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/

36: From Subtle to Gross

CHAPTER 8, TEXT 3: The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: The indestructible, transcendental living entity is called Brahman, and his eternal nature is called adhyātma, the self. Action pertaining to the development of the material bodies of the living entities is called karma, or fruitive activities.

(note: I use the pronoun "he" for simplicity's sake in this post)

Although there are over 340 recognized breeds of dog (livescience.com) there is factually only one species: canis familiaris (scientificamerican). 

But according to Vedic understanding, these "breeds" of dogs are actually different species. Material science defines a species as a group of organisms that can biologically reproduce with one another (nature.com), but Vedic understanding declares that a species is defined by the composition of its consciousness according to the three modes of material nature, satva (goodness), rajas (passion), and tamas (ignorance). The aphorism "from subtle to gross" is pertinent in this regard, for consciousness shapes physical reality. 

It is well known that certain breeds of dogs have particular personalities. For example, "Boxers are upbeat and playful... They take the jobs of watchdog and family guardian seriously and will meet threats fearlessly" (akc.org). In the picture below, note the sharp ears perked up, almost reflecting this watchful nature (total speculation on my part!). 

Contrast this with the nature of a golden retriever, which is "even-tempered, intelligent and affectionate. Golden retrievers are playful, yet gentle with children, and they tend to get along well with other pets and strangers" (hillspet.com). Note that the golden retriever's ears are soft and floppy and actually cannot perk up, which seem to reflect a kind of softness and gentility (again, total speculation). 

Do individual boxers and golden retrievers deviate from this commonly experienced norm of personality? Absolutely. At the same time, we can generalize that these particular breeds of dogs produce a particular personality, or consciousness. 

Within both the boxer and the golden retriever is a pure, imperishable soul, called the adhyatma, as mentioned in this verse of the Gita. This pure soul is definitely not a dog according to his eternal nature. But that soul has identified with material nature, and then according to the laws of nature, he is given a body to reflect that consciousness - in this case, a particular kind of dog. Prabhupad writes, "When the living entity is in material consciousness, he has to take on various bodies in the material world. That is called karma, or varied creation by the force of material consciousness." I find the phrase "varied creation by force of material consciousness" intriguing in this regard, because it means that all the varied material creation springs from consciousness, and this is "by force." The aphorism "from subtle to gross" offers a clear understanding that whatever one thinks or desires becomes manifest by force. 

Modern science has officially described 1.6 million species of life (biodiversidad.gob.mx) although there are estimates up to 8.7 million (livescience.com); ancient Vedic understanding states that there are 8.4 million species of life. The relatively close correlation between modern estimations and ancient statements is fascinating. But while modern science simply offers material calculations, Srila Prabhupad offers the reason for all of these millions of species of life: "According to his [the soul's] identification with material or spiritual nature, he receives a material or spiritual body. In material nature he may take a body from any of the 8,400,000 species of life, but in spiritual nature he has only one body." The three modes of material nature, goodness (satva), passion (rajas), and ignorance (tamas), combine in 8,400,000 ways in order to manifest the various material bodies that we see (Padma Purana). 

This principle applies to all species of life, and Prabhupad writes that "In material nature he [the soul] is manifested sometimes as a man, demigod, animal, beast, bird, etc., according to his karma." Karma in this context means one's "work" or "actions" so according to what one has willed into reality by force of material consciousness, one is given a body that corresponds.  

For example, for one to be born in the body of a dog, the overall ratio of satva, rajas, and tamas is balanced for this species of life, let's assume for demonstration's sake 40% satva, 40% rajas, and 20% tamas.   

Proportionately the boxer may have a smidgen more rajas because its nature is to be upbeat and protective, while the golden retriever may have a smidgen more satva because its nature is to be affectionate and gentle.

What is most important to understand is not that we aim to take on the body that has the highest ratio of satva. We are not meant to have even the tiniest tinge of ANY of the modes of nature in our true self. Living in the body of a boxer or a golden retriever is temporary and is not an eternal existence or identity. Prabhupad states clearly that we either identify with a material nature - and thus spring forth 8,400,000 species of life in conjunction with the modes of nature - or we identify with our spiritual nature.

In our original spiritual nature, we have only one body. This means that our pure, imperishable, joyful soul - the adhyatma - is shining forth and manifests in a tangible body, free of any tinges of the modes of nature. 

Ultimately, we choose: material identity or spiritual identity. 

If the aphorism "from subtle to gross" holds true, how do I purify my subtle consciousness to truly achieve purity of mind and ultimately body? Prabhupad writes, "The Supreme Lord is the purest of the pure. Therefore anyone who is constantly Kṛṣṇa conscious is also the purest of the pure" (8.5). Krishna consciousness means remembering (smaranam) Krishna, especially by chanting the holy name. Chanting of the holy name is emphasized by Srila Prabhupad repeatedly as a way to connect with our original, joyful, pure nature by connecting to the source of all purity and love:

Hare Krishna

Hare Krishna

Krishna Krishna

Hare Hare

Hare Rama

Hare Rama

Rama Rama

Hare Hare 

https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/8/3/

Sources: 

https://www.livescience.com/8420-incredible-explosion-dog-breeds.html#:~:text=Now%2C%20there%20are%20about%20340,currently%20recognizes%20only%20167%20breeds.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/different-dog-breeds-same-species/#:~:text=But%20among%20dogs%2C%20which%20are,a%20single%20species%2C%20Canis%20familiaris.

https://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/v_ingles/species/howmany_species.html

https://www.nature.com/scitable/definition/species-312/#:~:text=species,nature%20and%20produce%20fertile%20offspring.

34: Make A Choice: IGNORE-ance or KNOW-ledge

CHAPTER 7, TEXT 15: Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me.

CHAPTER 7, TEXT 16: O best among the Bhāratas, four kinds of pious men begin to render devotional service unto Me – the distressed, the desirer of wealth, the inquisitive, and he who is searching for knowledge of the Absolute.

One evening when I was thirteen years old in Hawaii, I smoked marijuana with a few of my friends at an abandoned hotel. We then went to the beach and laughed and played in the shimmering blue water in the setting sun.

The night set in fast. My friends went home and somehow I ended up at the beach alone. This was an age before cell phones, so I couldn't call my parents. I had no money for a payphone. Besides, I thought nervously, I didn't want my parents to catch whiff of anything I had been doing.

So... I walked home.

In the dark, along roads where headlights blinded me and whizzed by, through quiet streets up the mountain towards my house, I walked. I was coming off the high from the marijuana, and one side effect is to become paranoid. So walking in the dark my mind conjured monsters, ax-murderers, and ferocious beasts. You're just coming down from your high, Bhakti, get a grip, I told myself. But fear flooded my veins.

By the time I got home, the high (and the fear) had worn off. I walked through my front door exhausted to the core of my being - not only by the fear, but by my attempt to have fun. What a shallow, unreliable, and futile method to experience happiness. I had simply become miserable.

That night, I vowed to never smoke marijuana again, or take any other mind-altering substance.

The next morning, I opened up an old songbook, filled with prayers by the saints in the Vaishnava tradition. I wanted to know - what is real happiness? Surely these people had it figured out, and maybe their songs would show me the way.

That fateful evening when I was thirteen was so miserable for me that I decided to turn to God. I could  have just as easily shrugged off the miserable experience as a one-off event and kept on smoking marijuana and stumbling in the metaphorical dark. But somehow, I made a choice.

There must be more to life than this. 

Show me. 

Please. 

That choice set me on a lifelong path for the pursuit of truth and love.

These two verses from the Bhagavad-gita, verses 15 and 16 of Chapter 7, highlight in such piercingly clear ways the types of people who refuse to turn to Krishna and those who do turn to Krishna.

Below I arrayed my analysis of these two verses and the analogous types of people, which is based on the commentary by Baladev Vidyabhusan; I wove in Prabhupad's translation and commentary as well.

Ultimately, the greatest distinction between these types of people is those people who choose to ignore Krishna (and cultivate ignorance) and those who choose to know God (and cultivate true knowledge). I did  not only make the choice to know God when I was thirteen - my relationship with God and the way I turn to Him continues to evolve over time. I am called to choose on a regular basis: turn towards or turn away?

These verses are not meant to condemn, but are meant to give us the clarity to understand our own relationship with God and to ask the question: Which one of these am I?

And then - make a choice.

Full Purports by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad here for Verse 15: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/7/15/
and here for Verse 16: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/7/16/

24: The Ultimate Motivation

CHAPTER 4, TEXT 12: The steadily devoted soul attains unadulterated peace because he offers the result of all activities to Me; whereas a person who is not in union with the Divine, who is greedy for the fruits of his labor, becomes entangled.

There are four levels of motivation for any activity (Bhaktivinoda Thakur, Chaitanya Sikshamrita):

Love
Duty
Profit
Fear

Here's an example:

Going to work -

Love: I love teaching. I love my students. I love my subject matter.
Duty: My job is to teach. I'm responsible for these kids' education.
Profit: I'm here for the money (even though it ain't much) and for paid summers off.
Fear: If I don't go to work to teach, I will lose my paycheck, I'll lose my home, I'll go hungry, I'll lose my WiFi...

Any of this sound familiar?

For the most part, humans operate out of Profit and Fear. Sometimes we level up to Duty, maybe even to Love. But mostly, we're either in it for the money/rewards or we're terrified of what will happen if we don't do our job/do the needful.

That's just life, right?

In fact, one could say, hey, what's the problem with doing something for the money? Krishna knows this is how human beings operate, that's why He makes the declaration in this verse that to be greedy for the fruits of one's labor makes a person becomes entangled.

Now we see that entanglement is the problem.

When we're entangled, we're not free.

And the soul wants freedom.

Most of all, the soul wants freedom to love.

At the end of the day, when we look at the four kinds of motivation, let's all admit that if we could, we'd do everything out of love. I love my job, I love my family, I love my car, I love throwing out the trash...

But we're not there.

So the Bhagavad-gita emphasizes doing things at least out of Duty, because that's one step away from Love.

But let's all admit where we're really hanging out: Profit and Fear.

And so Krishna is so wondrous, so amazing, that He says that if we just remember Him and offer our endeavors to Him, even if it's out of Profit or Fear, He is pleased. After all, everything belongs to Him and He is everything: "All that exists is a product of Krsna's energy, and Krsna is all good." We can't go wrong if we keep Krishna in our hearts.

So no matter what activity I do, from cooking a meal to putting gas in the car to managing a business, when I keep Krishna in my heart He elevates all of my activities. Prabhupad writes: "Activities in Kṛṣṇa consciousness are on the absolute plane; they are transcendental and have no material effect. One is therefore filled with peace in Kṛṣṇa consciousness." This makes sense, for if an action does not entangle us further, we're free, and if we're free, we're at peace.

Prabhupad then writes the beautiful, beautiful secret of Krishna consciousness: "[the] realization that there is no existence besides Kṛṣṇa is the platform of peace and fearlessness." Whether I'm motivated to act out of Love, Duty, Profit, or Fear, if I can choose this one little shift in consciousness - everything belongs to Krishna, let me keep Him in mind, let me offer my action to Him - then I am free. I am at peace. What's more, to remember Krishna is in and of itself an act of Love.

I was in the middle of writing this post while cooking dinner. I was excited to make a delicious soup for myself and my husband. But then I remembered this principle. So before we ate, I offered the soup to Krishna with a little more attention. Just a little.

I felt peace.

And a tinge, just a glimmer, of Love.

Full purport for Chapter 5, Text 12 by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/5/12/