90: Divine Qualities

Creative Expression: Hand Lettering

I chose to highlight a selection of divine qualities from Chapter 16, Verses 1-3:

Full text here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/16/1-3/

78: Distinguishing Reality From Illusion

CHAPTER 18, TEXT 32: That understanding which considers irreligion to be religion and religion to be irreligion, under the spell of illusion and darkness, and strives always in the wrong direction, O Pārtha, is in the mode of ignorance.

Based on this verse of the Gita, Prabhupad offers three ways that intelligence works in the opposite way that it should:

1) "It accepts religions which are not actually religions and rejects actual religion." 

The word "religion" in 2020 has taken on such heavy baggage, with connotations of "patriarchy," "oppression," "judgement," and being "fake," and "outdated." Thus religion is rejected on a wholesale level. 

But religion is simply a practical path for the soul to engage with spirit.

If one does not follow an established religion of the world, the soul still craves a practical way to evolve and connect to the divine. So then what do human beings do who crave to connect with God but are not engaged in a legitimate religion? 

They invent their own. 

Jeff Brown, a popular "grounded spiritualist," has written a "Humanifesto" to state his beliefs, what he strives to do for humanity, and the labels of the people who follow his particular brand of spirituality ("enrealment activists" or "Souldiers") and the things that they do. This "Humanifesto" is replete with invented words such as "gender-ation," "enrealment," and "womanifestation." In this way he is inventing a system of spirituality, and he is at the helm. 

Brown does not cite a single authority or a single source of inspiration for his own journey. In fact, he rejects them all. He writes, "[I endeavor to] liberate the species from the idea that those who came before have all the answers we seek. They don’t. We are a species in-process, endlessly evolving" (https://jeffbrown.co/humanifesto/) Note that he writes that "he" endeavors to liberate the species - he does. As in, he believes that by his own endeavors he can actually liberate human beings from the concept that those who came before us (any authorities, sages, saints, or self-realized beings) have  answers or truth that the soul is searching for. This directly counters the teachings of the Gita that if one wants to learn the truth, one must approach a spiritual master, render service, and inquire submissively (4.34). Basically, Jeff Brown and those who follow Jeff Brown reject the paths of genuine religions and invent their own religions and ideas based on subjective, personal experiences. This is considering "religion to be irreligion and irreligion to be religion." 

As a note, there is a grain of truth to Brown's statement that human beings are endlessly evolving, and that the soul is full of knowledge by nature. In fact, great souls emphasize that the soul is eternally full of knowledge (chit). So Brown is speaking of some truth, but it's a half-truth - it's not complete. In the purport to the Sri Isopanishad, Mantra 12, Prabhupad condemns spiritual leaders who present half-truths to the population. He writes, "If such foolish men have any knowledge at all, it is more dangerous in their hands than ignorance itself." This means that the general populace resonates with the grain of truth presented, but because it is couched within ignorance, ultimately even intelligent, thoughtful people can be lead astray. 

This approach leads to Prabhupad's second point of intelligence in the mode of ignorance: 

2) "Men in ignorance understand a great soul to be a common man and accept a common man as a great soul." 

Jeff Brown, although putting forth himself as a man who endeavors to "liberate," "awaken," and "remind humanity," he is simply an ordinary man. He may have some interesting ideas, but ultimately his ideas have little substance because they are not based upon the foundation of tried and tested knowledge, truth, and realization of great souls or the scripture. In fact, he rejects all of these things, calling the great souls common men or women. He does not accept or acknowledge that there are great souls or scripture who have more knowledge, understanding, or realization than him. He puts forth himself - in so many words - as a great soul (his website states that he has been featured on CBS, NPR, and Good Morning America), and he has a following who believe him to be a great soul. 

But in fact, Brown is a common man. 

Thus, he considers great souls to be common men, and he is a common man who is considered to be a great soul (or considers himself to be a great soul), which is intelligence in the mode of ignorance. 

And the final point that Prabhupad makes in this purport is that:

3) "They think truth to be untruth and accept untruth as truth." 

Brown states in his "Humanifesto" - essentially, his own created scripture: "Simply put, an absolute state of enlightenment does not exist—enrealment does. And it’s a relative process, changing form as we change form. We are form, and we are here to in-form our humanness." Brown is declaring that absolute enlightenment does not exist. This goes directly against the truth as stated in the major scriptures of the world and the teachings of the great souls that liberation from this material world is possible and real. For example, Krishna states in the Bhagavad-gita that "After attaining Me, the great souls, who are yogīs in devotion, never return to this temporary world, which is full of miseries, because they have attained the highest perfection" (8.15). Krishna says that these yogis in devotion "never" return to this temporary world - thus absolute enlightenment exists. So Brown is stating truth to be untruth.

Brown posits that enlightenment is a "relative process, changing form as we change form." But enlightenment, according to the Gita,  is a specific state of the soul in connection with God and all other souls - this is not relative. The soul - the unchanging, eternal soul - does not change form.  

Brown then invents his own word, enrealment, to describe a kind of relative process of how we are the form of our bodies and we "in-form" our humanness.

???

Honestly, I'm bewildered by Brown's philosophy. 

I have no intention of figuring it out, either. I see that he's posing an untruth as truth, which is intelligence in the mode of ignorance, where "intelligence is working the opposite way that it should."  

While certainly Brown's endeavors to uplift himself and humanity contain sparks of sincerity and striving for truth, his striving is upside down and flipped around. He insists that 2 + 2 = 5. He insists on creating his own path. But Prabhupad writes that "In all activities they simply take the wrong path; therefore their intelligence is in the mode of ignorance." Brown is taking the wrong path. If he was even to read this post, he would probably reject what I've written and declare that his path is the right path, everything is relative after all. 

I've done my best to base my analysis on the ancient words of the Bhagavad-gita and the words of Bhaktivedanta Swami, a man who is within an unbroken lineage of great souls who are handing down spiritual knowledge and realization. While I may be a fool, clouded by my own pride at times in my writing and thoughts, I trust at least that the great souls can help me distinguish reality from illusion, to help strengthen my intelligence to be in the mode of goodness. 

While I can see some small kernels of truth here and there in Brown's "Humanifesto" (which, again, can be more dangerous than pure ignorance) I can say with confidence that his approach to wisdom and transformation is intelligence in the mode of  ignorance. Jeff Brown is not a "grounded spiritualist" in any way. After all, what and who is he grounded in? 

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/18/32/

77: Description, Not Condemnation

CHAPTER 18, TEXT 28: The worker who is always engaged in work against the injunctions of the scripture, who is materialistic, obstinate, cheating and expert in insulting others, and who is lazy, always morose and procrastinating is said to be a worker in the mode of ignorance.

There is something very, very fascinating about how Krishna phrases His words in this verse. Well, not only this verse but any verse that describes types of people within the modes of natures. 

He does not instruct.  

He does not condemn.

He simply describes. 

Sure, the words "obstinate" and "lazy" sound judgmental, but Krishna is not judgmental or petty in that way. He is objectively describing the mental habits and behavior of a worker who is cocooned within the mode of ignorance. 

To be honest? I find myself being described here. But I don't feel condemned by God. In fact, I feel understood. 

I feel understood for my habits of working in a lazy and morose way and constantly procrastinating. Prabhupad writes, "[Workers in the mode of ignorance] procrastinate; anything which can be done in an hour they drag on for years." I had to laugh at this statement, because I find such truth here. I can pull up a list in my mind of projects or "to-do"s that could be completed literally within an hour, but they go on uncompleted, year after year. 

When I read this verse of the Gita I feel as though I am looking into the mirror. I see more clearly that, ah yes, I am often a worker in the mode of ignorance. 

So I'll start there, by simply saying that I resonate with this verse, and I do not feel condemned, but understood. 

Consequently, and naturally, I feel this lacking within my heart, this sense that I want to not be in the mode of ignorance. I want to be described in a different way. I do. 

My next point now has to deal with the world that I observe around me, especially on social media. 

1) I've begun to notice how there seems to be a confusion about what should be done and what should not be done. Recently I've seen some women share about the deep pain and challenge of motherhood. And while I understand that that's a reality, still... it's a stage of life. Billions of women have endured motherhood for millennia, how come suddenly motherhood is so shocking? Granted, I am not a mother, and I sound like I am condemning women for complaining about the challenge. Still, this verse from the Gita mentions that one who is "always morose" implies someone who is working with a kind of dread, frustration, and resisting the reality of one's duty day after day. While moroseness and the pain and challenge of motherhood is natural, to hang out in that space for a prolonged period of time seems to be resisting one's duty and to be working in the mode of ignorance. 

2) I am seeing a lack of gentility in communication, and a prevalence of cutting insults towards others. I see name-calling, such as "racist", "neo-Nazi", "Karen", "white supremacist", "Uncle Tom", "baby-killers", "snowflake", "wimp" and more. Name-calling is a kind of laziness, labeling others in a way that demeans and disrespects without much consideration. Prabhupad writes that "Such workers are not very gentle, and generally they are always cunning and expert in insulting others." In fact, this brashness and cutting personality is even glorified in modern media. Youtube videos of personalities who condemn and name-call others are wildly popular. The problem with this new kind of gossip and name-calling is that it's out of touch with humanity. If we were all to relate with each other personally, one-on-one, this kind of painful communication would hurt and maim others in a deep way.

3) I am also seeing a kind of obstinate way of dealing with authority, a kind of obnoxious "push back" against being told what to do, especially according to any kind of scriptural injunction (which this verse of the Gita mentions). Authority is rejected and generally seen as an oppressive force that should be questioned at all times. At no point should authority be accepted and respected in any kind of deep way. This obstinate nature and refusal to accept authority is a trademark of workers in the mode of ignorance. 

This post started out by saying that Krishna does not condemn workers in the mode of ignorance. Sure, His language is strong, but he is simply describing the truth of workers in this mode, just as he describes workers in the modes of passion and goodness. Krishna does not even instruct us to work in the mode of goodness. 

He leaves it up to us. 

We read how these workers are described. We look in the mirror and nod when we resonate. 

And we make our own choice: what kind of worker do I want to be? 

Okay, okay, show me the description of the worker in the mode of goodness. Let's do this. Because... that's how I want to be described. I want to look in the mirror and see that person. 

So here it is: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/18/26/

***

Full purport here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/18/28/

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/

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/

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/

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/