Transcription :

Transcriber: Suresh Gupta

Question: If someone puts in the same efforts as me but gets better results, how to avoid envy?

Answer: All of us are on a multi life-time journey where actions and results are not simply a linear connection. We see that a particular action done by us leads to a particular result and when someone else does the same action, it produces different result. Although causes and effects are connected, the connection between cause and effects is not simply linear or a one-to-one correspondence. For example, two farmers living in different part of the country may individually do the same action of sowing seeds, ploughing their land but if it rains only in one part of the country and not in the other part then the place where it rained, the farmer will get lots of harvest and the other place where it did not rain, the farmer may not get any harvest.
In Sanskrit, all these factors are described as karma (action), daiva (destiny), kaala (time) and phalah (fruit). We perform karma (action) to produce phalah (fruit) but actually there are two more factors involved: daiva and kaala. So, the entire equation is karma + daiva + kaala together lead to phalah. In this case, the karma is the farmer ploughing the land, sowing the seeds; daiva is the rains coming; kaala is the passage of time until the harvesting season and finally it leads to phalah.

Whenever we do any action, we need to understand that they alone do not determine the results. Our actions do play an important role – the farmer has to plough the land, sow the seeds but that alone does not bring the result. Sometimes, we may go through a phase when the daiva or the destiny is not favourable and because of that, even after doing the work, result does not come. If we look back at our life, we will remember situations where although we had put in small efforts, still we got a good result. Along with our hard work, many things would have fell right in place (e.g. we might have found the right contact, a particular thing happened on time etc.). The results achieved require not just our good performance but also other things. Thus, daiva is an accumulated sum total of the karma that we have done in the past.

When we do not get the results, it means that karma is not leading to phalah because daiva is not favourable. Daiva is like weather – sometimes cold, sometimes hot. It is not that daiva will always be unfavourable. One must learn to tolerate such events and be patient. There is no need to be envious of others because everybody has done a mix of good and bad karmas. With this understanding, we would not deem ourselves as failure for not producing a result.

Ultimately, nothing is gained by envy. Therefore, we should instead focus on doing our best then even when the results do not come, we are at least becoming better at what we are doing. We are growing internally. Einstein said, ‘’Strive to become a man of values, not a man of wealth”. Values are enduring and wealth is fleeting but if we develop the culture of discipline, dedication and values, then that will bring results in due course of time.

End of transcription.

The post If someone puts in the same efforts as me but gets better results, how to avoid envy? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcription :

Transcribed by: Keshavgopal Das

Question: Why don’t we make Bhagavad-gita compulsory in schools in India?

Answer: This is a question we should be asking from the Government of India. Let me try to answer it based on how I see it.

We live today in a multi-cultural world, where people are opposed to the idea of imposing any one faith on them. People believe that faith is a personal matter which should be chosen by an individual. These days, Bhagavad-gita is seen as a religious book; a book of Hindus. As long as Bhagavad-gita is seen as a religious book, it will be difficult for the government to make it mandatory. May be in future, if we have a government which rules by different principles then it is possible. However, it does not mean that nothing can be done to popularize Gita. What need to present Bhagavad-gita not as a religious book but as a book of wisdom. When it will be viewed as a book of wisdom in the Indian tradition that will make people more open.

Few years ago, a big attempt was made to make Bhagavad-gita as national book of India. It led to a lot of violent opposition from people saying that it will make India a theocracy or a radical Hindu country. In today’s world, religious pressure will not work. Bhagavad-gita needs to be repositioned as a book of wisdom. There are devotee scholars who are working in mainstream academia for this purpose. Beyond that, we, at our individual level, can do our part in sharing Gita’s message. However, we should be careful that we do not present Gita’s message as mandatory. When we present things as mandatory, people do it as ritual and they do not take it very seriously. For example, I sometimes do a class on Bhagavad-gita in colleges in India, where the authorities make it mandatory to attend. Such an arrangement can lead to five hundred or thousand students coming to the class. The number of students attending the class can appear impressive, but to such a crowd even if we give the best class, we find that the students are just not interested. The students are chatting on their phones, looking here and there. When we make things mandatory, people just switch-off. It is much better to share the message at an individual level. Change at a grass-root level is much more sustainable compared to when brought in a top-down fashion. In a top-down approach, we can have a lot of resources, but that will not necessary mean acceptance from others. In today’s ethos that will only lead to resistance.

In my childhood, I participated in Gita shloka recitation competition and won a prize. I thought Gita is only meant for memorizing some shlokas and win prizes. I never saw it as a book having practical relevance to me. When a friend came and gave me Bhagavad-gita, he requested me to read it. My first reaction was, I have already read it. However, when I saw him transformed I was surprised. My friend was a very materialistic person, but after transformation he appeared very sober, gentle, and cultured person. I thought that if he got so much transformed by reading the Gita, probably I missed something in my reading. Such lateral sharing of Gita is going to transform people in a much more sustainable way. Such an approach on sharing is very much within our control right now.

Yes, Bhagavad-gita has come from India, it is a national heritage, but unfortunately it is not being studied at all in India. Unfortunately, that is the way government’s situation and cultural trend is today. If we try to impose something it will be resisted and will not be accepted open mindedly or whole heartedly. Rather than waiting for something to come from top down, we just focus on doing what is in our power.

Srila Prabhupada, before he went to America, he had practically no resources. Bhagavad-gita was known but it was not known as it is now. When I recently met one of the editors of Srila Prabhupada in the early days of ISKCON, he told me about how Srila Prabhupada would give him manuscripts of his books for typing. He saw manuscripts were written with no margins on the pages. Srila Prabhupada was in such financial crisis in those days, that he had hardly any money to have paper. He would write on the paper from top left corner to the bottom right corner. Many of the papers he had written were the inside of the envelopes which he had received as letters. However, he did what he could. Now from that, a global movement has emerged. Millions and millions of Bhagavad-gita has been distributed and thousands and thousands of lives have been enriched by that wisdom. Krishna had its plan, he empowered Srila Prabhupada in an extra-ordinary way. However, it all started with Srila Prabhupada doing what was in his power. Surrender at one level means doing what we can with what we have right now. Just like you are sharing your appreciation of Gita here, you may share the same appreciation with others. There are many people who are naturally and voluntarily willing to take the wisdom of Gita if this is presented as wisdom to them. As Gita starts to be seen more of a wisdom book and the number of people viewing Gita in such a light increases, then there will be greater openness to accepting Gita.

End of transcription.

Transcription in Hindi

प्रश्न – हम भगवद्गीता को स्कूलों में अनिवार्य क्यों नहीं करते?

उत्तर– ये प्रश्न वास्तव में भारत सरकार से पूछा जाना चाहिए, पर यहाँ हम अपना मत आपके साथ साझा कर सकते हैं।

हम एक बहु-सांस्कृतिक जगत में रहते हैं, जहाँ लोग किसी एक मत को अन्यों पर थोपने के पक्षधर नहीं होते। लोग सोचते हैं कि विश्वास अथवा श्रद्धा एक निजी विषय है जिसका चुनाव करने का सबको अधिकार है। वर्तमान समय में भगवद्गीता को हिन्दुओं की एक धार्मिक पुस्तक के रूप में देखा जाता है। जब तक गीता को धार्मिक पुस्तक के रूप में देखा जाता रहेगा, सरकार के लिए इस अनिवार्य करना कठिन होगा। किन्तु इसका यह अर्थ नहीं है कि इन सब परिस्थितियों के होते हुए भी गीता की शिक्षा का प्रचार नहीं किया जा सकता। गीता को एक धार्मिक पुस्तक के रूप में देखने के बजाय इसे ज्ञान की पुस्तक के रूप में देखा जाना चाहिए। जब इस पुस्तक को भारतीय संस्कृति की एक ज्ञान एवं दर्शन की पुस्तक के रूप में देखा जाने लगेगा तब लोग इसे स्वीकार करने में अधिक उत्सुक होंगे।

कुछ वर्षों पूर्व जब गीता को राष्ट्रीय पुस्तक बनाने का प्रयास हुआ तो बड़ा विरोध हुआ था। लोगों ने कहा ऐसा करने पर भारत एक गणतंत्र की बजाय एक धर्मतंत्र अथवा एक कट्टर हिंदुवादी देश बन जाएगा। वर्तमान जगत में धार्मिक दबाव बनाने से बात नहीं बन सकती। हमें गीता को एक ज्ञान के ग्रंथ के रूप में प्रस्तुत करना होगा। हमारी संस्था के कई विद्वान भक्त विश्व में मुख्यधारा से जुड़े शैक्षणिक संस्थानों में इस प्रकार का प्रयास पहले ही कर रहे हैं। किन्तु साथ ही साथ हम भी अपने निजी स्तर पर प्रयास कर सकते हैं। किन्तु हमें ध्यान रखना होगा कि हम गीता के संदेश को अनिवार्य शिक्षा के रूप में न प्रस्तुत करें। जब हम किसी बात को अनिवार्य बना देते हैं तो लोग उसे बोझ समझने लगते हैं और गंभीरता से नहीं लेते। हमने अकसर देखा है जब किसी विद्यालय में गीता पर कोई वार्ता रखी जाती है तो अधिकारीगण विद्यार्थियों का उसमें आना अनिवार्य बना देते हैं। ऐसा करने पर पाँच सौ, हजार बच्चे तो आ जाते हैं किन्तु अच्छी से अच्छी वार्ता प्रस्तुत करने के उपरांत भी बच्चे संदेश में रुचि नहीं लेते। वे इधर-उधर देखते रहेंगे, आपस में बतिया रहे होंगे पर ध्यान नहीं देंगे। कहने का अर्थ है कि जब किसी बात को अनिवार्य बना दिया जाता है तो लोग उससे भागने लगते हैं। अनिवार्य बनाने की बजाय हमें गीता के संदेश को व्यक्तिगत स्तर पर अन्यों तक पहुँचाना चाहिए। जब व्यक्ति इसके संदेश को जीवनोपयोगी एवं चेतना के उत्थान का माध्यम समझकर ग्रहण करेगा तो ऐसा बदलाव अधिक टिकाऊ होगा।

हमने अकसर देखा है कि कई बार बच्चे गीता के श्लोक उच्चारण प्रतियोगिता में भाग लेते हैं। वे श्लोकों को स्मरण करते हैं और पुरस्कार जीतते हैं। एक तरह से देखा जाए तो गीता के श्लोकों का स्मरण करना हमारे आध्यात्मिक कल्याण के लिए अच्छा है किन्तु इससे भी अच्छा है इस ज्ञान पुस्तिका में अन्तर्निहित ज्ञान को आत्मसात कर उससे अपने जीवन में सुन्दर बदलावों को लाना। इसके ज्ञान को आत्मसात कर हम एक भौतिकतावादी, मानसिक रूप से अशांत व्यक्ति से एक सभ्य, शांत, सुसंस्कृत व्यक्ति बन सकते हैं। इस प्रकार जब लोग गीता को ऐसी पुस्तक के रूप में देखने लगते हैं जो जीवन में बड़े सुंदर बदलाव ला सकती है तब वास्तव में लोग इस पुस्तक को सीखने में स्वतः ही रुचि लेने लगेंगे। ऐसा बदलाव लाना बिल्कुल भी कठिन नहीं। यह हमारे, आपके, हम सबके बस में है।

गीता भारत की पुस्तक है, यह इसकी राष्ट्रीय धरोहर है, किन्तु दुर्भाग्यवश भारत में इसका अध्ययन अधिक नहीं होता। वर्तमान में भारत में सरकारों की स्थिति और सांस्कृतिक ढर्रा कुछ ऐसा ही है। यदि किसी बात को थोपा जाएगा तो उसका विरोध होगा और उसको हृदय से स्वीकार्यता नहीं मिलेगी। इस बात की प्रतीक्षा करने की बजाए कि यह एक दिन स्कूलों में अनिवार्य रुप से पढ़ाई जाएगी, हमें अपनी ओर से इस पुस्तक की शिक्षा का यथासंभव प्रसार-प्रचार करने में आगे आना चाहिए।

हमें श्रील प्रभुपाद के जीवन से भी प्रेरणा लेनी चाहिए। उन्होंने बड़ी कठिन परिस्थितियों को झेलते हुए गीता पर अपनी टीका (भगवद्गीता यथारूप) लिखी। उनके पास धन का बड़ा अभाव था। उनको जो पत्र आते थे वे उनके लिफाफों के भीतर की सतह का भी प्रयोग कर उन पर अपना लेखन करते थे। आज उसी भगवद्गीता यथारूप से एक विश्व-व्यापी आंदोलन (इस्कॉन) खड़ा हो गया है। करोड़ों गीता की पुस्तकों का वितरण और इसके पठन-पाठन से लाखों लोगों का जीवन परिवर्तित हुआ है। किन्तु ये सब आरम्भ हुआ श्रील प्रभुपाद के एक विनम्र प्रयास से। इस प्रकार हम भी अपना छोटा-मोटा प्रसास कर सकते हैं। सर्वप्रथम हम स्वयं गीता के एक अच्छे विद्यार्थी बनें और फिर अन्यों को इसके ज्ञान का उपहार दें। जैसे-जैसे गीता को लोग जीवन में ज्ञान का प्रकाश लाने वाली पुस्तक के रूप में देखेंगे वैसे-वैसे लोगों में इसको स्वीकार करने के प्रति अधिकाधिक तत्परता दिखेगी।

End of transcription.

The post Why don’t we make the Bhagavad-gita compulsory in schools in India? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transription in Hindi
प्रश्न: सहनशीलता की हद कैसे तय करें?

उत्तर: जो गीता अर्जुन को सहन करने की शिक्षा देती है (गीता २.१४ – ताम् तितिक्षस्व भारत), वही गीता अर्जुन को युद्ध के लिए भी प्रेरित करती है (गीता ११.३३ – तस्मात त्वम उत्तिष्ठ यशो लभस्व)। श्रीकृष्ण ने कौरवों के अत्याचारों को सहने के लिए अर्जुन को गीता नहीं सुनाई। सहिष्णुता एक गुण है, किन्तु सर्वोच्च गुण नहीं है। सर्वोच्च गुण है धर्म का पालन करना और धर्म की परिणति अंततः भक्ति में होती है। भक्ति का अभ्यास करने के लिए, सहनशीलता का गुण होना आवश्यक है, किन्तु यदि परिस्थितियाँ हमारी भक्ति में बाधा बनें, तो ऐसी परिस्थितियों को सहन करने का अर्थ होगा अपनी सेवा को बंद करना। हमें यह समझना आवश्यक है कि सहिष्णुता का उद्देश्य है सेवा। सहिष्णुता का अर्थ है छोटी-छोटी बातों को छोटा ही रखना ताकि हम अपने मुख्य उद्देश्य पर ध्यान केंद्रित कर सकें। यदि सहिष्णुता के कारण मुख्य उद्देश्य की प्राप्ति में बाधा पड़ने लगे तो यह सहिष्णुता नहीं नपुंसकता कही जाएगी। और भगवद्गीता नपुंसकता की सिफारिश नहीं करती।

उदाहरणार्थ, श्रील भक्तिसिद्धान्त सरस्वती ठाकुर (श्रील प्रभुपाद के आध्यात्मिक गुरु) कहा करते थे कि यदि हम कृष्ण-कथा के लिए लोगों को आमंत्रित करते हैं और कोई नहीं आए, तो हमें दीवारों को कथा सुनानी चाहिए। आरम्भ में जब श्रील प्रभुपाद भारत में कृष्णभक्ति का प्रसार करने का प्रयास कर रहे थे, तब लोगों ने दिलचस्पी नहीं दिखाई, किन्तु श्रील प्रभुपाद ने दीवारों को कथा नहीं सुनाई। उन्होंने अथक प्रयास किए। वे अमरिका आए और अमरिका में ऐसे लोगों से सम्पर्क किया जो आध्यात्म के प्रति गंभीर थे। वे ऐसे लोगों को भारत लाए और अंततः भारत में लोगों ने प्रभुपाद को गंभीरता से लिया। प्रभुपाद कह सकते थे, “अरे, मैं चालीस साल से भक्ति के प्रचार का प्रयास कर रहा हूँ, कोई मुझे गंभीरता से नहीं ले रहा है, मुझे सहन करना चाहिए”। उन्होंने ऐसा नहीं कहा। उनका उद्देश्य श्रीकृष्ण की सेवा करना था और इसके लिए उन्हें अनेक कठिनाइयों का सामना करना पड़ा। उदाहरणार्थ, आरम्भिक दिनों में जब वे कक्षाऐं प्रस्तुत कर रहे थे, तो लोग कभी-कभी अजीब व्यवहार करते थे। अचानक ही प्रश्न पूछ बैठते। नशे की हालत में उल्टा-सीधा बोलने लगते। किन्तु श्रील प्रभुपाद ने वह सब सहन किया। जब प्रभुपाद, बटलर, पैनसिल्वेनिया में गोपाल और सैली अग्रवाल के साथ रह रहे थे, उस समय उनका भोजन उसी फ्रिज में रखा था, जहाँ अग्रवाल दम्पत्ति माँस रखते थे। अग्रवाल दम्पत्ति समझते थे कि ऐसा करना उचित नहीं है, किन्तु उनके पास कोई अन्य फ्रिज नहीं था। इसके लिए उन्होंने श्रील प्रभुपाद से क्षमा भी माँगी। श्रील प्रभुपाद ने स्थिति को समझा और हँसते-हँसते इसे सहन किया।

अतः सहिष्णुता का अर्थ है कि हम छोटी-छोटी बातों के कारण अपने मुख्य उद्देश्य अर्थात श्रीकृष्ण की सेवा से विचलित न हों। इसके विपरीत यदि सहिष्णुता हमारे मुख्य उद्देश्य के मार्ग में बाधा बनने लगे तो हमें बदलाव का प्रयास करना चाहिए।

मोटे तौर पर कहें तो जब भी हमारे जीवन में कोई कठिन परिस्थिति आती है तो हमारे पास तीन विकल्प होते हैं: (क) हम स्वयं को बदलें (ख) हम परिस्थिति को बदलें (ग) हम स्वयं को परिस्थिति से अलग कर लें। महाभारत में हम देख सकते हैं कि पाण्डवों ने अपने जीवन में इन सभी विकल्पों को अलग-अलग समय पर क्रियान्वित किया। जब कौरवों ने भीम को विष देने का प्रयास किया, उन्हें जीवित जलाने का प्रयास किया, तो युधिष्ठिर ने अपने भाइयों से कहा कि यह हमारे पारिवार का अंदरूनी मसला है, हम इसे सार्वजनिक नहीं करेंगे और इसे सहन करेंगे। जब कौरवों ने द्रौपदी को सार्वजनिक रूप से निर्वस्त्र कर उसका अपमान का प्रयास किया और कोई भी पछतावा नहीं दिखाया, न ही सुलह की कोई इच्छा दिखाई, तो पाण्डवों ने स्थिति बदलने का निर्णय किया। इसी उद्देश्य के लिए उन्होंने युद्ध लड़ा। अंततः पांडवों ने राज्य प्राप्त किया, किन्तु जब उन्हें पता चला कि श्रीकृष्ण जगत से पलायन कर गए हैं तो उन्होंने स्वयं को परिस्थिति से अलग कर लिया। उन्होंने भी जगत को त्याग दिया। ये तीनों परिस्थितियाँ – स्वयं को बदलना, परिस्थिति को बदलना और परिस्थिति से अलग हो जाना – ये तीनों ही धर्म के अनुसार हो सकती हैं। हमें उस विकल्प का चुनाव करना है जिसमें श्रीकृष्ण की सबसे उत्तम सेवा की जा सके।

यदि हम किसी छोटी बात के कारण उद्विग्न हैं, तो हम इसे सहन कर सकते हैं। कुछ मामलों में जब यही छोटी बात गंभीर रूप ले ले, तो हमें इसे ठीक करने के लिए कदम उठाना चाहिए। हम ये कदम सेवा के भाव में उठा सकते हैं। हम स्वयं को परिस्थित से अलग करने का निर्णय लें तो हम ऐसा इस समझ के साथ करें कि हमारे पास जीवन में सेवा के लिए अन्य बेहतर विकल्प हैं, अतः हम उस परिस्थिति में लिप्त नहीं होते हैं और स्वयं को अलग कर लेते हैं।

सहिष्णुता मूल रूप से यह सुनिश्चित करने के लिए है कि हमारा ध्यान श्रीकृष्ण की सेवा पर केंद्रित रहे। यदि सेवा करते हुए कुछ आकस्मिक समस्याऐं आती हैं, तो हमें उन्हें सहन करना चाहिए।

End of transcription.

The post Till what point should we tolerate? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcription :

Transcriber: Sharan Shetty

Edited by: Keshavgopal Das

Question: How can we know that we are progressing spiritually?

Answer: Bhagavad-gita 02.16 states, nasato vidyate bhavo nabhavo vidyate satah. The material is characterised by change and the spiritual is characterised by constancy. The material keeps changing but the spiritual never changes. When we are in material consciousness, we will be shaken by the changes in this world. To the extent we become spiritual, we will not be disturbed by the changes.

This world is like an ocean where there will always be waves. A person in an ocean will continuously be going up and down due to the waves. However, if the person gets into a boat which is anchored, then the shaking will be much less. Similarly, in this material world, there will always be changes causing anxiety, but when we become spiritual and connect with the unchanging reality God, then it is like sitting in a boat that is anchored. We connect with God through yoga, especially bhakti yoga, and it is like anchoring ourselves to a higher reality. When we do this, the shaking will reduce even further.

The more spiritual we become, the calmer we will be. We will be concerned but not disturbed. It does not mean that we will become uncaring or irresponsible. We have to function in the world and need to respond appropriately to the changes. When there will be changes in our life, we will work to rectify the situation but won’t be personally threatened by the change. The level of anxiety, stress, agitation going down is first marker of our progress in spiritual life.

Also, it is important to note that anxiety and craving are two sides of the same coin. To the extent we become spiritual, our craving for material things will go down. In material consciousness, self-worth is determined by what we possess. When our craving for material enjoyment goes down this indicates spiritual progress. This is second marker of spiritual advancement.
On a positive side, when we progress spiritually, we will start experiencing inner joy and peace. This is the third marker of our spiritual progress.

The more we advance; spiritual consciousness will become more and more our home territory. We do not always remain at home. Sometimes we also go out for work but then come back home after some time. Similarly, when we are in spiritual consciousness, it does not mean that we do not carry out our material responsibilities. Just like we come back home after completing our work, we come back to the spiritual consciousness after completing our material responsibilities.

In this way, by the decrease of anxiety, the decrease of craving and increase of joy and happiness in the spiritual realm, we can understand that we are progressing spiritually.

End of transcription.

Trancription in Hindi

प्रश्न: हम कैसे समझ सकते हैं कि हम आध्यात्मिक रूप से प्रगति कर रहे हैं?

उत्तर: आध्यात्मिक जीवन में प्रगति का पहला सूचक है जीवन से चिंता, तनाव और उत्तेजना का कम होना। भगवद्गीता 2.16 में कहा गया है – नासतो विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सतः। अस्थिरता भौतिक जीवन का लक्षण है और स्थिरता आध्यात्मिक जीवन का। जब हम भौतिक चेतना में स्थित होते हैं, तब हम इस संसार की अस्थिरता से भी प्रभावित होते हैं। हमारी चेतना जितनी आध्यात्मिक होती जाएगी, उतना ही वह भौतिक अस्थिरता से विचलित नहीं होगी।

यह संसार एक सागर की भाँति है जहाँ सदा लहरें उमड़ती रहती हैं। मनुष्य को इन लहरों के उतार-चढ़ाव से निरंतर संघर्ष करते रहना पड़ता है। ऐसे में मनुष्य यदि किसी लंगरयुक्त नौका में बैठ जाए, तब डगमगाना बहुत कम हो जाता है। इसी प्रकार, इस भौतिक जगत में सदा व्याकुल करने वाले परिवर्तन होते रहते हैं किन्तु जब हमारी चेतना आध्यात्मिक हो जाती है और चिरस्थायी परम तत्व भगवान से जुड़ जाती है, तब वह एक लंगरयुक्त नौका में बैठे रहने जैसा होता है। जब हम योग, विशेषकर भक्तियोग, के माध्यम से भगवान से जुड़ते हैं तो यह ऐसा है मानो हमने स्वयं किसी बड़ी वास्तविकता को कसकर पकड़ लिया हो। ऐसा करने के बाद जीवन में डगमगाना बहुत कम हो जाता है।

हम जितना अधिक आध्यात्मिक होंगे, उतना ही शांत रहेंगे। हम परिस्थितियों से चिंतित हो सकते हैं किन्तु व्यथित नहीं। इसका अर्थ लापरवाही अथवा गैरजिम्मेदारी नहीं। हमें संसार में अपने दायित्व का निर्वाह भी करना है और अस्थिरता का सामना भी। आध्यात्मिक रूप से उन्नत होने पर जब हमें जीवन में अस्थिरता का सामना करना पड़ेगा तब हम उसे धैर्य के साथ कर पाऐंगे और अस्थिरता के कारण विचलित नहीं होंगे।

साथ ही, यह ध्यान रखना भी महत्वपूर्ण है कि चिंता-तनाव और भौतिक वस्तुओं की लालसा एक ही सिक्के के दो पहलू हैं। जितना हम आध्यात्मिक होते जाएंगे उतना ही भौतिक वस्तुओं के लिए हमारी लालसा कम होती जाएगी। भौतिक चेतना में, हम अपना मूल्यांकन इस आधार पर करते हैं कि हमारे पास कितनी धन-संपत्ति है। जब भोग-विलास की हमारी लालसा कम होने लगे तब समझ जाऐं कि हम आध्यात्मिक प्रगति कर रहे हैं। यह आध्यात्मिक प्रगति का दूसरा सूचक है।

चिंता-तनाव का कम होना, भोग-विलास की लालसा का कम होना – इनमें हमारे भीतर की नकारात्मकता घटती है। आध्यात्मिक प्रगति के कारण एक सकारात्मक बदलाव भी होता है। जैसे-जैसे हम और अधिक आध्यात्मिक प्रगति करेंगे हम शांति और आंतरिक आनंद का अनुभव भी करने लगेंगे। यह हमारी आध्यात्मिक प्रगति का तीसरा सूचक है।

इस प्रकार हम जैसे-जैसे आध्यात्मिक प्रगति करते जाऐंगे उतना ही अधिक आध्यात्मिक चेतना हमारे मन में अपना स्थान बनाती जाएगी । हम घर पर ही सारा समय नहीं बिताते, कभी-कभी हम काम के लिए घर से बाहर भी जाते हैं किन्तु फिर कुछ समय पश्चात घर वापस आ जाते हैं। इसी प्रकार, जब हमारी चेतना आध्यात्मिक हो जाती हैं, तो इसका अर्थ यह नहीं कि हम अपने भौतिक उत्तरदायित्वों को भूल जाते हैं। जैसे हम अपना काम पूरा करके घर वापस आ जाते हैं, वैसे ही हम अपनी भौतिक उत्तरदायित्वों को पूरा करके पुनः आध्यात्मिक चेतना में लौट आते हैं।

इस प्रकार जीवन में चिंता-तनाव, भोग-विलास की लालसा में कमी होना तथा आनंद और प्रसन्नता में वृद्धि होना जैसे सूचकों से हम समझ सकते हैं कि हम आध्यात्मिक प्रगति कर रहे हैं।

End of transcription.

The post How can we know that we are progressing spiritually? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcription in hindi
प्रश्न: हम शास्त्रों को जीवन में लागू करने की दृढ़ता कैसे प्राप्त कर सकते हैं?

उत्तर: आध्यात्मिक ज्ञान के सीखने की प्रक्रिया क्रमिक होती है। अतः हम यह आशा नहीं कर सकते कि शास्त्रों का अध्ययन करने के पश्चात अगले दिन से ही हमारे व्यवहार में आध्यात्मिक प्रगति दिखाई देने लगेगी। यह समझना आवश्यक है कि शास्त्रों को सीखने पर आध्यात्मिक प्रगति एकदम से नहीं होती अपितु धीरे-धीरे होती है। जब हम शास्त्रों का अध्ययन करते हैं, हरे कृष्ण महामंत्र का जप करते हैं, नियमित रूप से भक्तों का संग करते हैं, तब जीवन के प्रति हमारी आंतरिक अवधारणा में परिवर्तन आने लगता है और जैसे-जैसे यह अवधारणा बदलती है, वैसे-वैसे क्रमशः हमारे बाहरी चयन में भी परिवर्तन आने लगता है।

एक स्तर पर हम सोच समझकर, पूरी निष्ठा के साथ अपना प्रयास करते हैं कि शास्त्रों के अनुरूप ही अपना जीवन जिऐं। जब इन्द्रिय विषय हमें लुभाते हैं और तंग करते हैं, तो हम श्रीकृष्ण का स्मरण करते हैं और प्रार्थना करते हैं कि हे प्रभु हमारी रक्षा करें। कहने का भाव यह है कि हम एक सोचा समझा प्रयास करते हैं कि इंद्रिय विषयों के प्रलोभनों से बचें। ऐसा करने के लिए हमें प्रयत्नशील रहना भी चाहिए। किन्तु कभी हम अपने प्रयास में सफल होते हैं तो कभी नहीं भी होते।

लेकिन दूसरे स्तर पर जब हम शास्त्रों का नियमित अध्ययन करते हैं तो हमारी मूलभूत धारणाऐं बदलने लगती हैं। जैसे-जैसे हमारी धारणाऐं बदलती हैं, हम अधिकाधिक यह अनुभूति करने लगते हैं कि हम एक आध्यात्मिक जीव हैं और यह विश्वास दृढ़ होने लगता है कि सच्चा आनंद तो श्रीकृष्ण से सम्बंध स्थापित करने में है। अंततः, जब यह बदलाव अवचेतन स्तर पर होने लगता है, तब हम जो चयन करते हैं वे पहले से बेहतर होने लगते हैं। अतः, हमें निरंतर अपनी तरफ से पूरा प्रयास करना चाहिए कि सही निर्णय करें और निराश न हों। किन्तु साथ ही साथ, हम अपनी भक्ति पर भी ध्यान देते रहें जो मूलभूत अवचेतन स्तर पर हमें शुद्ध करती रहती है।

यह ठीक वैसे ही है जैसे एक माँ चाहती है कि उसका बच्चा अच्छे से पढे़-लिखे किन्तु बच्चे का मन बाहर जाकर खेलने में अधिक लगता है। बच्चा प्रतिदिन खेलने के लिए बाहर जाता है और उसकी माँ उसे बार-बार पढ़ने के लिए बुलाती रहती है। माँ प्रतिदिन ऐसा करती रहती है लेकिन साथ ही साथ बच्चा प्राकृतिक प्रक्रिया से बड़ा भी तो हो रहा है। जैसे-जैसे बच्चा बड़ा होता जाता है उसकी बुद्धि भी विकसित होती जाती है और जिस माँ को अपने पाँच साल के बच्चे को पढ़ने के लिए बार-बार कहना पड़ता था, अब उसे अपने पच्चीस साल के पोस्ट ग्रेजुएट बेटे को पढ़ने के लिए कहने की आवश्यकता नहीं पड़ती है। ऐसा इसलिए क्योंकि अब बच्चे की बुद्धि विकसित हो गई है और वह अध्ययन के महत्व को समझने लगा है, और यह सब स्वाभाविक रूप से धीरे-धीरे समय के साथ सम्भव होता है।

इसी प्रकार एक स्तर पर हमें अपनी बुद्धि का उपयोग बच्चे के समान मन को एकाग्र करने में करना होता है। यदि यह गलत दिशा में जाता है, तब हमें इसे वापस लाना होता है। लेकिन जब हम भक्ति का अभ्यास करते रहते हैं, तब हम आध्यात्मिकता में बड़े होते जाते हैं। जैसे-जैसे हम बड़े होते हैं, हमारी समझ गहरी होती जाती है, हमारी धारणाऐं विकसित होती जाती हैं, वैसे-वैसे सही निर्णय करना हमारे लिए अधिकाधिक स्वाभाविक होता जाता है। अतः ऐसा दो स्तर पर होता है – (क) अपनी इच्छा शक्ति का प्रयोग कर सही निर्णय करने का प्रयास करते रहने से और (ख) भक्ति के निरंतर अभ्यास से, जिससे सही निर्णय करना हमारे स्वाभाव का अंग बन जाता है। इस प्रकार हम अपने जीवन को शास्त्रों के अनुरूप ढाल सकते हैं।

End of transcription.

The post How can we get the determination to apply scripture? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcribed by: Keshavagopal Das

Question: Can thinking positively create a brighter future?

Answer: There are two extremes. One is to think that our thoughts alone determine the future. There are books which almost make our mind as the controller of our destiny. For example, if I desire to have a car then I will have that car. Now basically, this is thinking that we are God. Certainly, by our thoughts alone, we cannot get whatever we want. That is not true. The other extreme is that our thoughts do not matter at all. That is also not true. Just as an archer has to properly use the resources (eyes, hands) with him to shoot the target, similarly mind is also a resource which needs to be used properly. If the mind is thinking always that we are not going to hit, then such negativity can sabotage us. Krishna talks about such habitual negativity as a characteristic of the mode of ignorance. In Gita, Krishna said that such determination is in the mode of ignorance where one is day dreaming, one is lamenting, one is habitually morose, one is gloomy. Such thinking is unhealthy.

Our negative thoughts can shape results negatively. This is something we all observe. Even in devotional circles, we observe this. When Srila Prabhupada went to the west, his godbrothers did not think that the prophecy of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu can be fulfilled. However, Srila Prabhupada did not think like that. He was confident, he attempted and became successful. However, at the same time we also need to understand that thoughts alone are not the only factor.

Gita 18.16 talks about five factors of actions. adhishṭhanam tatha karta karaṇam ca pṛthag-vidham vividhash cha pṛithak cheshṭa daivam chaivatra panchamam. One of the factors is cheshta i.e. endeavor. Our thoughts will determine how much we endeavor. If I think that I am not going to succeed, why should I waste my time in endeavoring. So, our attitude does matter. However, many self-help books guide us thinking that attitude alone does matter. Attitude does not change realities. Attitude can shape realities. However, if I think that I will never grow old, I will never die, I will never have disease, such realities are not going to change.

End of transcription.

The post Can thinking positively create a brighter future? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcription :

Transcriber: Suresh Gupta

Edited by: Raji Nachiappan

Question: How to understand the Bhagavatam’s cosmology? This seem to be very difficult to understand.

Answer: This subject is something which I have studied, contemplated, prayed, discussed, for over twenty years. It is not an easy question to answer. There is a five-step reflection to understand this, as described below:
I. Understand the purpose of science
II. Understand the purpose of scripture
III. Understand the scope of science
IV. Understand the scope of scripture
V. See how science and scripture can be harmonised.

I. The purpose of science:
Science, as understood in today’s world is a methodology which is used for getting material explanations for material phenomenon. When Newton saw the fruit falling, he questioned the cause which led to the fruit falling. He could have said god caused the fruit to fall. Yes, while that is true and Newton also believed that the laws of nature came from god, he was looking for a material cause, and not to God as a cause. Science focusses on looking for material explanations for material phenomenon. In the scientific world, this is called as naturalism or methodological naturalism. Science in itself does not make any statements about anything non material and whether it exist or does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of science is to look for material explanations for material phenomenon.

II. The purpose of scripture:
When we consider the Bhagavatam, it is spoken to Parikshit Maharaj when he was about to die in seven days. The purpose of Shukadeva Gosvami speaking to Parikshit Maharaj is to help him to fix his mind on Krishna. The Bhagavatam’s Fifth canto cosmology is also spoken with that same purpose. It is said in the starting of that section in the fifth canto that, while meditating on the universe in this way, one’s appreciation and devotion to Lord Hari will increase. Therefore, the purpose of everything in the Bhagavatam is to help us to fix the mind on Krishna. It is not that Shukadeva Gosvami was giving Parikshit Maharaj knowledge about how he could go on space travel. That was not the purpose. Everything has to be seen in the light of its purpose. The purpose of science is to give natural explanation for natural phenomenon and the purpose of scripture is to help us fix the mind on Krishna.

III. Scope of science:
Science does not offer us reality; it offers us models of reality. For example, there is quantum physics and there is relativity. These are two fundamental branches of physics and both of them are violently contradictory. The model of reality that is offered by quantum physics is very different from the model of reality offered by relativity. This is a technical subject but suffice it to say that these two are just not reconcilable. Scientists use whichever model works. When dealing with the subatomic realm, it is quantum physics that works and for cosmic distance and cosmic objects, it is relativity that works.

Now, what is the nature of reality: is it particles or is it waves? Or is it something else like space-time? What is it? In science, there is the ontological approach to reality and the functional approach to reality. Ontology means the study of reality as it is. Functional means reality as we can function with it. If we go seriously into the study of science, science makes no pretentions of giving us knowledge of reality. It simply gives us models of reality. Quantum physics offers one model and relativity offers another model. What reality actually is, that is something else. We do not know it from science. Reality may be something entirely different. These are working models offered by science. When we say models, it does not mean they are false. They are useful, but they give one particular picture of reality. For example, if we have a map of America, the map is a very useful tool, however the map does not contain everything. If we use a map to go to our friend’s house and everything on the map turns out to be true, our confidence in the map increases. When we finally reach our friend’s house and when our friend welcomes us, we do not look at the map and tell our friend that since they are not present in the map, they do not exist. The map is not meant to show people, the map is a model of a territory and hence it does not depict everything.

Science does not have a monopoly on the explanation of reality. Science offers an explanation that works within a particular framework, however there can be other explanations and other perceptions from other scales of observations. For example, if I take a white chalk and black coal and I grind both of them into powder and then I mix the powder together, I will have grey granules. However, if I look at the mixture under the microscope, I will not see any grey granules, I will see white and black particles. Hence, what is it really? Is it grey granules or is it white and black? Therefore, what it is, depends on our scale of observation. In the same way, science can offer us particular models of reality that comes from a particular scale of observation. There can be other models of reality that can be from other scales of observation and science cannot inherently disapprove them. Science offers one model, there may be another model from another perspective.

IV: Scope of scripture:
The Bhagavatam offers a particular cosmology. At the same time, the Bhagavatam’s cosmology is not the only cosmology in the Indian tradition. If we consider astrology, it is based on the Jyotisha Shastra where a different cosmology is given. The Bhagavatam’s cosmology is different from Jyotisha’s. No astrologer uses the Bhagavatam’s cosmology for predicting anything. They all use Jyotisha cosmology, including Vaishnava astrologers. Even Vaishnava acharyas, who have commented on the Bhagavatam, if they had to do anything with astrology, they used the Jyotisha cosmology. That means, the Bhagavatam’s cosmology is even within the Vedic tradition, not considered to be only cosmology. Bhagavatam offers a particular vision of reality which is Krishna centred. However, for functional purposes even in Vedic tradition there is other cosmology which is used. The Jyotisha Cosmology in many ways is similar to modern cosmology. The point of is, the acharyas are not saying that the Bhagavatam cosmology is mythological or imaginary. It is just of a different scale.

V: How science and scripture can be harmonised:
We do not have to position science and scripture as competitors. If we position scripture as competitor to science, we devalue scripture. Science gives us functional knowledge for operating in this world. Scripture give us knowledge for raising our consciousness and going beyond this world. Sometimes, scripture may also give functional knowledge for living in this world and we can use that. However, that is not the purpose of scripture. Parikshit Maharaj was not interested in learning how to make a plane or how to make a mobile. He was interested on how to focus his mind on Krishna and how to attain Krishna. Hence, these two have different purposes, and without that understanding if we position scripture as a competitor to science, we actually devalue scripture.

In this world we have to take care of our material needs and there can be different ways for taking care of the material needs. To cure a bodily ailment, we may take Ayurveda or we may take Allopathy. The important point is not that we become a campaigner for or against allopathy or Ayurveda. As devotees, our purpose is to get healthy, so we can serve Krishna. Similarly, we do not have to become a campaigner for science saying that everything science says is right or we do not have to become campaigner against science saying that everything science says is wrong.

Our purpose is, science is functional and scripture is transcendental. For practical purposes, we do what is required. What we should not do is to let science determine our values and goals. Science does not actually give knowledge on values and goals because that is outside the scope of science. If we understand what the purposes of science and scripture are, then we will not unnecessarily obsess over certain sections of scripture, which are difficult to make sense of. The Bhagavatam offers a cosmology which is primarily meant to help us to fix the mind on Krishna. If we find that by studying the Bhagavatam cosmology, it does not make any sense to us or that it seems strange and even agitates us, then the purpose of fixing the mind on Krishna is not being served. Srila Prabhupada, even in the Bhagavatam’s fifth canto cosmology purports, does not go too much into the technicalities. Rather, Prabhupad expertly focusses on the principles of the spiritual life. Those principles are important to us. Hence, if we have the purpose of fixing of the mind on Krishna, then we can ourselves understand scripture appropriately and more importantly present it in a way that helps people to come close to Krishna.

End of transcription.

The post How to understand the Bhagavatam’s cosmology? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcription :

Transcriber: Suresh Gupta

Question: Amidst conflicts, how can we put aside our ego and accept responsibility for the problem?

Answer: We often have a very functional approach to things – this is the problem; this is the solution. The one who has caused the problem should fix the mess. This is the way we normally function in the world. Instead, we should have a more service-oriented approach where we are conscious that the problem can impede our service to the Lord. The cause of the problem is not as important as the problem getting fixed. If we shift our vision from the specific problem or its solution, to service of the Lord and give more importance to service of the Lord then that itself gives a higher perspective.

We all have to choose our battles in lives. There are too many things that are wrong in life. If we look at the news, we will find hundreds of things that are wrong. We all choose our battles, even in spiritual lives we have to choose our battles. When we want to serve the Lord then for the service to go on, we keep the big picture in mind and may just decide to take a step back. This will help us understand that the problem is not a big issue and we can give concession to the person or the problem so that at least this will keep things moving.

The mind magnifies small problems and deludes us by making us loose our sense of perspective. Sometimes we may magnify a small problem and sometimes we may trivialise a big problem. Either way, the mind can make a loose sense of perspective. However, if we have a clear picture that we have dedicated our life for the service of the Lord, then we can decide, how much energy we want to spend on a problem.

There is a good example in Ramayana of four obstacles which Hanuman meets on his journey to Lanka, which represent various things. One of those obstacles was a demoness named Surasa. She had the benediction that whatever passed on her way should enter her mouth. Seeing Hanuman approach, she made her mouth big. Sensing this, Hanuman too makes himself big. Then Surasa makes her mouth bigger and similarly, Hanuman makes himself bigger. But at one point, Hanuman shrinks his size and immediately enters the mouth of Surasa and comes out. Hanuman could have made this situation an ego issue, but instead he gives priority to his goal of reaching Lanka, which was his service to Lord Rama. Hence, to honor Surasa’s benediction and continue on his journey, he reduces his size and enters her big mouth and immediately comes out. Seeing the intelligence of Hanuman, Surasa becomes pleased and allows him to go ahead and even grants Hanuman her blessings.
Similarly, when we are faced with arguments then instead of getting stuck in the loop of arguments and counter-arguments, we should instead look for ways to close the chapter and move on. Our love for Krishna should free us from the necessity of being right in every argument. Ego has the need to prove that one is always right but if our love for Krishna is strong, then we understand that there are more important things than proving our rightness and the other’s wrongness. The important thing is to move on. On the other hand, if someone is creating a problem again and again or victimising us, troubling us, then we may have to deal with it differently.

Whenever we are proven wrong, that creates an insecurity where we assume – “People will think I am careless, foolish etc.” and that may impel us to prove that we are right, but if we are fixed on Krishna, then even if we accidentally commit a mistake, we can move on because Krishna knows our heart and we have security with him. We don’t need constant approval from the world in every situation.

Giving up the egoistic need to prove ourselves right in every situation is a test of our love to Krishna. In the fourth Canto of Srimad Bhagvatam, there is a story of Prithu Maharaj who had performed ninety-nine sacrifices and while performing the hundredth sacrifice, Indra came and stole the horse. Indra did this repeatedly and was being a troublemaker. Finally, Lord Brahma intervened, and Prithu Maharaj stopped the hundredth sacrifice. Here, Prithu Maharaj could have argued that Indra is wrong, and I am right and could have opposed Brahma. In fact, Lord Brahma did not even need to mention it, Prithu Maharaj understood and stopped the sacrifice.

If we make a small issue into a big issue, then it may turn into a total mess afterwards. We should understand that “there is a right” and “there is also the right beyond right”. There is a right and wrong in a particular argument but there is a right in the ultimate sense also. Prithu Maharaj did not insist on proving his rightness. For him, what was ultimately right was – Lord Brahma is like a guru and he should be pleased. After Lord Brahma, Lord Vishnu Himself appears. Normally, if somebody performs hundred yajnas then the fruit goes to heavens. The Lord may or may not appear. However, in the case of Prithu Maharaj, even though he did not complete the hundred yajnas, still Lord Vishnu appeared. The Supreme Lord appeared because Prithu Maharaj was ready to give up the egoistic pleasure of “doing hundred yajnas”. If we keep the higher cause of Lord’s service in mind and know that Krishna understands us then sometimes, even if in a particular argument, we are proven wrong, it does not matter. We can take the humble position and move on with the service of the Lord.

End of transcription.

The post Amidst conflicts, how can we put aside our ego and accept responsibility for the problem? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

Transcription :

Transcriber: Sharan Shetty

Edited by: Keshavgopal Das

Question: When jnana and karma are different philosophies, how can they both give the same result, as the Gita’s sixth chapter states?

Answer: When Krishna is using the words karma and jnana, he is not necessarily using the words to refer to whole philosophical systems. Arjuna and Krishna are not discussing broad philosophical treatises, they are discussing courses of action, that is why, karma in that context refers to the path of action and jnana refers to the path of inaction or the path of renunciation based on contemplation. There are some connections between the sankhya (which is being talked over there) and the sankhya (which is a philosophy) but they are not exactly the same because words have contextual meaning and context-independent meaning. Here, in the context, Krishna says to Arjuna , in Gita 5.2, nihsreyasa-karav ubhau. This means both will lead to long term benefit, but both will not lead to the exact same benefit. Krishna is not specifying any identical ultimate goal, he is broadly saying that both will lead to nihsreyasa or long term benefit. Therefore, in that context, both are similar.

When Krishna is using the word karma, he is not using it to refer to karma-kanda, he is actually using it to refer to karma yoga because in the context of karma-kanda, Krishna has already told in Gita 2.47, karmaṇy evādhikāras te mā phaleṣu kadācana (You have a right to perform your prescribed duty, but you are not entitled to the fruits of action). The progression from karma-kanda to karma yoga has already happened before Chapter Three. Krishna is talking here about karma yoga which does not mean romanticizing and enjoying the world. Krishna explains karma yoga as working with detachment. There are various places where Krishna is saying asaktah – work with detachment. Among the path of detached action and contemplative knowledge, karma yoga is better, although both will lead to long term benefit.

The yoga ladder, in itself, is an overall truth in which jnana yoga is placed above karma yoga. However, in the Gita’s context, there are very few verses which are actually speaking positively about the jnana yoga, path of inaction. Krishna wants Arjuna to act and so he always stresses on action, not on renunciation. The very fact that Arjuna wanted to renounce the world indicates that he considered renunciation to be higher than action and from a broad cultural understanding; renunciants are respected even by the kings. Renunciation being respectable is a broad Vedic understanding and Krishna is not challenging it. Renunciation of the world for the contemplation of higher reality is considered higher than engagement in the world for the purpose of enjoying the world. So, in the Gita, the hierarchy of renunciation being higher than action, in principle, is already accepted. However, in the context of Arjuna, inaction is not preferable. For him, the path of detached action is preferable. That is why, Krishna is speaking in general principle that both will lead to long term well-being but for Arjuna (and in general, people who are not very detached or not in sattva-guna) the path of detached action is better than path of renounced contemplation. This is the principle which Krishna is explaining in that context.

End of transcription.

The post When jnana and karma are different philosophies, how can they both give the same result, as the Gita’s sixth chapter states? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.

The post Why does the Bhagavatam say that literature glorifying Krishna is imperfectly composed when such literature is meant to attract people to Krishna? appeared first on The Spiritual Scientist.