Why do many Vedic sages engage in behavior that is lower than the moral standards of modern Vedic practitioners and even many modern atheists?

Vedic sages like Brihaspati cohabit with other’s wives, whereas today’s devotees follow the regulative principles. Many atheists also follow moral principles.

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna. Question, why is it that some Vedic sages and some Vedic personalities like Brihaspati or others seem to have moral behavior which is lower than that of modern day Krishna conscious practitioners and even many modern atheists? If Kali Yuga is the lowest of ages, then shouldn’t the moral standards of Kali Yuga be lower, not higher than that of previous ages? Answer, Sri Prabhupada through Krishna consciousness has not just given us Vedic culture.
He has given us the best of Vedic culture. What does that mean? In the Vedic culture there is karma kanda, there is jnana kanda and there is bhakti. So bhakti is the culmination.
And even the Bhagavatam says that the bhaktas are very rare. So it says that Among Mahamunis, there are a few who are devoted to Krishna. So what does this mean? This means that even in Vedic times, devotional service was rare.
And that’s why Bhakti is sudurlabha, it is rarely achieved. So what Sri Prabhupada has given us to Krishna consciousness is a rare and topmost gift of the Vedic literature and that is the mercy of the Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. That which is the topmost has been given to people who are the lowermost.
So we Kaliva people are not qualified to get the process of Krishna consciousness. But it is a gift that has been given to us. So now is it a moral standard? For example, say we may see that in the past sages may not have been following, may act in ways which seem contrary to the moral principles, like eating meat or having some illicit relationship with somebody else, not a marital relationship.
So I have talked about Brihaspati elaborately in a separate answer. But the point is, these are in no way held as models by the Bhagavatam, especially not these behaviors. So Brihaspati is a Devarshi, but he is not a model of the Bhagavatam.
The model of the Bhagavatam is the devotees and Brihaspati is more of a priest than a devotee. So he is not held as a model primarily, but he is an example of a Pramana who is to be respected. But the Vedic scriptures, especially the Bhagavatam, while focusing on the principle of pure devotional service, also gives a chronological report of how the, not a systematic chronological report, but a chronological report of the various dynasties in which the Lord has descended.
And while doing that, passingly describes some other pastimes also. So these are meant to act as lessons of how we should not act, not that they are meant to act as models of this is how these people used to regularly act. Those were occasional lapses that happened and they are serious misdeeds.
So the Bhagavatam doesn’t describe routine events. It either describes extraordinarily positive events or extraordinarily negative events. There is no place in the Bhagavatam where immorality by any of its characters is condoned or glorified.
It is treated in a negative way. Definitely. If we see the Bhagavatam from its perspective of what it talks of as its worldview, The only pure devotional service to the Lord can satisfy.
Now coming to the question about Atheists having higher morality sometimes. Different people come from different backgrounds. So if somebody has lived sattvically in a previous life or has been born and brought up in a sattvic family, then that person may have some sattvic culture and sattvic behavior.
Now we have to understand that sattva guna is not necessarily devotional or even spiritual. It is conducive to spirituality, but it is not spirituality. And one of the characteristics of sattva guna is that it binds a person.
So atheism, if it is gross and sensuous and involves violence and immorality, then it is tamasic. Now atheism itself as a worldview is tamasic. It doesn’t see the totality of reality.
But while the modes can influence a person intellectually and they can influence a person culturally. So intellectually the atheism as a philosophy is in the mode of all over modes, either passion or even ignorance. But as a culture it is not necessary that the person who is in ignorance, whose worldview is in ignorance will necessarily live everywhere everything ignorantly.
This is devotees, many devotees, the Bhagavatam talks about devotional service in the three modes of material nature, goodness, passion, ignorance. So if somebody is practicing devotional service, that means the person understands Krishna is supreme, understands that I have to go back to Krishna. The worldview is transcendental.
But still the person’s practices may be in ignorance or passion or goodness in the Bhagavatam 6. Or of course they can be transcendental for advanced devotees. But the point is the intellectual mode affecting us, the intellectual mode of our worldview and the cultural mode of our living, they don’t necessarily have to gel all the time. So atheists because of certain cultural upbringing may have some regulation and they may be following certain principles.
So they may be practicing morality at some level. But their morality is generally not due to their worldview. It is in spite of their worldview.
Actually within the atheistic worldview materialism offers very little motives to be moral. This is the all life I have and the goal of life is to enjoy. Then morality is used primarily on a utilitarian basis.
There is no intrinsic value given to morality. And at times it can be dispensed when the need comes up, when one faces some pressure or gets some temptation. So this is not to say that all atheists have to be moral.
But the point is that the morality of the atheists is not because of but in spite of their atheism. It’s because of the force of their past culture continuing on and their intellectual worldview is tamasic. But because of some utilitarian considerations, for example, people may think that, oh, the ecology is in great danger and to be destroyed.
Therefore, we should be very green conscious. Now, that is nothing transcendental in it. So it’s based on survival instinct itself.
So overall, we need to understand that we certainly need to look at a person’s lifestyle. But along with that, we also have to look at the person’s worldview, because without the two being together, we cannot understand what the person’s heart is. And the Bhagavatam gives us the lifestyles of different people.
Some of those lifestyles contain serious lapses. But beyond that, the Bhagavatam also gives us a spiritual worldview, which is centered on God. That is what it holds as sacred.
And then it gives us many models of those who are living according to that worldview, like say Prahlad Maharaj, who rejected everything of this world for the sake of Vishnu. The Gopis also. There are many models of exalted devotees.
And that is the worldview to which everybody should aspire if they want to follow the Bhagavatam. Other examples are incidental to the flow of the Bhagavatam. And they should be seen as lapses on the side of people who were overall within the Vedic framework, trying to live a life according to Vedic principles.
They in those pastimes indicate the power of temptation to drag a person down. And we should be very careful for ourselves that we need to follow high moral principles. And by following the highest moral principles, we not only make rapid spiritual advancement, but also we set a good example by which people become attracted.
People get confused, especially when they see religious people behaving immorally and when they see atheistic people behaving morally. So it creates a profound moral confusion within them. That’s why it’s extraordinarily essential that devotees behave in moral ways and the scriptural examples of immorality among religious personalities be understood for what they are, not as models of what is to be done, but as examples of what can happen if one is not careful, as warning signals of how we need to be careful.
So it is not that intrinsically and eternally the moral principles of modern people, modern Krishna conscious practitioners are higher than of Vedic sages. We have to use the word Vedic sages very generically. It can refer to many people.
But when we talk about moral Vedic sages, they are the devotees, the pure devotees. And our moral standards are nowhere near theirs. Who among us has to sacrifice everything like for halal for the sake of our devotion? And similarly, the atheists also, because of their culture, they may be doing some morality right now, but we have to see both the cultural side and the intellectual side and both are combined in a person.
Then we understand that kind of behavior to be the moral behavior. And that is the blend of a moral worldview and moral behavior is the right example that we should emulate in our life.