71: The Function of the Soul

CHAPTER 16, TEXT 21: There are three gates leading to this hell – lust, anger and greed. Every sane man should give these up, for they lead to the degradation of the soul.

One evening many years ago, I was traveling on a bus. The driver of the bus, an elderly, spiritual man, was having a conversation with another traveler, and I eavesdropped on their conversation. 

The man asked, "What is the function of the soul?"

The traveler was silent. My ears perked up and I leaned in to hear the man answer his own question:

"To desire. The function of the soul is to desire," 

Those simple words rang with an eternal truth, and they have echoed in my mind in the many years since. Interesting, no? I can still remember the deep blue evening light, the headlights from oncoming vehicles, the silhouettes of spiky trees as they rushed by. Those words anchor me to that time and space: The function of the soul is to desire. 

I have seen this eternal truth play out in my life and in the world.

When the soul is in touch with material energy, that eternal propensity to desire transforms into lust. Trying to satisfy the soul's eternal, spiritual desires with temporary, material things is a recipe for frustration, drama, and pain. I speak from experience, here, and I'm sure anyone reading this post would say the same. 

In this verse of the Gita, Krishna is saying that there are three gates leading to hell - lust, anger, and greed. Prabhupad emphasizes, though, that lust is the origin: "One tries to satisfy his lust, and when he cannot, anger and greed arise." Note that Prabhupad writes that one "tries" to satisfy lust, but he "cannot" - it is simply impossible to satisfy lust, like trying to put out a raging fire by feeding it logs soaked with gasoline. It is eventual that one will get to the point of anger and an even more inflamed greed. In verse 12 of this chapter, Krishna describes that an ungodly person is "bound by a network of hundreds of thousands of desires" which is not an exaggeration. Hundreds of thousands of desires may even be an understatement. Those desires lead to the degradation of the soul, as Krishna says in this verse. 

Why? Where does lust come from, this raging fire of desire?

The soul. 

The function of the soul is to desire. 

To quench this fire of desire IS impossible, because to do so would snuff out our very existence. 

The key, then, is to understand that this nature to desire something and someone, always, is divine. Originally, the soul desires to love and be loved, and ultimately to love God and be loved by God. 

The whole process of bhakti yoga is about taking those tendencies of the soul offering them to Krishna. In this way the soul is not degraded, but uplifted.  

Desire Krishna. Desire to serve, desire to connect, desire to love. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/16/21/

70: Looking in the Mirror

CHAPTER 16, TEXT 17: Self-complacent and always impudent, deluded by wealth and false prestige, [the demons] sometimes proudly perform sacrifices in name only, without following any rules or regulations.

The 16th Chapter is entitled "The Divine and Demoniac Natures". I don't know about you, but the word "demoniac" or "demon" brings to mind a red, horned devil with a tail, cackling in hell. 

This is not what is meant when Krishna speaks about the "demons" or "the demoniac." The root Sanskrit word for divine beings (demigods) who favor God is the word sura. These beings possess divine qualities, such as truthfulness, self-control, and modesty (16.1). The word for "demon" is asura, which by the prefix a- tells us that these beings are the opposite of suras - those who oppose God, negate His existence, and possess a host of negative qualities such as lust, impudence, and false prestige (as stated above). 

The demigods and demons are not mythical creatures that hold epic battles in the sky over good and evil. The point of this sixteenth chapter is not to give us a lesson in Hindu cosmology or lore. 

This sixteenth chapter is meant to be a mirror that we hold up to our own hearts. We are meant to read these verses and identify when these qualities resonate in our lives - am I cultivating my divine nature?

Or am I cultivating my demoniac nature? 

I know it's a simplistic, cliched image, but there is even a modern equivalent of this struggle between choosing the divine or the demoniac: the angel and the devil on your shoulder. 

Often, though, this struggle is depicted as a rather vague struggle of conscience and "choosing the right thing" - whatever the "right" thing is (good luck with that). 

The 16th chapter makes this process clear with excruciating detail. An excruciating detail from this Text 17 is the phrase "without following any rules or regulations." Following rules and regulations is a concrete, powerful way to look in the mirror to determine whether one is cultivating a divine or demoniac nature. Rules and regulations are meant to elevate the soul to the mode of goodness, to bring about clean and pure habits. But when rules and regulations are disregarded, this is a red flag that one is sliding towards a demoniac nature. Prabhupad writes, "The word avidhi-pūrvakam, meaning a disregard for the rules and regulations, is especially stressed here." How come? Aren't rules and regulations just restrictions on the spirit, ways to suppress and oppress? 

We find a healthy application of rules and regulations in all spheres of life, from the rules and regulations of a highway, to health codes for restaurants to follow in the preparation and serving of food, to building codes, to the way a school or government or business is run. If one is to drive or serve food or construct a building or manage a government with any degree of success, rules and regulations must be followed. 

This same principle is applied for spiritual life - there are rules and regulations to follow in order to advance on the spiritual path with any success. A defining feature of a rule or regulation is that it is not only applied by one person on a whim - they are applied to any and all people who are participating in that  process. Meaning, there is a somewhat universal standard. 

But "the demons, however, do not care for such restrictions. They think that whatever path one can create is one’s own path; there is no such thing as a standard path one has to follow." Creating one's own path or believing that everything is all relative is a negative tendency, a trait that leads one to cultivate the demoniac nature. 

Why? 

How come not following a standard path is considered so... wrong? What could be so bad about creating something new - you know, blazing a new trail and stuff? 

Often, the desire to not follow a rule or regulation is from a kind of weakness of heart, not because one actually wants to revolutionize the world and do something positive. This "creating" of one's own path is often a guise for a few ways to avoid surrender. 

One - avoid the vulnerable and scary process of submitting to an authority and a higher order, especially if full trust has not been established. 

For example, "My new principal is telling me to write all of these detailed lesson plans in this particular way? Oh whatever, she doesn't know what she's talking about, I'll do them my own way." 

Or, "My spiritual teacher is telling me to lay off the alcohol? He doesn't understand the pain I'm going through with the loss of my mother, I'll drink when and how I need to,"

Two - avoid the hard or frustrating work of actually following a regulation.

For example, "To make sure we follow this building code, we'll have to spend thousands of dollars to hire an architect! We'll just do it our own way..." 

Or, "Vedic scriptures say I should not eat cow? Well, I'll eat free-range beef, at least the cows had a happy life," 

No matter what reasons or excuses are given to not follow a rule or regulation, these are often ways we avoid surrender. We avoid surrender "due to ignorance and illusion." If we had full knowledge, we would see that following the rules and regulations benefits not only ourselves but others, even the entire world. 

Following speed limits, health codes, and building codes is meant to prevent pain and drama and hardship. Rules and regulations are for our own good! They seem restricting but actually offer the greatest freedom. 

Cultivating a demoniac nature is about taking the easy, lazy way out, compromising one's integrity in the process. 

Cultivating a divine nature is about taking the hard, strenuous path which strengthens one's integrity and cleanses the heart. 

I'll finish this post with one of my favorite quotes: 

“If you are willing to do only what's easy, life will be hard. But if you are willing to do what's hard, life will be easy.” - Harv Eker

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/16/17/

69: A Divine Dialogue

Creative Expression: Found Poem

This post is in the format of a Found Poem - the words in italics, bold, or underline are words taken directly from the verse and/or purport. The words in standard font are my own words. 

A Divine Dialogue 

(Chapter 11, Text 44, 53, 54)

You are the Supreme Lord, 

to be worshiped by every living being. 

But I have shoved You away

My lip curled in a sneer 

Time after time. 

Still you come back to me

Time after time

Your eyes fixed on mine

waiting for me to turn to You

with soft eyes.

One day 

the realization pierces the armor of my heart

and I see that

You are the Supreme Lord, 

to be worshiped by every living being. 

So I fall down to offer You my respectful obeisances 

and ask Your mercy.

Please forgive me

 As a father tolerates the impudence of his son, 

a friend the impertinence of a friend, 

or a husband the familiarity of his wife, 

please tolerate the wrongs I may have done You.

With soft eyes, you tell me

"I cannot be understood simply 

by studying the Vedas, 

nor by undergoing serious penances, 

nor by charity, 

nor by worship.

These efforts are iron coins 

in the currency of your heart," 

You say,

"Worthless to me.

I desire the gold of your heart

undivided devotional service.

You stand before me

to beg forgiveness

and my own heart meets yours

in this way

I can be understood as I am, 

standing before you, 

and can thus be seen directly. 

Only in this way 

With the gold of your heart -

humility, gentleness, service, love - 

can you enter into the mysteries 

of My understanding."

68: Controversial Protection

CHAPTER 16, TEXT 7: Those who are demoniac do not know what is to be done and what is not to be done. Neither cleanliness nor proper behavior nor truth is found in them.

In this purport, Srila Prabhupad writes some very controversial statements about women. Let's jump right to them, shall we?

He writes, "Now, in the Manu-saṁhitā it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom. That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like children."

Whoo boy. 

There are often two ways to go with statements like these: 

1) Reject the statements and declare Srila Prabhupad to be a backwards man who was raised in an archaic India and he is lost in ancient, inapplicable laws and espouses dangerous ideas, 

or

2) Go fire-and-brimstone and declare that women should literally not be given freedom at all and Ruth Bader Ginsberg was a bane on human society. 

So either reject these words or take them like fire. 

There's a third option here: carefully consider these words with an open mind and reflective heart. 

Prabhupad is quoting from an ancient scriptural guidebook, Manu-samhita, on the best ways for human society to function. Let's look for the kernel of truth here, and I find it in the statement "women are like children." Not that women are immature and infantilized. Women are simply more directed by emotions and are prone to make decisions based on those emotions - like children. 

Look, I'm a woman and I have a Master's Degree and graduated with honors. I have job experience in education from various parts of the world and in several prestigious institutions. I could list quite a few other experiences on my resume that demonstrate that I am an intelligent, driven, successful woman. 

And I speak with 100% understanding that yes, I resonate with the statement that "women are like children." How come? I am often overpowered by emotion. While I do not speak for all women, I know that there are women who resonate with this experience. I sometimes - oftentimes - want to make a [life] decision based on an emotion, but only when I check in with my husband does he get me to come to reason. As a whole, the masculine is driven by reason and logic, and this is what makes men - traditionally - more able to lead a household. 

That said, for the Manu-samhita to state that women should not be given freedom is controversial indeed; surely millennia of abuse in the name of scripture has transpired in India based on this lawbook's verse. 

Let's see what Prabhupad continues to say. He writes, "The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they think that women should be given as much freedom as men. However, this has not improved the social condition of the world." Fascinating point. Ruth Bader Ginsberg championed for women to have all the same rights as men, from buying a home in her own name to having a credit card in her own name. Surely this is a step forward for society, right? That women have greater freedom?

But what was the goal of increasing a woman's capacity for freedom? To improve the social condition of the world. Prabhupad states here, though, that these increased freedoms have not improved the social condition of the world. This seems to go against modern understanding of the evolution of society. On objective scales, women are gradually getting paid just as much as men (census.gov), women are given positions to lead companies and organizations and women are even increasingly become religious leaders. How is this not an improvement on social conditions of the world? 

Those points of improvement, though, are not actually social improvement, because proper social behavior, according to the Manu-samhita, is the healthy functioning of the family - marriage, children, and old age. How do we deal with these social conditions? Are we improving? 

For the improvement of the family, the statistics show that we are not (census.gov). Households lead by women are double the rate of poverty compared to those lead by men or married-couple households. Almost a third of people on government assistance are women and children (lexingtonlaw.com) and almost two thirds of people on government assistance (Medicaid) are the elderly. This means that women, children, and elderly people are not being taken care of by their families, so the government must step in. If the government must step in, then according to the Manu-samhita, the family and social conditions are not improving. 

What is interesting, though, is the ideal that Prabhupad points out: "Actually, a woman should be given protection at every stage of life. She should be given protection by the father in her younger days, by the husband in her youth, and by the grownup sons in her old age. This is proper social behavior according to the Manu-saṁhitā." The emphasis here is that a woman is given protection. If a woman is not given protection, she must a) be her own protection, which calls upon women to imbibe more masculine qualities in order to not be taken advantage of or b) if she is put into a vulnerable situation, such as getting pregnant or getting old, and a man is not there to protect her, the government must protect her. Government housing, government food stamps, government services. 

The bigger problem, then, is that there seem to be a lack of men - fathers, husbands, or sons - to actually protect women. Women in society nowadays often grow up without a father or he's in and out. Often women don't get married or have a domestic partner, or maybe they get married and then get a divorce; either way, a steady, reliable husband isn't really there. And if a woman has a son, he often grows up without a father to model after, or even if the father is there and there's a nice family, there's little cultural support or expectation that he help his mother in her old age - hence the massive amount of elderly people on government assistance.

In this way, women are in a tough spot. They're supposed to be protected by men all their lives, but those men are not stepping up to the plate. What's a woman to do? 

This confusion, this "not knowing of what is to be done or what is not to be done" is a trademark of "demoniac" civilization. Although Prabhupad is talking  about women here, he is also talking about men. He is indirectly given men an instruction:

Be a protector. 

Be the father, the husband, or the son that your daughter, wife, or mother needs. Be a man and protect her. She needs you, even though it may not seem so. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/16/7/

U.S. Census: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/09/payday-poverty-and-women.html#:~:text=Poverty%20Rate%20Declines%20for%20Women,not%20statistically%20different%20from%202017.

Welfare Statistics: https://www.lexingtonlaw.com/blog/finance/welfare-statistics.html

67: Grateful for the Sting

CHAPTER 15, TEXT 20: This is the most confidential part of the Vedic scriptures, O sinless one, and it is disclosed now by Me. Whoever understands this will become wise, and his endeavors will know perfection.

For about three years of my life, my suitcase was partially or fully (very fully) packed. For three years, I lived in almost a dozen different rooms, apartments, and houses in all parts of the world.

When I began to settle down and at last moved in with my husband after we got married, I became obsessed with staying in one place. I abhorred even the idea of getting on a plane. I gave my suitcases to Goodwill with a "good riddance!" 

I then became obsessed with setting up our home. I would sometimes cackle to myself, "This is my kitchen, my bedroom, my apartment, my clothes, it's mine, all mine!" Over the past five years I have spent thousands of dollars on buying furniture, decor, plants, clothing, shoes, kitchen tools, and more plants. I must confess, I'm still consumed, because we have moved once again and are setting up our home again. 

I have become aware of a needle that jabs at my heart the more I feed this desire to buy and buy and buy. That jabbing weakens me. Over the years I have felt the sting and the resulting weakness build. 

How come this shopaholicism relates at all to this verse of the Gita where Krishna is describing a wise man who will know perfection? 

Prabhupad writes how the word "anagha" is significant in this verse because it means that Krishna is addressing Arjuna as "O sinless one." This means that to know Krishna we must be free of all material contamination and bad karma. The loophole, though, is that "devotional service is so pure and potent that once one is engaged in devotional service he automatically comes to the stage of sinlessness." This is good news for all of us, because Krishna has described devotional service as so easy that one can simply offer a leaf, flower, fruit or water with love and Krishna will accept (9.26). By such a simple, painless process, we can all become sinless. 

So if devotional service is that easy, how come we're not all doing it? How come we're not all wise and how come we're all so very far away from perfection? 

Weakness of heart, Prabhupad says. 

He writes, "The most important thing one has to surmount is weakness of the heart."

This weakness of heart determines more of our destiny than any bad karma. After all, bad karma can be lessened or even erased by devotional service. But when our very character is weak, then this is the greatest, most important thing to overcome. After all, all bad karma stems from a weakness of heart - that is what created all the negative reactions in the first place. 

So what is weakness of heart? 

"The first falldown is caused by the desire to lord it over material nature."

This is where we come back to my obsession with things. I had been so detached from my belongings and home and clothes for so long that I swung in the other direction and became obsessed with, shall we say, lording it over material nature. I became the lord of my apartment, and triumph flooded me - this place is all mine, muahaha! 

That triumph still floods me. I relish in buying more and more things, and I'm never satiated. Always looking for the next conquest to purchase. 

But the needle in my heart is beginning to sting and even make me go numb. When I get so absorbed in lording over material nature, "one gives up the transcendental loving service of the Supreme Lord." I'm so attached to material things that I feel a numbness to even performing a simple act here or there of love - you know, offer a leaf. 

A leaf, man, that's it. 

But no, I'd rather go buy a dress. Or a chair. Or a mirror. For us. Well, for me. 

From this first weakness of heart, the desire to lord it over material nature, comes the second weakness of heart, which "is that as one increases the propensity to lord it over material nature, he becomes attached to matter and the possession of matter." In this way, I become more attached and more absorbed in the possession of matter than the expression of service to the Lord. I want to enjoy myself, not have God enjoy. I am in the center, not God. 

Prabhupad concludes, "The problems of material existence are due to these weaknesses of the heart."

As long as I cultivate this weakness of my heart to lord it over material nature, so will the numbness continue to grow until I can no longer even fold my palms in prayer. 

Once again I am writing this post, unsure how to conclude because I honestly do not have a straight solution for you. It seems far too simplistic to simply say, "I shall stop lording over material nature," snap my fingers and *poof* all gone! There go my desires! Now I can engage in devotional service again! 

As I write, I realize that the only thing I can do is be aware that I even have a weakness of heart. There are plenty of people on this planet who are plagued with shopaholicsm on either or tiny or gargantuan scale who have no idea that it's a weakness of heart. They're just going along, looking for the next high by buying the next thing, not even aware that they're numbing their hearts more and more and more, the weakness draining their vitality. 

So at the very least, I am aware. I feel the sting. And in that sense, I am grateful for the sting. Maybe that's the first step of wisdom.

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/15/20/

66: Reality Always Wins

CHAPTER 15, TEXT 5: Those who are free from false prestige, illusion and false association, who understand the eternal, who are done with material lust, who are freed from the dualities of happiness and distress, and who, unbewildered, know how to surrender unto the Supreme Person attain to that eternal kingdom.

Scientists are the usual go-to people to find out the data, the facts, the reality of this world. Scientists break down the functions of the body, calculate the patterns of weather, and discover new ways to combine elements. They rely on cold hard facts to conduct experiments, and they use the scientific method to ensure that their process is legitimate. 

Scientists are who we, as a human society, rely upon to make sense of the world. 

So much of the Gita, though, emphasizes that human society cannot distinguish reality from illusion. This verse of the Gita uses the words "false", "illusion", and "being free" and "unbewildered" multiple times. Material scientists are minimized as a source for understanding reality; if we want to understand reality, we must approach a spiritual teacher, we must approach scripture to understand what is false and how to be free. 

A basic principle of reality that human beings cannot seem to grasp is that we will all die. All of us. Every single one of us. Believing that we shall live forever, we build a life thinking it will last forever and thus feel a sense of pride in self, family, and country. Prabhupad writes, "Pride is due to illusion, for although one comes here, stays for a brief time and then goes away, he has the foolish notion that he is the lord of the world." The phrase here "lord of the world" is significant - even men and women who are leaders of great countries or have vast amounts of wealth will die one day and be forgotten in the sands of time. What to speak of all of us non-royal, non-wealthy, non-talented little people down here - you know, 99.999% of the world. We will all just vanish into thin air when death claims us. BUT STILL - even us little people believe we are lords of the world. 

Even us. 

This is illusion. 

But because we believe we're lords of the world, "[T]hus [we] makes all things complicated, and [we are] always in trouble. The whole world moves under this impression." For example, modern human society invents complicated machines to speed up the process of doing laundry, cooking, and transportation. But then we create so many other problems, namely air pollution, landfills, and waterway contamination. In this way we're always in trouble - one material solution creates a hundred problems. 

Ultimately, "People are considering the land, this earth, to belong to human society, and they have divided the land under the false impression that they are the proprietors. One has to get out of this false notion that human society is the proprietor of this world." Prabhupad says the word "false" twice here - false means that the understanding is incorrect and not based on reality. In this world we operate under this principle, that human society is the pinnacle of existence, and that we own all the land and animals and plants on the planet. But how is that? How do humans have the absolute say? Prabhupad asserts that we must "get out" of this false notion. We are not the proprietors of anyone. 

Prabhupad writes that "One has to cultivate knowledge of what is actually his own and what is actually not his own." So then what IS our own? Do I even own anything? Honestly, after reading this verse and purport, I'm not even sure. Is it possible for a spirit soul to own anything? Well, I guess I own my choices. That's the only reality I can be sure of. 

"When one has an understanding of things as they are, he becomes free from all dual conceptions such as happiness and distress, pleasure and pain." The goal of scientists is to solve the world's problems, to increase happiness and decrease distress, to increase pleasure and decrease pain. But the goal of the transcendentalist is to rise above these dualities, understanding that they will ebb and flow like the tide for eternity. This is reality. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/15/5/

65: Transcendental Bystander

 Arjuna asks three questions to Krishna (Chapter 14, Verse 21) and Krishna responds with the below verses (22-25), which are traditionally grouped together. I will be focusing on the words and phrases that I bold and underline.  

CHAPTER 14, TEXTS 22-25: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: O son of Pāṇḍu, he who does not hate illumination, attachment and delusion when they are present or long for them when they disappear; who is unwavering and undisturbed through all these reactions of the material qualities, remaining neutral and transcendental, knowing that the modes alone are active; who is situated in the self and regards alike happiness and distress; who looks upon a lump of earth, a stone and a piece of gold with an equal eye; who is equal toward the desirable and the undesirable; who is steady, situated equally well in praise and blame, honor and dishonor; who treats alike both friend and enemy; and who has renounced all material activities – such a person is said to have transcended the modes of nature.

Talking about religion and saying the word "God" is now taboo. But the soul craves some kind of way to seek righteousness through reform and behavior. As a result, social and political issues and involvement seem to be the new religion. 

On the social level, there's the Me Too movement, Black Lives Matter, LGBTQ+ equality and pride, affirmative action, school shootings, abortion, and many more.

On the political level, there's the matter of Donald Trump being president, America's handling of its borders with Mexico, illegal immigrants, North Korea, involvement in the Paris Climate Agreement, voting, and many more.   

Of course, social and political issues overlap - Black Lives Matter is sometimes considered a political issue, the handling of illegal immigrants sometimes considered a social issue. In either case, in the past few years there seem to be marches and protests and riots on a regular basis; the people who participate are fighting for their voices and opinion to be heard, for a change to be made.

From what I have observed on social media and in person, the engagement with these issues escalates to an almost religious fervor. If one chooses to not engage with any or all of these issues, one runs the risk of being a "bystander" - one who just lets things happen without taking a stand for what is right. 

Krishna has a different perspective, though. 

In the previous verse, Arjuna has asked Krishna: What is the behavior of a person who has transcended the modes of nature?  

This fourteenth chapter has explored the modes of nature, specifically goodness, passion, and ignorance, and how they permeate this world and our existence. These modes are binding, even goodness. And so Arjuna is asking how to move beyond them. 

Yes, even goodness. 

Krishna replies that the symptom of one who has transcended these modes has "renounced all material activities." This could mean many things and this response could, quite frankly, be bewildering. But Prabhupad elaborates on this particular phrase in two sentences. 

In the first sentence, he says, "[The transcendentalist] is equally disposed and sees everything on an equal level because he knows perfectly well that he has nothing to do with material existence." This seeing everything on an "equal level" is key here, but what is important is to be able to see reality and then be on an equal level. If I deeply identify with being a woman, there is no way I can be equally disposed towards all. This goes for any material identity (such as race, age, sexual orientation, religious orientation, etc.). True equality and neutrality must come from a spiritually informed perspective that we are a spirit soul, that we have "nothing to do with material existence." That is spiritual reality and the foundation for an equal disposition. 

Prabhupad then specifically writes that a person who has renounced all material activities renounces connections to these ever-changing social and political issues. In the second sentence he writes, "Social and political issues do not affect him, because he knows the situation of temporary upheavals and disturbances." The material world is in constant flux, the modes of material nature in perpetual competition for supremacy (14.10). But our true, divine nature is not in flux - the soul and the Supersoul is steady, eternal, at peace. Getting deeply absorbed in the comings and goings of material problems is a never-ending, turbulent storm.  

For example, Donald Trump has been president for four years. The maximum term he could have held was eight years. People opposed him and supported him with feverish, religious fervor, but at the end of the day, his "reign" was four years, and if he had been voted into office for a second term, a maximum of eight years.  

Then the next upheaval would've come. 

Many of the issues listed earlier in this post have been under scrutiny for decades, but the past few years we've seen an explosion of talking about and shedding light on them. 

But they will come and they will go. This is not a pessimistic opinion dismissing important issues of the world. The statement that these issues will come and go is based on reality - social and political issues are temporary because they are born of the material world and the modes of nature. Material issues deal with the body, country borders, and the environment; for each of these issues there is a perpetual merry-go-round of goodness, passion, and ignorance fighting for supremacy. 

These are not issues of the soul. 

An important distinction to make here is that Krishna and Prabhupad are not recommending anyone to renounce material activities. Krishna and Prabhupad are describing the symptoms of a person who has transcended the modes of nature. 

So in this way, Arjuna could've asked the question flipped around: What is the behavior of a person who has not transcended the modes of nature?

And Krishna would've responded, logically, "He is deeply absorbed in material activities" and Prabhupad would've elaborated, "He is affected by social and political issues, thinking the problem to be permanent and that he must be the one to solve the problem." 

As a reader, we are now faced with a choice: which person do I want to be? 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/14/22-25/

64: A Dark Future

CHAPTER  14, TEXT 16: The result of pious action is pure and is said to be in the mode of goodness. But action done in the mode of passion results in misery, and action performed in the mode of ignorance results in foolishness.

In this purport, Prabhupad lays out clear logic that "indulgence in animal killing for the taste of the tongue is the grossest kind of ignorance." This is not Prabhupad being judgmental or disgusted. He is simply building upon this verse, 14.16, especially "action performed in the mode of ignorance results in foolishness." 

How is killing animals for the sake of the tongue foolish? How come it's it in the mode of ignorance? 

The foundation of this logic begins with the word ignorance, which is translated as "lack of knowledge or information" (Oxford Languages). 

Simple. 

If one performs an action without appropriate knowledge or information, the action and the results are often harmful to the self and to others. 

For example, I am ignorant of surgical procedures. I have a lack of knowledge and information (A BIG LACK) in order to produce a result that won't harm my patient (stab an artery...??) or harm myself (all those malpractice lawsuits!). In this regard, "the performer is without knowledge, and therefore all his activities result in present misery." This means that a lack of knowledge (ignorance) when we perform an action results in misery, not just a hazy confusion or discomfort. 

Misery. 

And misery for everyone. 

Lack of awareness and the repeated choosing to ignore and turn away from knowledge and reality leads the soul to "go on toward animal life. Animal life is always miserable, although, under the spell of the illusory energy, māyā, the animals do not understand this." Animals are all in varying states of ignorance, surviving from day to day, operating from a place of instinct and driven to eat, mate, and defend. This is a miserable existence, but souls in these bodies are not even aware just how miserable they are. In a sense, animals are innocent. Animals do not produce karma, or reaction to their actions, because they are simply acting out of instinct. 

But human beings can choose to act from a place beyond instinct, humans can act from a place of knowledge. Prabhupad writes, "Slaughtering poor animals is also due to the mode of ignorance. The animal killers do not know that in the future the animal will have a body suitable to kill them. That is the law of nature." Only human beings who kill animals or participate in the process of killing and eating animals recur this reaction to one day be slaughtered in kind. As Prabhupad says here, "That is the law of nature." If karma is working in all other spheres of existence as a divine system of justice, then this system also applies for killing animals. Thus, if one kills an animal to enjoy the tongue, "one has to pay for it." Action and reaction is a law of nature. 

Thus we come to where we began this post: "indulgence in animal killing for the taste of the tongue is the grossest kind of ignorance." Animal killing is the grossest kind of ignorance because there is such a fundamental lack of knowledge and information that if I kill another living being I am responsible for its death. 

What's more, "A human being has no need to kill animals, because God has supplied so many nice things." Nowadays, some would reject this statement and assert that some people just can't not eat meat because of his or her blood type or constitution. My sister professes that if she does not eat meat she becomes very unhealthy. I confess, I'm not a nutritionist or health science expert. That said, I am going off of Prabhupad's purport here, and he is emphasizing that [all] human beings do not need to eat meat, as "God has supplied so many nice things." 

Okay, so if one is aware of the law of karma and aware that killing animals to enjoy meat is not the best for a bunch of reasons, how come this post or any debate or discussion is unlikely to change anyone's stance on eating meat?  

I once debated this topic of vegetarianism in a Bioethics class in my undergraduate degree. We discussed all the reasons, from environmental impacts, to health reasons, and for this class especially, the ethical obligations of slaughtering animals for meat. 

The conclusion was pretty obvious: don't eat meat. 

But no one in the class, including my professor, was moved to make a change in behavior. 

One day, I approached my professor after class to assert that really there is only one reason that people eat meat and will not give it up: the taste. People enjoy the taste, texture, and experience of meat. 

The professor, a highly educated, sharp man in his thirties, at last conceded. He said, "I find it to be one of the greatest failings in my life that I'm not a vegetarian. But... I just love the taste of meat,"

One may have the knowledge and philosophical reasons to not eat meat, but at the end of the day, the fact that meat tastes good trumps all. In this sense, if one has the knowledge and information to not eat meat - that's not ignorance any more, right? In this case, then, ignorance is a true "ignore-ing" of what meat is (flesh of animals) and what the consequences are (being killed in kind). So "If one indulges in meat-eating anyway, it is to be understood that he is acting in ignorance and is making his future very dark." 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/14/16/

63: Divine Fire

CHAPTER 14, TEXT 12: O chief of the Bhāratas, when there is an increase in the mode of passion the symptoms of great attachment, fruitive activity, intense endeavor, and uncontrollable desire and hankering develop.

In the three modes of material nature that Krishna is describing in this 14th chapter, the primary mode that I identify with is the mode of passion. 

Krishna describes in the seventh verse, "The mode of passion is born of unlimited desires and longings." 

Yesss. 

Unlimited desires.

Like a fire. The fire is blazing and hot and demands fuel. I feel the burn and so with great effort and sacrifice I find the fuel to place into the fire - but the fire only increases. The fire burns brighter and hotter, demanding even more fuel than before. 

This is my life. 

My desires are unlimited. From clothing to contact lenses. From shoes to dining chairs to trips to India. To earrings to pairs of glasses to a Mercedes-Benz SUV to analmondmilkmaker to a gymmembership

toawafflemakertorunningshoestomoreearrings

on and on and on and on and on

and on. 

Not only do I yearn for tangible things, I yearn for intangible things, like a good job, good friends, recognition, degrees and accolades, invitations, and more. Prabhupad writes, "One in the mode of passion is never satisfied with the position he has already acquired; he hankers to increase his position." Always more. A fire doesn't burn peacefully at one steady level. The fire is consuming the fuel, and if the fire is not fed more, the flames begin to die out. 

For some reason, I am deathly afraid of those flames going out - it's almost as if I let those flames go out, my very life would go out. I would have no spice to life, no reason to live. So my desires burn in my heart, and I feed them; I am always hankering to increase my position and my things and my importance. 

Why? Why do I burn with so many desires?

Well, to enjoy. I want to enjoy my senses, both subtle and gross. For my gross senses I want to taste good food and drink, I want to see beautiful things and cool movies, I want to relax in a comfortable chair. For the subtle ways to enjoy, I want the prestige of having beautiful things and others admiring what  I own, I want the honor of having a prestigious job and being seen as accomplished and powerful. For the person in the mode of passion (like me), "he develops a great hankering for sense gratification. There is no end to sense gratification."

No. End. As Krishna says in this verse, "uncontrollable desires" develop in the mode of passion. 

I'd like to say that I'm on a spiritual path and want to learn how to love and clean my heart and all that. 

At the same time, the fact of the matter is that if you really pulled back the cover of my heart and peeked inside, that is what you would see: a blazing fire of desires consuming my mind at all times. 

Right now, I do not have any easy solution to these all-consuming desires, so simple trick to reduce the fire. The only way is to stop feeding them, and the prospect of not feeding them seems almost impossible right now. As I mentioned, feeding desires substitutes for a sense of purpose - it's easier to shop and acquire things than to live a purposeful life of navigating tricky relationships. To be honest, I choose shopping over calling a friend or spiritual activities. 

So yeah, I don't have a solution. 

But as I write this, some small voice is reminding me: there is a spiritual greed. 

That greed is called laulyam. 

You don't have to extinguish the fire of desire in your heart.

Just start feeding your fire some spiritual goals, some uplifting desires. 

Being consumed with greed to know and love Krishna, or krishna laulyam, is a divine fire, a fire that I actually want to burn in my heart. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/14/12/

62: Illuminating Presence

CHAPTER 13, TEXT 34: O son of Bharata, as the sun alone illuminates all this universe, so does the living entity, one within the body, illuminate the entire body by consciousness.

So simple. 

So sublime. 

The sun is one, and yet it illuminates and animates the whole earth. A symptom that the sun exists is that we see light. 

Krishna says in this verse that similarly, the tiny spark of the soul illuminates the body. A symptom that the soul exists is that we experience consciousness. Prabhupad writes, "Thus consciousness is the proof of the presence of the soul, as sunshine or light is the proof of the presence of the sun." One may ask how  consciousness is "proof" of the presence of the soul - why are there no other ways to prove the presence of the soul - say a microscope? Of some kind of energy meter...? 

In the previous verse, Krishna compares the soul to the sky - how the sky mixes with everything and at the same time is aloof and is never contaminated. The purport reads, "Similarly, the living entity, even though situated in varieties of bodies, is aloof from them due to his subtle nature. Therefore it is impossible to see with the material eyes how the living entity is in contact with this body and how he is out of it after the destruction of the body. No one in science can ascertain this" (13.33). The very nature of the soul is subtle and immeasurable to some kind of microscope or energy meter. Trying to manufacture some method to directly perceive the soul is pointless. As Prabhupad mentions here, "no one in science can ascertain" the soul or how or when it moves and functions. The soul itself is subtle. 

But we can perceive the soul through the symptoms of the soul, and the most obvious symptom is consciousness. We don't need fancy instruments or fancy scientific calculations to perceive the soul. The logic is simple: "When the soul is present in the body, there is consciousness all over the body, and as soon as the soul has passed from the body there is no more consciousness. 

"This can be easily understood by any intelligent man." 

Yes! The key word here is "easily" - this is easily understood! How is someone who has died referenced?

"She left us."

"He is gone."

"She is no longer with us."

Or maybe someone in grief, weeping at the bedside crying out, "Where are you?"

In all these situations, the body is right there. How is he or she "gone" or "no longer with us" and why would one say, "where are you?" if we can touch and see the body? 

The soul has gone, the soul is no longer with us, we are asking where the soul is. The soul is what illuminated the body with consciousness, like the sun illuminating the earth. "Therefore consciousness is not a product of the combinations of matter. It is the symptom of the living entity."

The living entity is not a product of matter - the soul is of a spiritual, divine nature. 

So simple. 

So sublime. 

The most reassuring part is that over and over again in the Gita and in other Vedic scriptures the soul is described as "eternal" and "undying", so when the soul "leaves" the body it's not like the soul is snuffed out like a candle, forever extinguished into oblivion. (This is a common belief of atheists.)

No. The soul leaves the body and moves on to another body. I mean, if the soul is eternal (and not just snuffed out) and it's not ready to go to heaven or back to God, what else would the soul do? The soul has a journey. Each body is a portion of the soul's journey.

I hope I can use this time wisely while my soul is in this current body. 

I hope to cultivate love and cleanse my heart, and seek God. 

I hope to live a life of purpose with each day, no matter how simple. 

And when the day comes when the lights go out forever on this life in this body and my soul travels on to my next destination, I hope the journey will take me ever closer to love and to God. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/34/

61: The One Who Takes My Hand

 CHAPTER 13, TEXT 26: Again there are those who, although not conversant in spiritual knowledge, begin to worship the Supreme Person upon hearing about Him from others. Because of their tendency to hear from authorities, they also transcend the path of birth and death.

When I was teaching in New York City, the fourth grade teacher at my school told me a story: 

"I told Kaya (pseudonym) to quiet down and stay in her chair. 

She then fired back, 'This is a free country,'"

You may commend this girl for using her intelligence - that comeback is snappy. At the same time, if you look just a little deeper at her words, you can see a kind of deep unwillingness to accept authority. No one is "above" her or has the right to give her directions - her reasoning is that we are all free and thus we are all equal. 

The word "educate" derives its meaning from the Latin "educare" which means "to lead out." This implies that someone is in a kind of darkness of ignorance (the student) and someone is leading that person out into the light (the teacher) (much like Plato's Allegory of the Cave).

In this sense, student and teacher are not equal. One is more knowledgeable and is helping the other, so that person is the authority. 

The hardest part about education is to surrender to authority, whether that is to superior knowledge, a teacher, a path, a lifestyle, and more. Surrender begins with the process of hearing, for words may enter the heart and brain and wake up deep inside a longing, a curiosity, an emptiness. 

Words have a mystical power to touch the soul. 

The ancient process for any kind of progress, but especially spiritual, is to hear from an authority with submissiveness. Prabhupad writes, "Lord Caitanya, who preached Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the modern world, gave great stress to hearing because if the common man simply hears from authoritative sources he can progress." Note that Prabhupad emphasizes that the "common man" can progress - not the scholar or the spiritualist but the common man. 

That's you and me, buddy. 

Krishna describes in this verse a person who has the "tendency to hear from authorities" - the key word here is "tendency." Even more important that downloading loads of knowledge is to cultivate that tendency to hear, an inclination and even hunger to hear. 

Prabhupad writes that the common man must "simply hear" from an authoritative source. 

That said, 

there is "hearing"

and there is "listening." 

Did Kaya hear her teacher's instructions? Yes.

Did Kaya listen to her teacher's instructions? No. 

Listening implies submissiveness, a willingness to learn, a willingness to be lead out of the dark, aware that one is even in the dark. 

Listening means that one wants the light, is open and ready to change and transform. 

The Sanskrit word used in this verse is sruti, which is translated as "hearing." This word is also intimately used in connection to or alludes to the Vedas, the ancient scriptures of spiritual knowledge. This means that hearing doesn't just mean the physical experience of processing raw sound. Hearing means that one should hear spiritual knowledge of great weight and authority (such as the Vedas) in order to be transformed and lead out of the darkness. 

Hearing, then, means accepting authority. Hearing from an authority who is knowledgeable and of impeccable character is a special, rare opportunity in this world. Prabhupad emphasizes that "One should learn to become the servant of those who are in knowledge of the Supreme Lord." This means that to truly prepare the heart to hear from an authority, to serve that person opens up one to the light.  

This story of the girl Kaya - the girl who refused to follow the directions of her teacher with her claim that this is a free country - rankles me so much because, frankly, I have a bit of Kaya within my own heart. I don't want to surrender to someone who will tell me the Truth and show me the Way. I want to find my own truth, find my own way. 

Yes, this is a free country, and I am free. No one should have the power to tell me what to do. 

So.

I'll take baby steps. 

There are a few people in this world whose authority I accept in deep, quiet way. One of those authorities is Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad, the man who writes purports to these verses of the Gita. Sure, maybe I'm still a bit like Kaya when I hear some of his directions, and at the same time I trust him.  

I'd bet that Kaya did not trust her 4th-grade teacher. So why would she follow her directions? 

I trust that Prabhupad is taking my hand in his strong, gentle hand. Although I may dig in my heels and turn away, still with gentility and firmness and kindness, he leads me towards the light. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/26/

60: Syamasundar-Shaped Hole

FORMAT: This post is in the format of a Found Poem - the words in italics are words taken directly from the verse and/or purport. The words in standard font are my own words. 

Syamasundar-Shaped Hole

(Chapter 6, Text 30)

I've been so lost

So alone 

So empty

For minutes and hours and days and years 

and eons

If only I could see and hear

Your eternal form of Śyāmasundara, 

situated within my heart

I know You would tell me 

"For one who sees Me everywhere 

and sees everything in Me,

I am never lost, 

nor is he ever lost to Me."

Don't be lost

alone

or empty

I am right here, You tell me.

After all,

Nothing can exist without Kṛṣṇa, 

Kṛṣṇa is the Lord of everything.

If only I would open my heart

to Your eternal form of Śyāmasundara, 

You would become my everything. 

That intimate relationship between the Lord 

and the devotee 

will fill the hole in this heart

the Syamasundar-shaped hole

the hole that echoes to me that I'm 

lost 

alone

empty

If only I would open my heart

You would never disappear from my sight

And I would never lose sight of  You

For you are my dearest Friend. 

***

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/6/30/

just a little note

I calculated that for this 100 Day/Post Project that I would actually complete the Gita in about 80 posts. The last 20 posts or so I had planned to do some creative responses to verses of the Gita, such as poetry, short stories, maybe a song or a photo essay and more. 

I've decided that every so often as I finish up this project, I might do one of these creative posts interspersed with the "close-reading" classic posts so far. I will go back to a verse that I've already earmarked.

I hope you enjoy!

sincerely,

bhakti

59: Very Far, Very Close

CHAPTER 13, TEXT 14: Everywhere are His hands and legs, His eyes, heads and faces, and He has ears everywhere. In this way the Supersoul exists, pervading everything.

When I finish cooking a dish, I scoop a portion onto a plate, place it in front of tiny carved effigies of Radha and Krishna in my kitchen, ring a bell, and murmur some prayers. I ask the Lord to please partake in what I have made. 

After a few minutes I transfer that food back into the pot or onto another plate. Maybe a take a sip/bite to check for salt or flavor to make adjustments. The understanding is that God just ate, and now I may eat.

How is that?

How can the Supreme Creator and God of Gods and the Supersoul who Pervades Everything eat a little plate of pasta from little ol' Bhakti lata's kitchen in the backwoods of Florida? 

This verse states clearly that God has hands, legs, eyes, heads, faces, and ear everywhere. The Supersoul pervades everything with senses that transcend our restricted notions. God is Supersoul within my heart, so of course he knows when I'm cooking and when I turn to Him to offer Him a little food. 

So "Although [God is] far, far away, He is also near to all" (13.16). God is simultaneously very far away - the Supreme Creator, the God of Gods who lives in the spiritual world far away from this earthly planet, He is also very near. 

He is within our own hearts. 

He can accept whatever little offering we make, even if it's some little plate of pasta we cooked up in a rush. Prabhupad writes that "In Bhagavad-gītā the Lord says that if anyone offers Him a flower, or a fruit, or a little water, He accepts it. If the Lord is a far distance away, how can He accept things? This is the omnipotence of the Lord: even though He is situated in His own abode, far, far away from earth, He can extend His hand to accept what anyone offers." In this verse of the Gita, Krishna is trying to paint a picture of that omnipotence, explaining that if one offers God a flower, He can still take it with His hand for they are everywhere. If one offers God a prayer, God can still hear it with His ears for they are everywhere. 

So yes, although Krishna is so far away in his own home, He is also right here with us, ready to receive and give love. 

Even if it's just a plate of pasta, made in haste. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/16/

58: False Ego vs. Real Ego

Brace yourselves, this is a long chunk of text, but these five verses are traditionally grouped together. These verses are straight fire, each word and phrase a gem with potential to transform our lives. That said, for this post I will be focusing on what I have bolded and underlined.  

TEXTS 8-12: Humility; pridelessness; nonviolence; tolerance; simplicity; approaching a bona fide spiritual master; cleanliness; steadiness; self-control; renunciation of the objects of sense gratification; absence of false ego; the perception of the evil of birth, death, old age and disease; detachment; freedom from entanglement with children, wife, home and the rest; even-mindedness amid pleasant and unpleasant events; constant and unalloyed devotion to Me; aspiring to live in a solitary place; detachment from the general mass of people; accepting the importance of self-realization; and philosophical search for the Absolute Truth – all these I declare to be knowledge, and besides this whatever there may be is ignorance.

Everyone is searching for belonging - in fact, it is considered a human need. 

Kendra Cherry writes, "The need to belong, also often referred to as belongingness, refers to a human emotional need to affiliate with and be accepted by members of a group" (verywellmind.com). Belongingness is essential to living a healthy life as a human being, and according to this definition, belonging has two aspects - 

1) being affiliated with a group and 

2) being accepted by members of that group. 

How does one go about belonging with a group? 

Identifying with a group. 

If I'm affiliated with the National Association of Teachers of English (NATE), to be accepted by that group usually means that I AM a teacher of English to be accepted. I mean, I can't really think of a person who would belong to that organization who wasn't a teacher of English. Maybe an administrator? A fanboy/fangirl....? 

I can identify with so many roles and experiences in this material world, from being a teacher of English and attending a NATE conference, being an overeater and attending Overeaters Anonymous, being a gurukuli and attending a Kulimela... our identities are pretty limitless. 

But those identities are constantly changing. They're temporary. 

Thus, our sense of belonging is changing. Our belonging is temporary. 

Deep down, we all crave for an eternal belonging, a group of people to be affiliated with and accepted by that never changes. But if we want to belong in an eternal way, we must uncover our eternal identity. 

The most clear cut translation of identity is ego. Contrary to popular understanding, ego is not negative (or positive). Ego simply means "identity." 

Ego is often mistranslated to mean prideful, self-absorbed, and big-headed because that person has a false identity, or a false ego. Prabhupad writes that the preliminary understanding is that "False ego means accepting this body as oneself." This is the biggest mistake - my body is "me." 

The image that comes to mind is of a self-absorbed body builder and I tend to think, "That man (or woman) has a big ego," But really what I mean is "That man is so absorbed in his (or her) body that he thinks that he IS his body and that is pretty distasteful." After all, there's something off-putting about seeing a man or woman strut his or her muscular body around with a smug look. 

He or she knows that they're attractive and cool and strong - but all of those attributes belong to the body. 

What about the self? 

Is that body builder attractive and cool and strong on the inside? Maybe. Maybe not. We just don't know, because the body is not a reflection of true identity. 

There is such a thing as a real ego. Prabhupad writes, "When one understands that he is not his body and is spirit soul, he comes to his real ego. Ego is there." This means that our true identity is a spirit soul - this is our real, authentic ego. This is the highest sense of self. Of course, "False ego is condemned, but not real ego." False ego is condemned because the body is matter that is always changing. 

That same bodybuilder will get old and lose all attractiveness, coolness, and strength. This is no foundation upon which to build an authentic existence. Placing one's sense of self in the eternal spirit soul is the doorway to peace and freedom. In fact, "When the sense of self is applied to reality, that is real ego." Our reality is not this ever-changing body. Our reality is the spirit soul. 

One may say that the solution to all ego is to just claim that we should have no ego at all and merge into nothingness. Prabhupad writes that "There are some philosophers who say we should give up our ego, but we cannot give up our ego, because ego means identity." If we attempt to give up our ego, this means we would have no identity, no sense of self. 

But if we have no sense of self or identity, we cannot belong. 

Belonging is a core human need, and one could argue is a core soul need. Belonging is a foundation for many other needs of the soul such as Significance, Connection/Love, and Contribution (resus.com.au). These are needs. 

Needs are needs. 

This means if they're not met in a healthy way, one will attempt to get them met in an unhealthy way - throwing tantrums (Significance), forcing others to follow my rules (Connection/Love), and others forced to follow harsh rules makes a Contribution.

Trying to get these needs met by identifying with the body only leads to frustration and heartbreak. On the other hand, meeting these needs by identifying with the soul leads to the love and contribution and belonging that we all hunger for. 

Prabhupad emphasizes, "In the Vedic literature (Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.4.10) it is said, ahaṁ brahmāsmi: I am Brahman, I am spirit. This “I am,” the sense of self, also exists in the liberated stage of self-realization. This sense of “I am” is ego, but when the sense of “I am” is applied to this false body it is false ego." In this aphorism, aham means "I am" and that "I am" is eternal - as Prabhupad says here, this sense of self exists even in the liberated stage. When we shed this material body and return to God, we will still exist in spirit - aham brahmasmi. But this sense of identity applied to this body is so ephemeral, the identities ever-changing, rolling by like so many coats we put on and discard.

Ultimately, those souls in the spiritual world is the group to be affiliated with and accepted by. The spiritual world is a place where there is an eternal exchange of love, connection, growth, and contribution. That is where we eternally belong. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/8-12/

57: Fight or Flight or...?

CHAPTER 13, TEXTS 1-2: Arjuna said: O my dear Kṛṣṇa, I wish to know about prakṛti [nature], puruṣa [the enjoyer], and the field and the knower of the field, and of knowledge and the object of knowledge. The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: This body, O son of Kuntī, is called the field, and one who knows this body is called the knower of the field.

Animals live in fear. 

Always. 

Think about it - for the most part, animals/aquatics/insects/etc. are eaten alive. If they are not eaten alive, they are always in fear of being eaten alive. Imagine that. You are still alive and conscious, and another animal is eating your body. 

Maybe this sounds graphic, but this is just the reality of the material world. 

Human beings are animals too, you know. 

Maybe we don't live in fear of being eaten alive (other than those villains in Indiana Jones movies) but our fear manifests in two basic ways:

Fight

or

Flight. 

Either ramp up the adrenaline and start arguing/kicking/screaming/punching or

Turn away from the conflict/problem/situation as soon as possible and run away as far as possible. 

Fight or flight. So often we operate in these two modes of existence. Fear manifests in countless ways in our physical, and emotional lives, often plaguing our mental health. 

But there is a third option: 

Observe. 

Don't fight. Don't take flight. 

Just be. Watch. Observe. 

In his book Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey writes how between stimulus and response, there is a space. Living a conscious, effective, and inspiring life sometimes boils down to a simple process: widening that space. Acting from that space. 

Instead of reacting out of fear - fighting it out or running away - stop, pause, and consider the situation. Make a decision from a place of clear knowledge and presence. 

Conscious life and indeed spiritual life begins when we realize that we *can* make a choice and not operate from some automatic fear reaction. Making conscious choices is waking up to the most powerful function of the soul - free will. 

Making choices begins with understanding that we each have a body, and within that body is a soul. In this verse of the Gita, Arjuna is inquiring about the field (ksetram) and the knower of the field (ksetra-jna). Prabhupad writes how the body is the field of activity for the conditioned soul, and "the person, who should not identify himself with the body, is called kṣetra-jña, the knower of the field." 

This is the crux of the matter: the understanding that I - the soul - am the witness. Prabhupad writes how even a child can understand that the body goes through so many changes, but the person inside of the body does not change. The soul is the witness. 

Here in this verse, it's clear that there is a difference between the body (the field) and the soul (the knower of the field). Prabhupad emphasizes that "The owner is distinctly ksetra-jna." The field may be destroyed, but the knower of the field continues to exist. There is no need to fear. 

Being a little removed from all the drama of life alleviates fear, because I understand that all the pain and horror and death is happening within the field, not to me, the soul, the knower of the field. 

Our greatest challenge of fear will come for us all one day: death. We probably wont be eaten alive, but we will definitely die - whether that is tomorrow or fifty years from now.

Do I fight against death? Do I run away from it and numb myself? 

Or do I observe?

That's my choice. 

Making this choice is the beginning of conscious living. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/13/1-2/

56: Bhakti Causes Bhakti

CHAPTER 12, TEXT 20: Those who follow this imperishable path of devotional service and who completely engage themselves with faith, making Me the supreme goal, are very, very dear to Me.

Arjuna asked which is better - "one who is engaged in the path of impersonal Brahman or one who is engaged in the personal service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead" - and Lord Krishna replies here without a shadow of a doubt that devotional service is the best of all processes of spiritual realization (Purport, 12.20).

But even though personally serving Lord Krishna with devotion is the process recommended here as the highest, most direct path to loving God, the process is also somewhat shrouded in mystery.  

A great Vaishnava saint and scholar, Srila Visvanath Cakravarti Thakur, makes this point in his commentary on a famous verse in the Srimad Bhagavatam that describes bhakti as causeless. He writes, "Here the work ahaituki, causeless, means that devotional service has no material cause (hetu)" (Madhurya Kadambini, 3).  

It's not possible to simply serve God and then after a preordained amount of time love would flood my heart. This would make love a business exchange, a kind of calculation on the grocery store receipt - 3 prayers, 5 fasts, 10 times giving in charity = love of God. 

Loving devotion, or bhakti, has no material cause. I could engage in these processes of prayer, fasts, and giving in charity for a million years and still not experience love of God, because bhakti is not dependent upon my material endeavors. 

So. The million dollar question: 

If I can't endeavor for bhakti, how do I get it?

???

Association with a pure devotee. 

Srila Prabhupad writes that this kind of association is essential to the cultivation of bhakti within the heart. In fact, Prabhupad emphasizes the essential nature of association by saying that "as long as one does not have the chance to associate with a pure devotee, the impersonal conception may be beneficial." How interesting! Krishna has just emphasized to Arjuna that bhakti yoga, without a doubt, is the best and highest path for spiritual realization, but here Prabhupad is saying that if one does not have the association of a devotee, the path of jnana (knowledge, meditation) yoga is beneficial. 

This means that associating with a devotee is a necessity for cultivating bhakti.  

But if one does not have that association, then this process of jnana yoga is your second best bet. 

Jnana yoga involves working without fruitive result, meditating and cultivating knowledge to understand spirit and matter (Purport, 12.20). These activities are all confirmed by Srila Visvanath Cakravarti Thakur as referring to "bhakti in the material mode of goodness (sattviki-bhakti) which acts as a limb of the system of jnana" (Madhurya Kadambini, 5). Being in the mode of goodness in our devotion is a great stepping stone to elevating our souls. Sattviki bhakti may never take us to our ultimate destination of love of God, but it opens the heart up to receive the love when it does come. That is why Prabhupad says that this process of jnana may be "necessary as long as one is not in the association of a pure devotee" (Purport, 12.20). 

So how come association is so essential to cultivating love in our hearts? The answer lies within a devotee's mercy. 

One may say that when or how a devotee gives mercy is dependent upon situations, so this is a material cause. But "Without the devotee having bhakti, there is no possibility of him giving mercy to others. Bhakti causes the devotee's mercy which causes bhakti in another person. 

"Bhakti causes bhakti."

This is why we cannot huff and puff away at our prayers and fasts and charities, expecting love of God to sprout in our hearts on its accord from all of these endeavors. Bhakti can only be given by one who possesses bhakti, someone with love and mercy in his/her heart. 

So either I engage in jnana yoga for lifetime upon lifetime, or I can seek out the association of pure devotees in order to take the highest, direct path to Krishna. The choice is mine, the choice is yours. 

Full purport  here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/12/20/

55: Just Be Kind

CHAPTER 12, TEXT 15: He by whom no one is put into difficulty and who is not disturbed by anyone, who is equipoised in happiness and distress, fear and anxiety, is very dear to Me.

Brutal honesty is overrated. 

I used to think that if I was in a close relationship with someone, that was a blank check to be "brutally honest" because, hey, honesty is the foundation for true friendship and love. I allowed others to be honest with me to the point of pain because I thought that that was healthy. 

And to a certain degree, it can be. 

The problem with brutal honesty is that without the skills or a deep enough relationship, it just often ends up being brutal. All that truth hurts and drives splinters and knives into a relationship. I speak from experience when I say that the relationship does not recover. 

This "brutal honesty" towards our loved ones is one way that we can put others into difficulty and disturb their hearts and minds. Personally, I have rarely ever felt moved to deeper understanding and personal growth from someone being brutally honest with me, even if that person was a very intimate friend or family member.

I just feel hurt. 

I am most moved when someone is kind to me.

In this verse of the Gita, Krishna emphasizes a kind of deep equanimity and peacefulness that should permeate our lives. The first phrase, "He by whom no one is put into difficulty," is poignant for this post. Not putting others into difficulty often boils down to a simple quality to exemplify at all times to all people: kindness. 

So much is included in the quality of kindness: respect, care, attention, empathy, gentleness, and even love. Prabhupad writes, "Since a devotee is kind to everyone, he does not act in such a way as to put others into anxiety." This means that the default should be kindness - respect, care, and empathy - for everyone at all times. 

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu emphasizes in the Siksastakam Prayers, Verse 3 "amanina manadena" - one should offer all respect unto others and expect none in return. Kindness and respect is not superficial, a  mask to put on to people-please. In fact, to offer respect and kindness towards others at all times requires a deep expression of the soul, and this sincere striving to cultivate one's highest qualities is very pleasing to Krishna - He states in this verse that such a person is "very dear to Me." 

I think of my husband in this regard. He is kind and respectful to everyone at all times, including me, and we have been in a relationship for seven years. Even though we are close, he never takes advantage of this closeness to be "brutally honest." 

He is honest AND kind - he does not put me into difficulty. By his unconditional kindness he moves me to be the best person I can be every day. Surely he is dear to Krishna. 

He inspires me to be dear to Krishna, too. That starts with being kind to all. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/12/15/

54: A Convenient, Joyful Process

CHAPTER 12, TEXT 5: For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progress in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.

This verse of the Gita underscores the fact that one who tries to understand God in His impersonal feature is duhkham - he is miserable. 

Meditating in silence and stillness on nothing / formless light / power is actually miserable. 

A key word of this verse is deha-vadbhih, which means "those who are embodied." To try and meditate upon a formless light when we ourselves are embodied is almost impossible. 

According to the Gita, we are all an eternal spirit soul, but we are housed within a material body. When the body dies, the eternal soul moves on to another body; "The individual soul is embodied since time immemorial." The soul has been traversing from body to body to body in a neverending ferris wheel in the cycle of samsara, the cycle of birth and death in this world. Thus "it is very difficult for him to simply theoretically understand that he is not the body." This shows that theoretical understanding does not go very far. Since I am housed within a material body, naturally I identify with this body, no matter how much philosophy I read and agree with. 

I tend to believe that this body IS me. 

I can't see my soul. But I can see and feel and touch my body, so my body must be who "I" am. Prabhupad emphasizes that it is difficult for us to even understand theoretically that we are not the body - indeed, I understand somewhat theoretically that I am not the body, but that theory is hard to apply in practical, everyday life. I am typing these words with my fingers, I am seeing through these eyes, I am willing my body to move. 

I mean, the willing and the moving of my body is so seamless that I must be my body, right? 

And everyone else's body must be them, right?

Bhakti yoga does not demand that one should stubbornly refuse all connection to the body. In fact, there is the understanding that we all have an eternal form, a svarupa, in the spiritual world. 

What's more, God also has an eternal form, but he is also represented in an embodied form in this material world. Prabhupad writes, "The bhakti-yogī accepts the Deity of Kṛṣṇa as worshipable because there is some bodily conception fixed in the mind, which can thus be applied." This is so beautiful. God is meeting us where we're at; He knows that since we have been embodied since time immemorial, we're going to identify with our bodies and identify others as their bodies. 

Including God! 

We're going to believe that God in His material body IS Him. 

So presto - God gives us deity worship in order to apply our bodily conception of life. Through deity worship, we may all approach God easily and joyfully. By "[God's] incarnation as arcā-vigraha He can accept the services of the devotee, just to make it convenient for the man in conditioned life." Amazing  how Prabhupad uses the word "convenient" here. Not only is this process joyful, it is convenient. Deity worship is not meant to be miserable, like meditating on an impersonal void. In fact, for "the personalist, without any risk, trouble or difficulty, [he] approaches the Supreme Personality directly." So although this verses emphasizes the misery of attempting impersonal meditation, within the purport Prabhupad offers a solution that is simple, convenient, and direct. 

Personally, I find that when I visit the deity form of the Lord within a temple, my heart opens like a flower and love flows in my heart. I can bow down with my body, I can dance with my body, I can drink in God's form with my eyes. 

Way more accessible than sitting in silent and, well, miserable meditation. (Hey, Krishna Himself says it's miserable!) 

I'm an embodied soul, what can I say? I tend to believe that others are their bodies, including God. Ever since I was a little girl, when I would gaze up at the deity form of God, I simply understood, "This is God. God is looking at me." This process is so easy even a child can exchange love with God. This is bhakti yoga. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/12/5/

53: Krishna at Face Value

CHAPTER 11, TEXT 51: When Arjuna thus saw Kṛṣṇa in His original form, he said: O Janārdana, seeing this humanlike form, so very beautiful, I am now composed in mind, and I am restored to my original nature.

The Gita has been studied for thousands of years. Scholars often recognize certain philosophical points in the Gita as truths and laws of nature, such as the law of karma, the eternality of the soul, the modes of material nature, and much more (https://www.ancient.eu/Bhagavad_Gita/). Krishna's words are taken at face value, no metaphorical bending or interpretation required.  

But when it comes to Krishna's statements that fools deride him when he descends in human form (9.11) or that one should worship Him with love and devotion by meditating on His form (9.22), Krishna's words suddenly are not taken at face value. They're seen as metaphorical.  

Many scholars take one of two standpoints: 1) Either Krishna is seen as an ordinary human being who gave some great wisdom to his friend on a battlefield, or 2) this battle at Kurukshetra never actually took place - the whole Bhagavad-gita is interpreted as a metaphor for the soul's battle for goodness and truth. 

There's a third possibility, though: 3) The battle of Kurukshetra took place, Krishna is God in human form conversing with his dear friend, instructing him how to live in this world and become a loving devotee. Bhaktivedanta Swami's commentary on the Bhagavad-gita is aptly entitled As It Is. 

Take everything Krishna says at face value. As it is. No metaphorical mind-bending.

If He says that there's a law of karma, there's a law of karma. 

If He says that there are three modes of material nature, there are three modes of material nature. 

If Krishna displays the universal, cosmic form, a form that only God can display, then that is Krishna's power and Krishna is God. 

If Krishna is described in His original form as having two hands and being very beautiful, then His original form has two hands and He is very beautiful. 

Prabhupad writes, "Here the words mānuṣaṁ rūpam clearly indicate the Supreme Personality of Godhead to be originally two-handed." This is clear. There is no need for a twisted interpretation to this verse and these statements. 

If Krishna's other statements of profound philosophical truths are so often taken at face value, why not these statements that He is the Supreme Controller, the Supreme Source of All, and the Supreme Personality of Godhead who comes in the form of a human to exchange love with His devotees? Although Krishna may look ordinary, He is not. Prabhupad argues this point, "If Kṛṣṇa is like an ordinary human being, then how is it possible for Him to show the universal form and again to show the four-handed Nārāyaṇa form?" Krishna has already shown and stated that He has displayed His universal form as well as his Narayan form - this is certainly not something an ordinary human being can do. So then the only other option is to see all of Krishna's words as metaphor. That option seems to be a little bit like cherry-picking the verses and ideas that are comfortable and leaving the rest as vaguely "metaphorical." 

After experiencing the terrifying universal form, Arjuna is now satisfied and at peace in his heart to behold his dear friend, Krishna, in his original two-armed form. This form is beautiful, a form that Arjuna can look in the eyes, a form that he can see with his ordinary eyes. 

Two seemingly opposing possibilities - that Krishna is in a human form and Krishna is all-powerful God - are reconciled once we just take Krishna's words at face value, As They Are. 

Prabhupad concludes his commentary on this verse by emphasizing that "the original verses of Bhagavad-gītā are as clear as the sun; they do not require lamplight from foolish commentators." 

I often feel like one of those foolish commentators as I do this Gita Project, trying to shed lamplight upon the brilliance of the sun of Krishna's and Prabhupads' words. That said, I just want to be as loyal and true to their words as possible, and if by God's grace I can accomplish this, then I am content to be a little lamp basking in the radiance of the sun of Krishna's teachings which illuminate the world. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/11/51/

52: Jesting With The King

CHAPTER 11, TEXTS 41-42: Thinking of You as my friend, I have rashly addressed You “O Kṛṣṇa,” “O Yādava,” “O my friend,” not knowing Your glories. Please forgive whatever I may have done in madness or in love. I have dishonored You many times, jesting as we relaxed, lay on the same bed, or sat or ate together, sometimes alone and sometimes in front of many friends. O infallible one, please excuse me for all those offenses.

We have been experiencing along with Arjuna the terrifying forms of God in His most powerful, awe-inspiring universal form, which includes viewing the vast pantheon of  demigods, spinning planets and  galaxies, and all beings  rushing into the mouth of death. I would imagine that if I was to witness even a fraction of any of this, my brain would be blank.  

But Arjuna's brain is not blank. In fact, he has the presence of mind to... huh? Apologize to Krishna for being so familiar?

The stark contrast between the universal form and Arjuna's description of intimate moments with Krishna is jarring. He describes lounging on the same bed, eating together, and jesting in the company of friends. There's a sense of  coming back down to earth to the present moment, right there on a chariot in the midst of a battlefield, and  I can almost see Arjuna folding his palms, stuttering his apologies. 

Arjuna's apology brings to mind a simple comparison - he's just joking with an old friend, maybe even making fun of him. His friend would laugh along, maybe tease him in return. And then only much later would he find out that the old friend is actually the king. If I had been in Arjuna's shoes, I would be stumbling out apologies and begging forgiveness, too. 

But the king is not only a king. Being a king is a role, not an identity. 

Ultimately, a king is a person. 

Krishna is a person, and He "is so kind and merciful that in spite of such opulence He played with Arjuna as a friend. Such is the transcendental loving reciprocation between the devotee and the Lord." Although Arjuna is gushing his apologies for his familiarity with Krishna, it's clear that Krishna is quite aware that Arjuna was interacting with him as a friend, eating together, joking with each other. Krishna was not only aware, He enjoyed this kind of exchange, this kind of natural loving reciprocation. 

Arjuna is thoroughly awestruck and trembling from this divine display of the universe - creation, annihilation, all the demigods and planets and galaxies - and yet he has the presence of mind to come back to remembering his relationship with Krishna, which consists  of such seemingly simple, mundane exchanges. This is because "the relationship between the living entity and Kṛṣṇa is fixed eternally; it cannot be forgotten, as we can see from the behavior of Arjuna." Prabhupad writes here that this relationship is eternal, which means that it is beyond this material world. 

The virat-rupa, the universal form, is actually the material manifestation of God's greatness. Prabhupad writes "This universal form is material and temporary, as the material world is temporary" (11.45, purport). So although Arjuna was given divine eyes to behold this universal form, nevertheless the form is material and therefore temporary. After all, the universe and the demigods and the planets are constantly being created and destroyed. 

But if something is eternal - like the soul, like God Himself - there is no creation. There is no destruction. And between the soul and God is a relationship that is eternal - that relationship was never created, it will never be destroyed. 

This means that that relationship - that thread of connection - is more powerful and divine than even the universal form. 

In this way, "Although Arjuna has seen the opulence in the universal form, he cannot forget his friendly relationship with Kṛṣṇa." So although the universes may rise and fall, the demigods create and destroy, the galaxies expand and collapse, living beings rush into the mouths of death in a ceaseless current, all these things will come and go. 

But that friendly relationship is not forgotten. 

Those jests, those moments of lounging and eating together amongst friends - that friendly relationship between Arjuna and Krishna will outlast even the longest lived demigod and universe because that is love, and love is eternal. 

Now that is truly wondrous.

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/11/41-42/

51: Flaming Mouths of Time

CHAPTER 11, TEXT 32: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Time I am, the great destroyer of the worlds, and I have come here to destroy all people. With the exception of you [the Pāṇḍavas], all the soldiers here on both sides will be slain.

65 million people die each year in the world.  

That is 178,000 each day, 

7425 each hour, 

and 120 each minute (bioethics.georgetown.edu). 

That means that every SECOND, two people die. In the time span of writing this post over the past minute or so, 100 people have died. 

Krishna says in this verse, "Time I am, the great destroyer of the worlds, and I have come here to destroy all people." Time does not only destroy people, but all living beings, all natural formations of the earth, the world itself, all the worlds, all the universes... time destroys all. 

How come Krishna is saying this powerful statement? In the verses previous to this one, Arjuna is describing what he sees in Krishna's universal form: "I see all people rushing full speed into Your mouths, as moths dash to destruction in a blazing fire" (11.29) and "O Viṣhṇu, I see You devouring all people from all sides with Your flaming mouths" (11.30). Arjuna is again repeating himself, terrified and awestruck, trying to make sense of what he sees. How can he see all people rushing into God's mouth to be devoured and destroyed? Isn't God supposed to be... well, good? 

Prabhupad explains, "Although Arjuna knew that Kṛṣṇa was his friend and the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he was puzzled by the various forms exhibited by Kṛṣṇa. Therefore he asked further about the actual mission of this devastating force." Puzzled indeed! One can imagine that Arjuna is trying to process not only that his friend is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but that God would devour people and the worlds in such a terrifying display. Interestingly, Prabhupad writes that Arjuna wanted to know further about the "actual mission" of this force - he wants to know what these flaming mouths actually mean and why they matter.  

This is Krishna's response: "Time I am, great destroyer of the worlds." 

Time. 

Amazing. We glance at the clock throughout the day, keeping track of its passage in order to go to work, eat, go to sleep, make appointments, catch a flight, and more. I have glanced at my computer clock a few times during this post, calculating how long I've spent writing.  

In the past 15 minutes, 1,800 people have died. 

Prabhupad writes, "Time is destruction, and all manifestations are to be vanquished by the desire of the Supreme Lord. That is the law of nature."

This destruction is what Arjuna is seeing by the flaming mouths of the universal form. Note that Prabhupad says that "all manifestations" will be destroyed. This means that death will come for all of us one day, for death "is an inevitable process eventually occurring in all living organisms" (wikipedia.org). So yes, over 2,000 human beings have died within the past 20 minutes or so, but what about all the living organisms on this planet? 

Millions, maybe even billions of beings die every minute, every second. 

What's more, the world itself is being destroyed at every minute. For example, if a house is left alone for even a year with no one to live in it or care for it, it begins to decay. Just by the passage of time, the house is destroyed. This goes for anything on this planet, from human structures like The Coliseum to natural formations like The Appalachian Mountains. "All manifestations" are being destroyed. 

This is the reality of this material world.  

And one day, our own lives will snuff out, and we will be like another moth into the flaming mouth of time. 

34 minutes - 4,080 deaths. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/11/32/

50: Oh My God.

CHAPTER 11, TEXT 19: You are without origin, middle or end. Your glory is unlimited. You have numberless arms, and the sun and moon are Your eyes. I see You with blazing fire coming forth from Your mouth, burning this entire universe by Your own radiance.

Arjuna has been given divine eyes to behold the universal form. Although we - the readers - do not have divine eyes, in our mind's eye we can somehow behold this dazzling form. Just by reading these words, my mind is awestruck, attempting to grasp the magnitude of God's greatness. 

No beginning, middle, or end. 

Numberless arms. 

The sun and moon are Your eyes. 

Blazing fire pouring from Your mouth, 

burning the universe

by Your own radiance. 

The images, the vastness flash through my mind and leave me breathless and awestruck. 

Interestingly, Arjuna has made very similar exclamations in verses 17 and 18:

You are inexhaustible

You are the oldest

Your form has a glaring effulgence

spreading like blazing fire

or the immeasurable radiance of the sun. 

Arjuna is repeating himself. Although there are poetic reasons for repetition, such as the power of persuasion, added emphasis, and creating rhythm, there is a far simpler reason that Arjuna is repeating himself: he is overcome with wonder. Prabhupad writes, "Here and in many other places there is repetition, but according to the scriptures, repetition of the glories of Kṛṣṇa is not a literary weakness. It is said that at a time of bewilderment or wonder or of great ecstasy, statements are repeated over and over. That is not a flaw." Certainly we can all identify a time in our lives when we were overcome with bewilderment, wonder, or ecstasy, and all we could do was repeat ourselves. 

Forgive me, but the phrase that keeps coming to me when I read these verses is:

Oh 

my 

God. 

Literally. 

Oh my God. 

I want to just keep repeating that phrase as the images flash through my mind - a beginningless and endless form, blinding radiance of the sun, rivers of fire, the planets are God's eyes, the eternality of the universe...

Oh my God. 

Oh my Krishna. 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/11/19/