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.

35: As Is The Individual, So Is The Universe

CHAPTER 7, TEXT 27: O scion of Bharata, O conqueror of the foe, all living entities are born into delusion, bewildered by dualities arisen from desire and hate.

This means that the idea that God looks like this

is a matter of human interpretation. Anthropomorphism states that we are superimposing human qualities upon something (and someone) that could not possibly possess those qualities. How can an all-powerful Creator have hands and facial hair? The Cambridge dictionary defines anthropomorphism more broadly as "the showing or treating of animals, gods, and objects as if they are human in appearance, character, or behavior" (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/anthropomorphism). So not only is the supposed creator of the universe an old man with a long white beard, so are weather phenomena such as lighting

and even the modern the portrayal of animals in animated films

to how dogs are treated like humans

Ultimately, the idea of anthropomorphism asserts that humans are not the center of the universe, but we superimpose our own idea of humanity on everyone and everything around us. We MAKE ourselves the center of the universe. There is a subtle negative connotation here, that to view the world colored by human characteristics is delusional and even damaging.

But anthropomorphism, in its simple way, is actually touching upon a deep eternal truth. The Yajur Veda states yatha pinde tatha brahmande, yatha brahmande tatha pinde, which translates, "As is the individual, so is the universe; as is the universe, so is the individual." This means eternal patterns of life and the universe are repeated from the macro scale to the micro scale.

For example:

Brain cells are tiny, invisible to the naked eye, and the universe is so large that we cannot grasp its enormity with the naked eye. But from the gargantuan to the minuscule, patterns are repeated.

Below is a figure of all the major river basins of the United States. Rivers are considered the "veins" of the land.

This is a diagram of the circulatory system of the human body, the veins and the arteries. 

and the veins of a leaf

This is only one way that patterns are repeated, from the macro to the micro. 

As is the individual, so is the universe; as is the universe, so is the individual. 

Ultimately, the Vedic scriptures would concur with the Christian conception that "God created man in his own image" (1:27, KJV) and not the other way around where humans create God in THEIR image, as in anthropomorphism. Prabhupad asserts that "those who are deluded by duality and nescience think that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is created by material energies." In fact, God is the source of material energies. He is not created or formed by material minds. Thus anthropomorphism is a mere shadow of a divine truth that indeed God is a person.

The problem with God being a person who created the universe is that He must be the most powerful, most beautiful, most intelligent, and basically, the most everything. When anyone is the most of anything, envy is bound to happen.

Aristotle defines envy as pain at the sight of another’s good fortune, stirred by “those who have what we ought to have.”

And that's our problem. Prabhupad writes that an ignorant person wants the peace and bliss of merging into the light of the Supreme Lord but is envious of Krishna's position as the Supreme Personality of Godhead (vedabase.com). We actually feel pain to accept the glory of God, and deep down we feel, "I ought to have that." Prabhupad writes, "The illusory energy is manifested in the duality of desire and hate." The perpetual cycle of desiring independent happiness and hating God is what keeps us bound by illusion in this world.

For people trapped in this cycle, "This is their misfortune. Such deluded persons, symptomatically, dwell in dualities of dishonor and honor, misery and happiness, woman and man, good and bad, pleasure and pain, etc." When humans turn away from absolute truth, then they plunge into the miseries of these dualities.

Dishonor and honor become relative and thus cheapened.

Misery becomes a necessary contrast to experience any kind of happiness.

Woman and man become adversaries, fighting for dominance and control and recognition.

Good and bad become the flavor from which life is lived, the only reference point my own perspective.

Pleasure and pain become the spice of life, the avoiding of pain just as poignant as the incessant striving for pleasure - both flicker in and flicker out.

In the midst of all of these dualities, the world revolves around human beings. Humans become the center of the universe. Humans create a God in our image, and we superimpose human qualities on all we see and experience. There is no understanding that there could be absolute honor, absolute happiness, an absolute identity, and an Absolute Truth.

To any logical person, anthropomorphism seems childish and deluded, because it implies that humans are the center. But if we could stretch our minds to consider that maybe on a divine level, God created man in HIS image, and this divine pattern is echoed everywhere, then we can understand that there is no one to be envious of. We see personality infusing every living being because God Himself has a personality.

If God is everywhere and in everyone's heart and in everything, then there is no duality, no battle for dominance and control and pleasure. When Krishna states that "all living entities are born into delusion" this is what He means - we all are attracted to attain happiness and repulsed by the idea of an authentic personal God whom to surrender to.


Full purport by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/7/27/

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/

33: Cultivating the Connection

CHAPTER 7, TEXT 8: O son of Kuntī, I am the taste of water, the light of the sun and the moon, the syllable oṁ in the Vedic mantras; I am the sound in ether and ability in man.

From personal experience, a broken heart from betrayed love is probably the most excruciating pain I've ever endured.

Also from personal experience, a whole heart to give and receive love with another human being is probably the most joy I've ever known.

Love is pain.

Love is joy.

See the problem here??

We all want love, but love could be our downfall OR our salvation. So what is love?

Love, at its core, is an exchange between two people. Brene Brown, a Ph.D. researcher on shame and connection, writes, "Love is not something we give or get; it is something that we nurture and grow, a connection that can only be cultivated between two people..."  (https://brenebrown.com/definitions/). This means that love is not an object to be given or an object to give away. And if love cannot be given or taken away, then that must mean that love eternally resides within the heart of each and every one of us. Essentially, love is a connection that is either cultivated or neglected.

Bhakti is the love that exists between God (Bhagavan) and the spirit soul (bhakta) - that love is not given to us, nor can it be given away. The propensity to love and serve God is intrinsic to our very nature. Bhakti is either dormant (and neglected) or active. What's more, "We cultivate love when we allow our most vulnerable and powerful selves to be seen and known" (Brene Brown, https://brenebrown.com/definitions/). Bhagavan in His most sweet and vulnerable form is when he goes by the personal name of Krishna. (An equivalent would be like calling President Obama by his first name, Barack.)

Calling God by His "first name" - Krishna - is very intimate. By saying the name Krishna, we are invoking God's most vulnerable and powerful self, and Krishna is allowing Himself to be seen and known.

So what does this all have to do with this Chapter 7, Verse 8 of the Bhagavad-gita?? What does being hardwired to love, being scared to love, and using God's personal name have to do with Krishna sharing that He is, say, the syllable om in the Vedic mantras?

Prabhupad writes, "Because the impersonalists are very much afraid of addressing the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa by His innumerable names, they prefer to vibrate the transcendental sound oṁ-kāra." The key word in this sentence is "afraid." The very reason why people become impersonalists and refute the existence of a personal God who has a form and a name is because they're afraid... of love.

We all know how painful love can be, and so impersonalists have simply chosen to not cultivate that connection of love with God the person. After all, a broken heart on the scale of loving God could be cataclysmic!

Still, there's a secret: "But [the impersonalists] do not realize that oṁ-kāra is the sound representation of Kṛṣṇa."

There's no escape ;)

Krishna says in this verse that He is the om-kara, so for those who are afraid to connect to God in a loving relationship, He still makes Himself accessible through an impersonal sound. Prabhupad writes, "The Supreme Lord can be preliminarily perceived by His different energies, and in this way He is realized impersonally." When loving God seems too far away, too scary, too impossible, then we can start here, in this preliminary way: experiencing His energies. They're all representations of Krishna Himself that we can experience right now, in this moment.

A glass of New York City tap water (which is famous for being drawn from natural springs) sits on my desk; I just took a sip. That clean taste is Krishna.

The morning sunlight shines with brilliance upon light brown bricks of the apartment building outside my window. That light is Krishna.

Sitting here at my desk, I just vibrated the syllable om. That syllable is Krishna.

Right now I can hear the clock tick. That sound vibrating through ether is Krishna.

I move my fingers across this keyboard and look upon this screen. The ability to do so is Krishna.

Right here, right now, I can experience God, if only I have the vision. No need to fear any kind of personal relationship or connection that could end in a broken heart, because maybe - if I'm honest - I'm scared and a little intimidated to really love God. So Krishna says here: Just experience the original and purest lights, sounds, smells, tastes, and movements of this world and You will know me.  

In this way, Krishna is allowing His most powerful self to be known through these energies. Maybe He's not so vulnerable - like using his personal name of Krishna - but that's okay. In this way, Krishna is emphasizing that all pathways to experiencing, knowing, and loving God are valid. Prabhupad points out, "Practically speaking, there is no conflict between personalism and impersonalism. One who knows God knows that the impersonal conception and personal conception are simultaneously present in everything and that there is no contradiction." In this way, the spiritual journey is meant to be understandable and accessible to all.

Right now.

Right here.

Bhakti is meant to be cultivated through the simple medium of appreciation. Just appreciating the glass of water, the sunlight, and sound, our heart grows and softens. We begin to understand that God is not vaulted off in some inaccessible cloud in the sky looking down on us. He is infused within every moment and every movement of our lives, if we only have the vision to see.

"When we focus on our gratitude, the tide of disappointment goes out and the tide of love rushes in."
Kristin Armstrong

Full purport by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/7/8/

32: The Goal of Life

CHAPTER 7, TEXT 3: Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows Me in truth.

I once asked a parking attendant, "What do you believe is the goal of life?"

Grumpily, he finally responded, "To be happy and make others happy, okay? Now let me get back to giving parking tickets,"

His answer astounded me because not only did I agree with him, I was sure that the whole world would agree with him. Here was some random, ordinary person doing his mediocre job, for all the world - according to spiritual calculations - a lost soul deep in ignorance.

Yet when asked, the goal of life was on the tip of this man's tongue - be happy and make others happy. This is the perfection of life.

In this verse, Krishna says that out of many thousands of men, only one may endeavor for perfection. My sense is that we all know what the perfection of life is; after all, the answer was on the tip of the parking attendant's tongue. But very few people actually endeavor for perfection. Prabhupad writes, "Generally mankind is simply engaged in the animal propensities, namely eating, sleeping, defending and mating, and hardly anyone is interested in transcendental knowledge." Most of us are so caught up in simply surviving in this world, happiness is equated with getting enough food or having a nice place to sleep. We equate "happiness" with surviving with pleasure.

But pleasure comes and goes.

An intelligent person understands that true happiness must transcend the temporary comings and goings of, say, a delicious meal or pleasurable sex. Real happiness must be... eternal.

But the fact is, very few of us are actually interested in eternal happiness. It's just too far off. Better to stick to delicious meals and pleasurable sex.

So it is a rare soul indeed who decides to actually endeavor for real, eternal happiness. And Krishna says that while that soul is rare, s/he achieves happiness every so often.

The thing is, I would also translate the parking attendant's response of the goal of life, "to be happy and make others happy" as to love and be loved. I would dare say that even on a theoretical level, most of the world would agree with this statement. Love is the only way the soul can truly be happy or make others happy.

Thus, to love and be loved is the perfection of life.

Whew.

Love.

What a loaded word.

So let's start with a definition. Brene Brown, a Ph.D. a researcher on shame and connection offers a definition of love: "We cultivate love when we allow our most vulnerable and powerful selves to be deeply seen and known, and when we honor the spiritual connection that grows from that offering with trust, respect, kindness and affection. " (brenebrown.com)

Brown's definition of love offers us the reality that love is not easy. Love takes work. Yet love is the true goal of life - to be vulnerable, to be seen and known, to cultivate connection with trust, respect, and affection. Love is a cultivation that takes time and energy and is fraught with possible pain and hardship.

Love is definitely a kind of happiness that transcends simple pleasure or enjoyment.

In this sense, when Krishna says that even when a rare soul achieves perfection, even more rare is "one who knows Me in truth." Is not Krishna saying here, in Brown's words, that it is rare for Krishna to be "deeply seen and known"?

The path of love is a challenging path, and to love God is the most challenging of all. In Brown's words, it means that to love God we must cultivate trust and respect for God as well as kindness and affection.

To cultivate trust and respect, we must set boundaries, honor our word, show up on time, and more. This is not easy. These things are the nitty-gritty, the nuts and bolts of "love," and this all applies to loving God. The word for the eternal loving relationship between God (Bhagavaan) and the soul (bhakta) is bhakti. Prabhupad writes, "Actually the path of bhakti is not easy. The so-called path of bhakti practiced by unauthorized persons without knowledge of bhakti may be easy, but when it is practiced factually according to the rules and regulations, the speculative scholars and philosophers fall away from the path." This means that the path of loving service to God is not an exercise of the mind meant for textbooks and university halls or even TED Talks. The path of love is bound by rules and regulations, which means that love is meant to be practiced in action. Insincere people will simply fall away.

Brown elaborates on her definition of love by saying that "Love is not something we give or get; it is something that we nurture and grow, a connection that can only be cultivated between two people." This definition aligns well with the understanding that while love of God is present within the heart of every living entity (nitya-siddha krishna-prema ‘sadhya’ kabhu naya, CC Madhya Lila 22.107), that connection must be nurtured and cultivated through service, trust, respect, and kindness.

At the end of the day, if we accept that God is a person, we must also understand that even if we follow every rule and regulation and offer respect and affection to God, He still has free will. Love is not a recipe or a business exchange or a mathematical equation. Love between persons always involves the willingness to open the heart and be vulnerable.

So we do our best. We follow the rules and regulations of love, we show up on time and cultivate love of God through our nitty gritty actions and nitty gritty prayers.

Then maybe one day, most wondrous of all, God may choose to be vulnerable to us, to be deeply seen and known, to be known in truth. In the  purport of this verse, Prabhupad quotes the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.234: "[Krishna] reveals Himself to the devotees, being pleased with them for their transcendental loving service unto Him.”

Transcendental loving service is meant to demonstrate our sincerity. Service is meant to put our hearts on our sleeve, to unfurl our hearts that have been wound up so tight for so long. How amazing that in seeing this sincerity, God would choose to reveal Himself to US. God would actually be vulnerable and open His heart to be deeply seen and known. I can think of no higher happiness that to have God open his heart to me of His own free will.

Full purport by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/7/3/

Day 31: A Really Good Question

CHAPTER 6, TEXT 38: O mighty-armed Kṛṣṇa, does not such a man, who is bewildered from the path of transcendence, fall away from both spiritual and material success and perish like a riven cloud, with no position in any sphere?

Arjuna has received instructions about the nature of the soul and  the supreme value of pursuing the spiritual path. These instructions are so logical and make so much sense, it's difficult to deny that the ultimate goal of human life is to set one's mind on Krishna and offer one's very self in devotional service.

But Arjuna has a doubt.

This goal is so high - love of God - that it seems unattainable.

So Arjuna is wondering - on behalf of all of us - if I fall from the spiritual path, where will I fall?

What's more, if one is on the spiritual path, then maybe material life is neglected. So not only would someone fail at spiritual life, s/he would fail at material life too. Double whammy! Prabhupad writes: "If the aspiring transcendentalist fails, then he apparently loses both ways; in other words, he can enjoy neither material happiness nor spiritual success." This is a lose-lose situation, and it's a possibility for each and every one of us:

Failure.

No progress, no success, no belonging, just...

You failed.

Prabhupad defines the term "riven cloud":  "A cloud in the sky sometimes deviates from a small cloud and joins a big one. But if it cannot join a big one, then it is blown away by the wind and becomes a nonentity in the vast sky." Note that the cloud may start off in a smaller cloud - this represents being in the material world, with relatively small goals and small aspirations. When a cloud breaks off to join a bigger cloud, this represents the soul's desire to achieve something much grander than itself. But when the cloud fails to belong in that spiritual place - the soul is "bewildered on the path of transcendence" - then it wanders and dissolves into nothingness. It belongs neither here nor there - it is "riven."

Arjuna's fears strike a deep chord. Not only do humans want to succeed in an endeavor, they also need to belong. Karyn Hall, Ph.D. writes in her article "Create a Sense of Belonging" in Psychology Today, "A sense of belonging is a human need, just like the need for food and shelter." The possibility that one may not belong anywhere and simply dissolve into a "nonentity" is a frightening prospect indeed. We're hardwired to be connected to something bigger than ourselves. But the problem is that we could fail to belong, and we could fail to succeed in life. 

In his question, Arjuna is expressing some of our deepest fears: failure and belonging nowhere.

Don't you notice that when a question is good, like, really good, we want to know the answer? Well, now we're set up. We want to know.

So let's lean in and hear what Krishna has to say.


Full Purport by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/6/38/

Hall, Karyn. “Create a Sense of Belonging.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 24 Mar. 2014, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/pieces-mind/201403/create-sense-belonging.

30: Be Sincere

CHAPTER 6, TEXT 33: Arjuna said: O Madhusūdana, the system of yoga which You have summarized appears impractical and unendurable to me, for the mind is restless and unsteady.

In Chapter 6 entitled Dhyana Yoga, Krishna is instructing Arjuna to follow a very stringent system of yoga practice to purify the body and mind. Go to the forest, sit upon a firm yet soft mat, gaze at the tip of the nose with eyes half-open, and control the mind until it becomes like a "lamp in a windless place" (6.29).

One would imagine that as an obedient disciple to God Himself, Arjuna would be nodding his agreement to all of these instructions. Even if he did have misgivings, Arjuna would never object to instructions given by the guru.

Right?

Not quite.

Krishna has presented a system of mysticism to achieve perfection, but it is "rejected by Arjuna out of a feeling of inability."

Cue inner sigh of relief.

The yoga of mystic meditation and mind control seems interesting, and the past few dozen verses have certainly made valid points about the importance of self-control and recognizing the divine within others and within oneself. That said, Arjuna does not mince words - he declares that the system "appears impractical and unendurable."  In fact, Arjuna is a warrior and already highly self-disciplined; he also "had much better facilities than we do now, yet he refused to accept this system of yoga... Of course it may be possible for some very few, rare men, but for the people in general it is an impossible proposal."

Arjuna's rejection of Dhyana Yoga demonstrates two things. The first is that above all, The Bhagavad-gita is a practical scripture; this wisdom is meant to be applied by the common man in every age, every place, and every culture. The Gita is not meant for a few, rare men. The Gita is meant for the people in general, and people need practices that are accessible and meaningful. The Gita is meant for you and for me, today, here and now.

The second thing that Arjuna's rejection of Dhyana Yoga demonstrates is how a disciple should engage in dialogue with the teacher. Arjuna uses his intelligence and is respectfully, unflinchingly honest. What kind of disciple would Arjuna be if he just nodded his head and "accepted" everything that Krishna was telling him to do, but in his heart he felt doubtful and incapable? Arjuna speaks up about his concerns. Thus he is showing us how to conduct ourselves on the spiritual path - Do not blindly follow, but also do not blindly reject.

Use your intelligence.

Use your heart.

Be practical.

Ultimately, be sincere.

Full purport by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad here: https://vedabase.io/en/library/bg/6/33/