What is Karma Mimamsa? If Krishna himself speaks it, how can it be considered wrong?

How exactly is it wrong? If it is wrong, then why does Krishna speak it?

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
the question what exactly is the Karma Mimamsa philosophy what is wrong with it why does Krishna speak it in the Govardhan Leela and if Krishna speaks it himself then how can we consider it to be wrong answer, Karma Mimamsa is one of the six systems of philosophy which have developed from the Vedas they are traditionally called as Shat Darshana and generally Karma Mimamsa is also called as Purva Mimamsa and there is Uttar Mimamsa, Uttar Mimamsa is Vedanta so there is Sankhya and Yoga they are clubbed together then Nyaya, Vaisheshika they are clubbed together and Karma Mimamsa, Vedanta are clubbed together so these are the total six systems of philosophy and all six are considered to be Aasthik, Theistic in the sense that all six accept the Vedic authority however not all six reflect the Vedic conclusion accurately they are quoting the Vedas but often their conclusion is different from the Vedic conclusion and that’s why in the Vedanta Sutra Vyasadeva actually discusses all the philosophies, all the other five systems of philosophy and establishes how they are not the conclusions of the Vedas the actual conclusion of the Vedas is Vedanta now Karma Mimamsa is the philosophy that the laws in the universe are supreme now in today’s schools of thought this can also be roughly equated with what is called as naturalism naturalism means that nature itself is supreme and many Darwinian evolutionists atheists they subscribe to this theory that the laws of nature are supreme so this is based on an understanding that we observe nature and we see that it behaves according to patterns so then we infer that certain causes produce effects and the effects in turn become causes for future effects so the Mimamsa accepts the law of Karma it also accepts soul and reincarnation so there are broad agreements also within the six systems of philosophy but Mimamsa considers the laws to be supreme of course Mimamsa is in one way more evolved than naturalism that is there in today’s scientific conceptions and that is Mimamsa includes the factors of free will, consciousness and divine supervision so it includes the law of Karma which is not currently understood and included within the naturalistic view of science but in principle both have the idea that laws are supreme the error in this philosophy is that laws come from a lawmaker and the lawmaker is above the law so Krishna talks about this very clearly so he talks about how he is the controller of material nature and then he also talks about that that I will deliver you from sinful reactions which also indicates his superiority over the law of Karma so laws come from a lawmaker and in the transcendental world the lawmaker is above the law and that’s what Bhagavad Gita says so the error of Karma Mimamsa is to make a mechanical system into the supreme instead of understanding the supreme personality of Godhead to be the supreme so the Bhagavatam also gives in the first canto when Narada instructs Yudhishtir he gives the example of law of Karma and then he says that actually the living beings are moved around like the pieces that are moved around in the game like chess and the supreme lord of the supreme will who moves people around like this so that indicates also that the lord is in supreme control so this is how the principle of laws can be reconciled with the principle of free will on the chess board the pieces move according to certain laws although there are laws governing the movement of the pieces but at the same time where the pieces will move is not determined by the law it is determined by the discretion of the player so that’s how consciousness interacts with the laws but the supreme lord is such that he does not have to follow any laws and he is above the law now why does Krishna speak it and how can we consider it wrong if Krishna is speaking it we have to understand the concepts of Tattva and Leela Tattva is philosophical truth and Leela is pastime so in pastime sometimes Tattva is subordinated for the sake of Rasa so Tattva is that Krishna is the supreme lord the source of everyone, the parent of all but in Leela for the sake of Vatsalya Rasa that Tattva is subordinated and Krishna becomes the son of Yashodamayananda Maharaj and by that the Rasa is enhanced so that’s why in general first we have to understand Tattva and then look at Leela if we just look at Leela and then try to understand Tattva we can get quite confused and that’s why Prabhupada would often say that first Kurukshetra Leela and then Rasa Leela or we see Krishna says understand my pastime Tattvataha in 4.19 understand them in truth Krishna says and then further in the case of Leela when Krishna speaks certain things for enhancing the Leela and we have to understand that that is for the sake of enhancing Rasa and to the extent that it agrees with the ultimate Tattva that Krishna has taught elsewhere in the scripture when he is speaking Tattva to that extent it is accepted otherwise it is recognized as a statement for enhancing Rasa sometimes Krishna may even speak apparent untruths Krishna may tell Eswar Dama that I have not stolen butter or I have not eaten mud so these are what Krishna speaks for the sake of Rasa so now in the case of Govardhan Leela Krishna speaks here that actually the rains are produced by our karma so therefore if we do our karma then the rains will automatically come there is no need for us to do any Yajna so why should we do any Yajna to Indra and Krishna by speaking this wants to cure Indra of the pride and possessiveness that have gripped him pride that I am the controller and possessiveness that this Yajna these people will perform for my sake and I will be glorified through that Yajna so it is my position and my glorification that is his center of the world and Krishna wants to free him from that misplaced center and bring him to the real center of devotion to Supreme Lord therefore Krishna speaks this to arouse the anger of Indra so what Krishna speaks in the Bhagavatam in the 24th chapter of the 10th Canto is Karma Vimamsa and he for example says that actually if we have done our karma then Indra has to give rains and if we have not done karma then Indra will not give rains whatever we do so therefore there is no need for us to do Yajna now actually Krishna tells in the 3rd chapter of the Bhagavad Gita Yajna Karma Samudbhava so yes we have to do Karma and one part of doing Karma is doing Yajna Samudbhava means born with it so from Karma arises Yajna that means it is not just enough for us to do our duties in terms of farming plowing the field or taking care of the cows by giving them water and feeding them bathing them that is also a Karma but along with Karma Yajna Karma Samudbhava doing Yajna is also our Karma so all of us we have material duty and spiritual duty so our material duty may be we have a job we have to take care of our family but along with that we have spiritual duty and that is to chant Hare Krishna and connect ourselves with Krishna in Kaliyuga Sankirtan Yajna is what is prescribed for us but when Krishna is talking with Arjuna sorry Krishna is talking with the Vrajavasis now we say that you don’t have to do Yajna to Indra but then he says do Yajna and we ask them to do Yajna we have to govardhan so the point is Krishna is not really rejecting the principle of Yajna entirely he is simply directing it away from Indra to aggravate the anger of Indra so he is telling that direct this sacrifice to Govardhan because he is the person who we are indebted to and now as the pastime evolves and as the Acharyas develop the expression further based on other relevant scriptures Govardhan is non-different from Krishna so in a sense Krishna by telling the Vrajavasis that worship Govardhan instead of worshiping Indra through this pastime is instructing all of us that we should worship the Supreme Lord Govardhan is non-different from Krishna so worship of Govardhan is non-different from worship of Krishna and it says Krishna says in 18.66 it gives up all varieties of religion so giving up all varieties of religion includes giving up Indra Puja and focusing on the worship of Krishna so that is what Krishna is indirectly telling but he is telling it in a way that will provoke Indra’s anger Krishna could very well have told that we should not worship Indra he is a Devata but above that there is Vishnu and we should worship him but then Indra also knows that Vishnu is Supreme and he would have not got aggravated by that and his pride would not have become purified so his pride really got piqued, pinched and piqued when he found that he had been left aside for the sake of a mountain, one ordinary mountain on the earthly planetary system which is far below the planetary system where he himself lives so that was a scathing insult for Indra and it infuriated his anger and through that after he demonstrated his full power and it proved to be insignificant against Krishna’s power then Indra’s pride became humbled and he became purified so this is a part of Krishna’s plan so is Krishna entirely rejecting the principle of yajna although he is speaking such words he is saying that ultimately all rules are supreme if we do good we will get good there is no need to worship God but the Vedic understanding is that an integral part of doing good is worshipping God in fact that is the best way of doing good so yajna karma samudbhava means doing good, karma is su-karma it is doing good but an integral part of doing good is yajna, yajna is worshipping God if we try to do good without worshipping God then that is the goodness of honesty among thieves who have taken the property of God and trying to honestly divide it among themselves so karmam imamsa is wrong because it assumes that the laws are supreme but it does not recognize that the laws as well as the whole material world over which the laws act they are all made by Supreme Lord and they are all under his jurisdiction so everything belongs to Supreme Lord and the yajna is the way by which we acknowledge his supremacy so yes we have to act properly we have to act responsibly but Prabhupada did not equate yajna with taxes so a citizen has to obey the laws of the country but along with that the citizen wants water supply the citizen has to give the water tax so somebody may say oh it is good enough for me to just be a good citizen there is no need to pay the water tax no being a good citizen includes paying the water tax similarly doing good, being good includes worshipping the Supreme Lord and doing yajna to worship the Supreme Lord so what Krishna does is he honors the principle of yajna but by directing that yajna’s object of worship away from Indra towards Govardhan he humbles Indra’s pride and for the perceptive observers demonstrates that actually the Supreme Lord or his devotees should be worshipped Supreme Lord Govardhan should manifest in Supreme Lord only should be worshipped so that means Krishna does something contextual over there that is purify Indra of his pride and does something universal the universal message is not there is no Supreme but rather the deeper message is that there is a Supreme alone who should be worshipped and now if Krishna is speaking something how can that be wrong actually as I said when Krishna performs leela the purpose of leela is to enhance loving exchanges and also to enhance the opportunity for others to enter into that world of love and that love is the ultimate truth so in a relative moral sense we could say that this is true and that is false but in the absolute sense that which takes us closer to the ultimate truth that is the real truth so whatever Krishna does in the leela that enables the devotees to enter deeper into the truth of bhakti of prema for Krishna and enables other people also to come closer to that truth so in that sense it is the truth whatever Krishna speaks so Krishna enabled the Brajwasis to relish his darshan and he enjoyed beholding them continuously for 7 days and 7 nights through the Govardhan Leela and he also purified Indira of pride and brought her closer to the bliss of sincere servitude so in this way Krishna actually helped everyone come closer to the absolute truth of pure love for God and in that sense what Krishna has done is the absolute truth but we have to understand that in the Vedic scriptures there is a hierarchy and there is nirnayak tattva and there is nirnayatar tattva there is nirnayak shastra and there is nirnayatar shastra nirnayak is decisive and nirnayatar is to be decided just like in certain law cases there may be multiple laws which apply for example if somebody kills that person should be punished but if somebody is defending oneself then self-defense is considered to be a fundamental right so say if a murderer was going to kill a person and the person defends oneself and while defending the person kills the murderer then there are two different laws are there then we have to understand which is the higher law is this the principle of punishing a murderer the higher law or is the principle of self-defense and doing whatever is required to self-defense the higher law and depending on whichever is the higher law then the proper justice has to be given so just as in ordinary law there has to be a understanding of precedence similarly within the Vedic scriptures also there are levels and Krishna himself talks about multiple levels when he tells in 2.45 in the Bhagavad Gita when he says that he is himself given the Vedas he will later on say Vedanta Krut Veda Videh Vachaham and the Upanishads say that the Vedas come from the Supreme Lord and he says I am the creator of Vedas and Vedanta but then he is also saying over here that ultimately give up the Vedas because you have to go beyond the three modes so therefore if there is any statement from the Rajasic, Tamasic, Puranas and then the statement from the Vedas is accepted as a higher authority so same way, when Krishna speaks something as a matter of philosophical instruction then that philosophical instruction is considered to be the highest truth in terms of Tattva and then within Leela if Krishna speaks something else then we understand that is for the purpose of enhancing Rasa so that is also true and we can describe from some analytical points of view how that is true but from the point of philosophical truth that which is taught as Tattva is true in fact there are many statements in the Srimad Bhagavatam which by this understanding we have to contextualize for example in the 7th Canto in the chapters where Hiranyakashyapu does puja, does tapasya to please Brahmaji and when Brahmaji appears Hiranyakashyapu glorifies Brahmaji as if Brahmaji is Supreme now Hiranyakashyapu is not speaking the he is not giving Vaishnava Siddhanta he is simply trying to flatter Brahmaji to get to carry favour from him to extract the boon of immortality so those statements can be understood in one sense as to the way Prabhupada takes it that you know that is the Achintya Viharave Tattva and Brahmaji also has the Amsha opulences of Vishnu and in that sense this glorification is going to Vishnu not to Brahmaji in another sense we also understand that it is not that Hiranyakashyapu is teaching absolute Siddhanta Hiranyakashyapu is simply flattering so when we see a particular event we have to look at its context and then understand whether what is being spoken is the absolute truth or is a contextual statement so what to speak of a demon like Hiranyakashyapu even sometimes a devata like Brahmaji when in the fourth canto when Daksha, Daksha pastime happens and first Sati is killed and Daksha Yajna is devastated by Virabhadra then Brahmaji goes to appease Lord Shiva and there Vishwanath Jyotaka describes while in the abode of Lord Shiva Brahmaji accepts the mood of a Shaivite and although Brahmaji is the father of Shiva there he offers prayers as if Shiva is supreme so in that particular context considering what has happened in the pastime earlier we have to understand that this is a truth because Shiva is in one sense not different from Vishnu but in another sense this is a contextual glorification so Chakravarthipada explains this point that here he is adopting the mood of a Shaivite so in this way every statement that is made in the scripture we have to see what is the context and then understand whether that is speaking referring to absolute truth or not so for example what Krishna speaks in the Bhagavad Gita is a clear setting where Arjuna and Krishna are having a serious discussion Arjuna is asking probing questions and Krishna is giving philosophically profound answers so what is spoken in such answers is the absolute truth and what will be spoken in pastimes has to be understood so first we have to understand the Tattva and then look at the Leela and look at Janma and Karma and then when we understand it then we will see how in Krishna’s intimate associate, intimate circle Krishna lets her love reign supreme so Krishna is such a God, such a wonderful God, he loves love so much that in his abode he doesn’t himself reign supreme nor does he let truth reign supreme Krishna subordinates himself and Krishna subordinates truth so that love can reign supreme so he conceals in his pastimes his own divinity because then his parents and other associates can love him more intensely then they would have been able to if they would have considered him to be God and similarly Krishna subordinates truth he lets people think that he is not, he doesn’t necessarily always speak the truth he speaks whatever is suitable to enhance love and in this way this is the glory of Krishna Leela which we will understand as a glory only when we understand the Tattva otherwise we will misunderstand why Krishna is speaking things like this and we will become bewildered but once we understand Tattva and then look at the Leela then our heart cannot but fall in love with a God who loves love so much that he lets truth and even himself become subordinated so that love can reign supreme