want power, we stay around here for a few years.

I become a senior devotee. And then so many devotees will respect me. I can get power also.

If I want prestige, I can get prestige. If I want power, I can get power. If I want money, I can get money.

If I want controversy, I can get controversy. Lot of controversy. If I want Krishna, I will get Krishna also.

So Krishna, we will get in Krishna's movement. But Krishna is not the only thing we will get. So it is our desire that is important.

So differences of opinion, they will be there. You don't have to become inordinately disturbed by them. If there is too much, some devotees, somehow they take up an agenda.

I think this devotee is so bad. This devotee is so bad. If that devotee is taking an agenda like that, just keep a distance from that devotee.

But tell them, I feel very uncomfortable about this. Please, can we talk something else? Can we talk about Krishna? The most devotees will be reasonable. Okay, if you're not interested in talking about it, I won't talk about it.

But if some devotees are not, their agenda itself, just keep a distance from them. Associate with other devotees and practice bhakti. That way, what will happen is, over a period of time, as devotees mature, we will not respond inappropriately to differences.

It's not that differences will go, differences will be there. But we will learn to respond to differences maturely. And we'll all be able to practice bhakti in our own way.

Does that answer your question? I would say that we practice bhakti. Now, whether it is in the temple environment, whether it is in some other environment, whether it is in here or there, that's up to person to person, situation to situation. So, it's not that we don't want to go to the temple.

But the purpose of going to the temple is to remember Krishna. So, somehow, while going to the temple, there is so many other things happening over there that agitates our mind. And then, after returning to the temple, our heart should be filled with inspiration to remember Krishna.

After returning to the temple, we are just agitated about this and that. Then, that is not nourishing our bhakti. So, I wouldn't make it.

Generally, going to the temple will enhance our remembrance of Krishna. And that's why we shouldn't go to the temple. But the point is, there is a practice and there is a purpose.

In some exceptional situations, if the practice doesn't serve the purpose, and it may happen for a particular devotee at a particular point. So, that doesn't mean that has to be absolute principle for everyone. Some devotee may have some strong conflicts with in a temple.

And then, when they go to the temple, they just can't be Krishna conscious. They are just that particular devotee conscious. They are conflict conscious.

Now, if that is happening, then for some time, till the temperature of the conflict goes down, that particular devotee may decide, let's not go to the temple. But it's not that has to be done for everyone. Prabhupada says that about Rasleela.

He says, Rasleela is actually meant to purify us, to give us the remembrance of Krishna, most intimate pastimes. But if by remembering, reading Rasleela, we're getting agitated, our senses are getting disturbed, then don't read Rasleela. That doesn't mean we're saying it's bad.

And at this stage, for me, it is not good. So, we focus on the principle that we are meant to remember Krishna. And it's not that, it's not a blanket principle that we should not go to a temple.

But if for a particular devotee in a particular situation, the agitation from going to the temple is so much that the remembrance of Krishna is disturbed, then for that devotee during that situation, if that devotee avoids going to the temple, that devotee should not be judged as wrong. Because that's what is required for their bhakti at that time. But that doesn't mean that that devotee has to impose that on everyone.

It's that you shouldn't go to a temple. No one should go to a temple. So, every one of us has to be individually responsible for our spiritual growth.

And do that which is favorable for our remembrance of Krishna. Does that answer your question? Yes, ma'am, please. This is on a personal level.

I deal with different types of people, not only at work but also at home. And what I'm trying to do is basically bring together devotees and non-devotees so that way non-devotees can get in contact with devotees and at least see the picture of Krishna or hear at least Krishna. Or even eat something that is offered to Krishna.

And I tend to have a lot of trouble with, I'm sorry I have to cluster it here, but with devotees because it seems that sometimes that they forget as a human being we have responsibility to do in the home environment, which is very simple in my opinion as a mom, I do many things, I still have time to do things. But I tend to come across people like, oh I'm just busy with this and I couldn't do that. And other people that are non-devotees, this is the rule and this is how we go because we benefit all of us.

And they do it. And I find like what is going on, so I try to tell them like I tell my child nicely in the first time, second time is like okay you know what's going on here, and the third time so what's happening here. And then when things doesn't progress any better than the next time I just like I get very cross and sometimes like too in at work because I deal with a lot of people I just feel like too a little energy there and when I come home I just find like this here this there and I feel like okay am I dealing with five-year-old children here or am I dealing with adults and then the funny thing is when you basically say look things are like this you do it or you don't do it and this is the result they just feel it like oh I want to be taught like I'm an adult, it's like wait you're not getting it.

So it basically I'm not listening my spiritual life because I feel like what am I doing wrong here, how am I supposed to be doing better here, what is this bringing to me and how should I be acting in this and I just feel like all absent like Krishna help me here because I just have so much energy for depending with them. So sometimes when we interact with the devotees and non-devotees, non-devotees may sometimes be more responsible in doing some things but devotees may just be neglectful and sometimes there's a neglectful that appears like we're dealing with children but then if we try to deal with them like children they get angry, they get feel annoyed. I'm not a child so what should we do in such a situation so that we can at least advance in our bhakti.

The word devotee is a very elastic term. The word devotee can be applied to someone who is a pure devotee completely absorbed in Krishna and sometimes we apply to just somebody who just started practicing bhakti. So we all come from different backgrounds and our backgrounds shape us very significantly as our bhakti is meant to change us but there are certain things which we may change by our practice of bhakti.

We may give up certain bad habits but that doesn't necessarily mean that all of us whatever kind of upbringing we had, whatever kind of training we had, what a kind of culture we came from and of course whatever so how we have carried from our previous life that has changed so quickly. It may take some time. So some people may have come from a culture of being material responsible, materially competent, materially diligent.

Some people may not come from that and if devotees have come from a culture where they were not materially negligent, not very materially accountable or responsible and non-devotees have come from materially responsible, diligent culture then although the devotees may be practicing bhakti it may not be the same. At a material level the devotees may work out to be less competent than non-devotees. So we have to see that bhakti is an agent of positive transformation but what it is transforming is different for different people.

The starting point of the transformation is different in each case, in each individual's case and some people may spiritually have understood the ultimate goal of life but practically their modes may not have changed. They may still be in a mode of passion or in a mode of ignorance. Some aspects of the mode of passion ignorance in terms of some bad habits they may have given up but still other aspects they may be there like that.

So we have to deal with people as they are. So we just have to, one of the best ways to avoid frustration in relationships is to decrease expectation. We would like other people to rise, to become better and in some cases it's needed but sometimes some people may take a long time to do that.

Sometimes some people may do it immediately because sometimes some people may just not change. So if after repeated interaction we find that some people are just not changing, their devotees, then depending on the nature of the relationship that we are in, we have to see what can be done. If it's just two people, some devotee we just got acquainted with, we find working with them is very difficult because they are not at all responsible or reliable, then we may just decide I won't develop this relationship any further.

There are other devotees with whom I can associate and I can move forward in my service to Krishna. But in some cases we may be required to be in that relationship. It may be a loved one, it may be a close devotee relationship and in that case you have to decrease the expectation that this person comes from a particular background, they can't do this.

There's a difference between being insensitive and being desensitized. So being insensitive means not caring at all. Being desensitized means that person doesn't have that sensitivity only.

If somebody wants to talk with me and they touch me on the shoulder, suppose I have got something like paralysis over here, I'm desensitized. They touch me on the shoulder and I don't feel anything at all. Keep touching, I'm just doing something else.

I don't know, you touched me? So I was not being insensitive, I was just desensitized. So what happens in our life is that all of us are super sensitive to some things and some of us are very desensitized to some things. I'm an author, so I'm very conscious about spellings.

Although I also make mistakes, but when I find a mistake I feel embarrassed and I correct it immediately. But especially when I live in India, as soon as I enter into a new room, I look at all the notice boards, what is written over there and immediately I find spelling mistakes over there. And sometimes you write a big font, some spelling mistake is there.

And for me it is intellectual torture to see that. So I tell someone, please correct it. He says, what does it matter? He says, it's a wrong spelling.

He says, everybody understands, why don't you understand? So most people are simply desensitized to it. So I am super sensitive and the person is desensitized. More commonly we experience it in kirtan.

Sometimes somebody comes, kirtan is going on, somebody picks up a kartal and they're playing out of tune. And then the worst part is, at least some people, when they're playing out of tune, they understand I'm playing out of tune and they try to correct it. But some people are so desensitized that they're playing out of tune and they don't even understand it.

So they are blissful and people around are miserable. So we have to say that if somebody is repeatedly doing something in the wrong way and despite our telling they don't understand, then we have to see that that means it's not that they are being insensitive, they can just be desensitized to that. So for some people cleanliness is very important, keep everything neat and tidy.

And some people, as soon as they come into a room, it's like in two minutes they brought a hurricane over there. So what happens is, why can't you keep things clean? Are they unclean? I didn't notice. How could you not notice? That's the first thing I noticed.

So in such a situation, I said if that other person is desensitized, then we simply have to decrease our expectation. It's not that the person is bad, but it's just that in that particular faculty they're just not sensitive. So it's something very important for us that we may have to communicate to them in a non-judgmental way.

What happens is, when we you are so lazy, you are so irresponsible, as soon as we make a judgmental comment like that, that person either goes on the defensive or goes on the offensive. You think I am lazy? Do you remember what you did? You forgot that and then they started attacking us. The issue is forgotten and it becomes like an ego battle.

So at such times, in a non-judgmental way, you have to communicate the importance. You know, when you forget to get this, I felt very upset because I needed this for my meeting. I needed this for this program.

So when we objectively communicate the importance of certain things, over a period of time people get it. And then gradually they will learn. So it's that, so when I say somebody is desensitized, that means they just don't get the importance of that thing.

And if I get the, for me it is very important, then I have to very maturely recognize that where they are coming from and help them understand the importance of that. And gradually they will learn. It's usually in close relationships, it is not that people want to hurt each other.

It's just that we do things which hurt each other. So just as I may be, just as somebody else is, somebody else may be doing something which is, which is out, which is irritating me, I may be doing something which may be irritating others. And I don't know about it.

So once I was giving a class and I was studying that when we are, when we are practicing bhakti, we have to tolerate many things. Tolerance is important. That class on tolerance.

I said, what all do we have to tolerate? So one devotee very enthusiastically raised her hand. Yes, we have to tolerate devotees. So then I said, yes, that's a good realization.

And as we advance, we also realize that devotees are tolerating us. So yes, we all have our weaknesses and we need to, we need to tolerate. So we try to communicate in a way that helps others to understand the importance.

And if that doesn't work, then and if that thing is very important for us, then we just don't entrust it to them. We just do it ourselves. But if that does, basically, by recognizing that different people have different natures, we will be able to modulate, moderate our expectations and then take appropriate course of action.

Either do it ourselves, either communicate in non-judgmental ways so that they do it or just outsource and get someone else to do it, whatever. The practical course of action will vary depending on time and circumstance. But the important thing is that we recognize that different people come from different backgrounds.

And that's why that which may seem very basic for us may seem like non-important for them. And that gap in prioritization, gap in considering what is important, that will need to be somehow dealt with. Any other questions? If I'm subjected to ridicule or disrespect by a senior devotee, and I share my thoughts and suggest these things to my devotees, am I committing a virtual offence? If I am insulted or disrespected by a senior devotee, and I write this, if I talk about it with, if you're disrespected by some senior devotee and I talk about it with some other devotees, some other senior devotees, is that an offence? See, offence is basically when we do something with the intention of pulling someone down, with the intention of, with the motivation of envy.

Why is this person being respected so much? So if that is not our intention, if our intention is basically to deal with our own hurts, yes, somebody spoke of something which has wounded me. And then I'm going to some, I need to be healed and I talk with someone else about that. That is not offensiveness.

See, there is, there is objective reality, there is subjective perception of the reality. So at an objective level, if something has happened, sometimes my mind may make it much bigger than what it needs to be. Or sometimes my mind may perceive it in a particular way, which may be wrong also.

But the objective reality is there. So we have to, when we associate with other devotees, if our purpose is to help us heal the wound, that means basically the event has, objectively the event has taken place, but I want to subjectively process it in a way that minimizes the hurt, that helps me to deal with the situation better. Then that is actually in the mode of service to Krishna.

And you know that senior devotee might tell, okay, probably this devotee is under that pressure because of that devotee threat, because maybe you did this and because of that happened. They give some context to explain things, to see things from a better perspective. So that is not at all offensive.

In fact, that is essential for us to persevere in the path of bhakti. From a philosophical perspective, we need to understand that all of us, we are, by our past karma, we are meant to get some klesha. There is adhyatmik klesha, adhibhautik klesha, adhidaivik klesha.

So adhyatmik is from the body-mind, adhidaivik is from nature and adhibhautik is from the people around us. If we are living primarily with devotees, then often devotees will be the source of adhibhautik klesha for us. That karmic, that klesha which is going to come to us by our karma, that is going to come.

Sometimes devotees may become the channel for that. So just as if the atmosphere becomes very cold, then I go to a doctor to take treatment. The cold is there, so like that.

If I get hurt in the association of devotees, I may need some relief. If my whole mood is just to accuse, accuse, accuse this devotee and do this to me, then that can be my problem. But if my intention is to understand and to process, what made that devotee do this and how can I move forward in my life? So then that is important for us to clarify.

Otherwise, we will not get any shelter. We will be like having our wounds and nursing our wounds alone and they may end up becoming worse. So we do need association of devotees.

That will help us to deal with the situation. So if we say that the soul has knowledge, soul is Satchitananda and that knowledge is covered, then what exactly is covered? Is it some spiritual knowledge or is it the specific knowledge of verses from the scriptures? Basically, it is the soul's inclination towards spiritual understanding or whatever inclination the soul has acquired. In the Bhagavad Gita, in the sixth chapter, Krishna talks about the yoga bhrastha, the souls who have started spiritual life but they are unable to continue.

They leave it off. So what happens is that Krishna says that purvabhyasena tenaiva riyate yavasopisaha jijnasura piyogasya shabda brahmati vartate purvabhyasena tenaiva. By the past practice, riyate yavasopisaha, one is helplessly attracted.

So an attraction towards Krishna is what is there and that comes back to us. So avrutam jnanam etena, Krishna talks about lust or in general about worldly desires, kama, they cover our knowledge. They cover our knowledge means that the soul has awareness of its spirituality but that knowledge is covered over by selfish desire.

That means we forget that and we start perceiving ourselves differently as men, as women, as whatever else. So when we become purified, that covering is removed. When the covering is removed, then we start seeing things as they are and from that point onwards we start functioning more effectively.

So it's not necessary that the specific verses in scripture is what the soul remembers. That is more of the, you could say, the verbalization of the knowledge. But the knowledge itself is internalized.

So it is not that, say, there are, in various parts of the world we have had, the Janana Maharaj has written a book called Animals in Krishna Consciousness. So basically there are places where, there is in Malaysia, there was one dog, every evening would come outside the temple at the time of Gaurarti and just stand there. And the devotees would shoo it away.

It would go a little distance and again stand over there. Where there is in South India, there is a temple where there is a crocodile which takes only vegetarian food. It takes only rice that is offered to the deities.

And many people come and sponsor rice for the deities, not because the deity will take, but because the crocodile will take it. So they offer the bhoga and then they bring it and the crocodile actually eats it. So what is happening over here, that spiritual life cannot be begun in animal form.

But spiritual life can be continued in animal form. If a soul has practiced in the human form, but somehow because of some reason, a soul loses a human body, like happened with Bharat Maharaj. Very evolved spiritually, but because he was attached to a deer, so he went down to animal body.

He went to deer body, but he did not get deer consciousness. Even in deer body, he was trying to associate with sages, be satisfied with whatever grass was available nearby, but staying in association with sages. Now it's not that that deer was speaking Sanskrit verses.

No, the deer was just a deer, but that spiritual consciousness was there. So sometimes verses may also emerge, but that is not the essential thing. The essential thing is that, that inclination towards Krishna is what stays on.

So if somebody has acquired that in the human form of life, even the soul goes to animal form, from that animal form, the soul will get it, it will continue that. The next human form again will continue further. So basically, the soul goes from one body to another, the subtle body goes with it.

And in the subtle body, there can be attraction towards material things, there can be attraction towards spiritual things. That is carried over from the soul. That is carried over from one body to another.

That is covered by illusion and that uncovering has taken place. Even if it is partial, that partial uncovering will be carried on to the next life. Did I answer your question? I think you somewhat answered my question.

I was wondering, when a human being is in harmony with Krishna, victory will be there. As per our circumstances, I was wondering what is victory for us? Can you explain, like seeing the things as they are? So when we are in harmony with Krishna, there will be victory, the Bhagavad Gita says. What does victory mean? In the material world, nothing is permanent.

So Arjuna won the Kurukshetra war. Eventually, the Pandavas renounced the world, they went to the forest and eventually they went to the spiritual world. So anything in the material world is not going to be permanent.

But although the world is impermanent, by Bhakti, the impermanent becomes the way to the permanent. The impermanent, we will do various activities in this world, in this impermanent world, in our impermanent roles in this world, but through that we can become purified and we can attain the permanent spiritual world. So ultimately the victory for us is that we attain Krishna.

We become absorbed in Krishna, we attain Krishna. Specifically with respect to various services that we are doing, sometimes those services may work out, sometimes they may not work out. That's fine.

The important thing is we keep serving Krishna. So victory is more in the intention. Always want to serve Krishna fully.

And as long as that intention is there, victorious. And sometimes Krishna may work out things in this way that externally also wonderful things come out, sometimes they may not. So in the context of Arjuna, because the question there was what is going to happen in the battlefield.

This is Arjuna's question. So he is saying that in this particular war, Arjuna is going to be victorious. In the overall journey of our life, we will be victorious if we are with Krishna.

But specific battles, some may be won, some may be lost. Does that answer your question? Thank you. Okay.

Let me know how much time should we go on. It's up to you. I mean, you are the boss.

So if you're okay, then we can continue. Otherwise, we can have some questions in the evening. Okay, we can have a few questions in a few minutes more.

We'll come back to you. After listening to Bhagavad Gita and getting more high score, but I sometimes wonder why Arjuna takes such a big pratigna of when Arjuna has died. And he says that I will give up my life if I don't kill Krishna.

But he has a purpose of doing the war. But in between, he got into moha because of Arjuna's death. And he puts that.

Why is that? Okay, good question. So Arjuna is saying at the end of the Gita that I'm free from moha. But then when Abhimanyu is killed, at that time, he takes a vow that I'll kill Jaidam before sunset.

That anger and that lamentation, isn't that moha? Has he gone into moha? Yes, and no. I would say that being spiritual doesn't mean repressing all human emotions. It means reaching beyond those human emotions.

We can't repress our emotions. So if somebody's son has died, it's painful. There is some anger, there is some distress.

And if one speaks or does something in a surge of emotion at that time, that should not be seen as a contamination in one's devotion. One should just see that as a circumstantial stimulus that has come up. If, say, I'll start from some simple, some trivial things.

Somebody says, we have some prasad and something very salty. I can't eat it. It is prasad, it is Krishna.

Why are you looking at it in a mundane way? Well, it is prasad, it is spiritual, but that doesn't mean that there is no material aspect with it. It's too salty, we can't take it. So if the prasad is, see, I may say it's only prasad, a prasad is Krishna.

Yes, but if I overeat prasad, still I'm going to have problems, isn't it? Taking prasad is serving Krishna, but that is not the only way to serve Krishna. There are other ways also. So my point here is that when we see some things which are transcendental, there is a material effect also associated with the manifestation of the transcendental in the material.

So we can't reject that. So when we are interacting in the world, when certain bad things happen, the natural human emotions will be there. Draupadi, when she is dishonored, actually she calls out to Krishna.

Sometimes in movies we may see Krishna coming, but actually nobody sees Krishna coming. All that happens is that her saree is inexhaustible, and the assembled people attribute it to her chastity, that because of her chastity she was protected. But whatever it is, afterwards, when they are in the forest, Krishna comes to meet them.

Krishna and Balarama come to meet them. And then Draupadi saw Krishna, she says, you know, why didn't you come at that time? I needed you. Krishna doesn't say, I am God, have faith in my perfect plan.

What does Krishna say? He says, I didn't know. Krishna says that I was fighting with this demon Shalva who had attacked Dwaraka, and because of that I was caught over there. As soon as I came to know what happened, immediately I have come here.

So Krishna acknowledges Draupadi's emotions, and he doesn't try to suppress them or make them into a faith issue. He is very understanding. The point I am making here is that there are circumstantial emotions and there are core intentions.

So when I say, hey, this prasad is too salty, my core intention is not to disrespect Krishna in the form of prasad. But it's a circumstantial emotion that this food will not work. So similarly, when say a son has passed away, at that time a circumstantial emotion may come.

And Krishna is with Abhimanyu. Krishna doesn't tell Abhimanyu. Krishna is with Arjuna.

Krishna doesn't tell Arjuna, have you forgotten Bhagavad Gita now? Remember Bhagavad Gita. No, Krishna is very understanding. There is a time for instruction and there is a time for commiseration.

Commiseration means just being there with people, just being understanding, being caring. It's not that every situation we have to speak philosophy. Sometimes just being present as a human being for being with people, that's fine.

That's what is required. So Krishna understands and eventually Arjuna's core intention comes back. Arjuna keeps serving Krishna.

So circumstantial emotions, even if they sometimes seem to be non-devotional or anti-devotional, should not be taken as a contamination if the core intention for serving Krishna is there, is there overall. So that way we understand this apparent moha into which Arjuna could have that time. I have not read this in Mahabharata, but what is your point? What is the point of that example? Okay, I got your question.

See, if Kunti, she heard apparently that Bhima is going to be killed by Dhritarashtra, still she remained calm. But Arjuna got agitated when his son was killed. Now irrespective of whether that incident is true, I have not read it in Mahabharata, but still there is an important principle over here.

Different devotees may express their devotion in different ways, in different situations. Once a devotee was caught in communal riots in Mumbai, the devotees in Saffron, and there's a whole group of rioters coming. So the devotee just had some books, just dropped the books and ran away from there.

And he ran and ran and hid somewhere and managed to survive. Then the devotee went to the spiritual master and asked, Maharaj, I speak so many times that we are not the body, we are the soul. Now I have to hear what happened.

When this danger came, I just ran. Did I do the right thing? Maharaj told him that, actually, it's not just because of fear of the body, fear of bodily death. That is one factor, of course.

But what is the purpose? As devotees, it is not that we are intentionally going to go into danger. We see our body is also a tool for serving Krishna. And if we act to protect the body, that's also a service to Krishna.

In some cases, we may decide that there's nothing that can be done and we surrender to Krishna. So Prahlad Maharaj surrendered. Then Narsimhadeva, when Nandakashi was tormenting, he was folding his hands and absorbing himself.

But Prahlad Maharaj is considered to be an Acharya. But then we have so many other forms of the Lord or devotees, they fight back. And when there's a demon who is attacking, Arjuna fights back.

So some people fight back, some people don't fight back. So how a devotee will be inspired by the Lord to serve, that will vary. So Arjuna's surrender is that he picks up his bow and is ready to fight.

Draupadi's surrender is she raises her hands in helplessness. Krishna, you take care. So in different situations, surrender will be expressed in different ways.

Often it is expressed according to the particular roles and capacities that a person has. So Kunti, she's an elderly statesman like a lady. She expresses her surrender by dependence on Krishna.

Arjuna is a warrior. He expresses surrenders by diligence for Krishna. I will do this for you.

So the devotion, surrender is the same, but expression varies according to circumstances. Yeah, we have one or two last questions. So the samskaras coming from a previous life and the subhavas from this life, how do they correlate? They don't necessarily correlate, both of them contribute.

Basically our actions are determined by five broad factors. Our samskaras coming from your previous life, which often science calls as genetic determinism, that our genes, the kind of genes that we have, that's from our past life karma. Then there is our upbringing, kind of parents we have, that's called something like family determinism.

Then there is our association. Somebody may be brought in a very pure family, but then if they associate with materialistic or sinful people, especially in college that happens for children, for students, then they may get spoiled over there. The association also shapes our behavior.

Beyond all this is our free will. So all these, my past, my subhava, my samskara, my sangha, these three all push, but we can counter-push. So sometimes two people may be born in the same circumstance or similar circumstance, but they may behave very differently.

One grows to become an exemplary citizen, other grows to become a criminal. Why is that? Because we are not just a product of our circumstances. So we can change.

And beyond that, there is Krishna's mercy. By Krishna's mercy, the influence of these three can be substantially countered or channeled, depending on how that influences. And our will can become much more empowered.

Even if that past influences are there, we can counter it. So from the subhava, certain things may come up, but the samskara can change it. So ideally, in the traditional culture, subhava and samskara would go together.

That means a husband and wife, both are of brahminical disposition. When they unite, a soul who is of a brahminical disposition gets attracted to their womb. And then when such a soul is given brahminical samskaras, the soul grows up to be a very good brahmana in future.

So we can't control what samskara the child is carrying from the past. Sorry, what subhava the child is carrying from the past. But we can indeed focus on the samskara that created it.

So we are not meant to label people based on whatever past they may have had. That's not in our control. What is in our control is to try to give the best samskara as possible.

We do that, we are doing our duty, and it is up to that soul ultimately what choice the soul will make. We can focus on that which is in our control. Samskara is in our control, at least to some extent sangha is in our control.

So we try to provide that and eventually the soul will make wise choices either soon or over a period of time. Did I answer your question? Yes, it's an inclusive statement. Because in the bhagavanta's point of view itself, Krishna has talked about karma yoga, jnana yoga, ashtam yoga.

He has mentioned these various processes. So whatever processes you may think for spiritual realization, just put it aside. Focus on serving.

It can be an inclusive statement. The word dharma can have many different meanings. It can mean duty.

It can mean nature. Kshatriya dharma means kshatriya duty. But it can just mean nature.

That's what a person's nature is. That can also be called as dharma. It can also mean social order.

Krishna says dharma samsthaapanarthaya, that I will destroy. He is talking about dharma as a social order. I have come to establish those kings who will establish dharma.

So this is a complex subject, but I will try to mention it as quickly as possible. See dharma can have broadly three meanings. One is at a spiritual level, our dharma is to serve Krishna.

That is sanatana dharma. Then there is dharma at the material level, where for the orderly conduct of life, certain duties have been followed. So in the traditional culture, there was varna ashram dharma, a particular varna and particular ashram.

But along with that, there can also be other dharmas. So for example, we live in a particular country, following the laws of that country. That's also dharma.

So basically in this context, whatever is the material order, the activities that we do to maintain the material order, it's dharma. We are following the traffic rules, it's dharma. So at a material level, basically if you understand dharma as order, the activities which will maintain order at the material level, that is dharma.

At a spiritual level, the activity that keeps us in our orderly spiritual nature in service of Krishna, that is dharma. And for us, there is the activity that take us from the material level to the spiritual level, our consciousness, which will elevate. That is our sadhana.

That is also dharma. So you can say there is paradharma, that is spiritual dharma. At the pure spiritual level, the soul naturally loves and serves Krishna.

There is aparadharma. Aparadharma is the worldly responsibility that we have, which also we are meant to do properly. And there is the sadhana, which takes us from aparadharma to paradharma.

So when Krishna is saying sarva-dharman parityajya, He is telling among the aparadharmas, there can be conflicts. There can be different aparadharmas because there can be different conflicts for different people. But if we focus on the principle that I am meant to serve Krishna, then we can find the best way ahead through that situation.

Okay. So thank you very much. This was the best Bhakti Shastri session here.

So thank you very much.