->

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #26 – The Death of Nuance

June 23rd, 2025

My post today is just a reflection on the current state of public discourse, both in the world and within the modern Vaiṣṇava movement.

 

In Nyāya (the school of logic), there are three levels of public discourse:

 

Vāda – entering a discourse in a detached manner to find the truth.

 

Jalpa –entering a discourse by presenting your point vigorously with the single purpose of gaining victory.

 

Vitaṇḍā—entering a discourse only to refute and destroy one’s opponent without any concern even to establish one’s own thesis.

 

Obviously, cultured people prefer vāda.

 

“I am vāda amongst the disputants.”Krishna in Bhagavad-gītā (10.32)[1]

 

No Western philosopher exemplifies this spirit better that the British philosopher, John Stuart Mill who famously said, “He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that.”

 

Mill felt that without this type of detached exploration of alternative views, one could never deeply understand the depths or even correctness of one’s own convictions. And that opposing arguments, even those considered wrong, often contain aspects of the truth that can give one a more complete understanding of one’s own thinking.

 

Now I will share my personal observation.

 

It is difficult to enter a vāda discourse today. When people are polarized, they only listen to something if it agrees with their opinion. And if you disagree with someone, or even just seek clarification, that person assumes you are on the other team or even an enemy. Unfortunately, such unexamined truths too often become shallow and instead of expressing vibrant truths become lifeless dogmas.

 

But certainly, mustn’t there be certain views that are wrong, and even dangerous? By remaining neutral, doesn’t one become an accomplice to the unjust? That is certainly true. Vāda, however, doesn’t mean treating all perspectives as the same. It means hearing both sides to deepen one’s understanding.

 

And there is problem if we do not give each side a hearing. Those who are polarized, whether they are right or wrong, always see the other side as dangerous. Better therefore we test our convictions, if even for the purpose of communicating them more effectively in opposition to those doctrines we feel harmful.

 

I had a funny thought. If the world is as polarized as I perceive, by taking the middle ground and asking all to consider alternative views, will I not then also become an enemy to those fixed in their views?

 

Have we reached the death of nuance?

 

 


[1] Śrīla Prabhupāda translates Bhagavad-gītā 10.32 as “and among logicians I am the conclusive truth.” I checked with a reputed Sanskrit scholar if the alternative translation that I found is also accurate. His response. “Yes, the translation you’ve found is totally correct.”

 

Monday Morning Greeting 2025 #25 – If You are Not an Optimist, You’re an Atheist!

June 16th, 2025

If You are Not an Optimist, You’re an Atheist![1]

 

This post is about gratitude.

 

What is gratitude?

 

It’s a strong feeling of appreciation of someone or something for what they have done for you and the consequent feeling of receiving mercy or kindness that wells in the heart.

 

This post will discuss why developing this state of having gratitude is one of the keys to inner fulfillment.

 

Being in the state of gratitude and the consequent feeling of inner fulfillment is based on the premise that the universe is ultimately beneficial to us.

 

That premise is based on the principle found in all spiritual traditions that “what comes to us is for us.” It’s a conviction that every event, even those causing suffering, is designed to teach us something. And it is worth any of the pain we might endure to learn it. That is certainly the strong realization of spiritual practitioners. They can look back on their lives and undeniably see the connection between the experiences they had and the priceless gift of realization that those experiences gave them. I am confident that anyone who has become a grateful seeker will eventually come to that conclusion. There is ultimately a gift of realization contained in whatever they experience, good or bad, and those experiences have been personally designed for us.

 

It is not that one no longer feels the pain of the challenges one faces. But living in a state of mercy or kindness certainly tempers, and to an extent even allows one to transcend, the suffering and temporary nature of this world.

 

In my study of gratitude, I found a beautiful analogy that illustrates this principle—that the universe is rigged to give us some benefit. Just as pearls are the result of the reaction of a wounded oyster, our deepest realizations come from the lessons our suffering teaches us.

 

I never heard that fact about pearls before. I researched it:

 

Pearls are created by bivalve mollusks, like oysters and mussels, as a defensive response to an irritant. When something gets inside the shell, like a piece of sand or a parasite, the mollusk secretes nacre, a substance made of calcium carbonate and protein, around the irritant. This nacre gradually builds up in layers, forming a pearl.

 

Let me frame this analogy in another way to further explain this point. If pearls are precious, so are the wounds that create them. In other words, if deep realizations are precious so are the challenges that gave them to us.

 

Rumi the poet explains the same phenomenon in a charming way. It’s too good not to add to our discussion:

 

“When God is digging a ditch to throw you in, he is actually digging a ditch to quench your thirst.”

 

Of course, there are very horrible things that happen to people that must be reconciled with the concept of grateful seeing. I have dealt with that in separate posts,[2] but at least we should be able to realize this basic principle in most of our experiences. The universe serves as a teacher that enables us to be grateful and there is tremendous benefit in realizing that. We will end by listing some of those benefits:

 

Gratitude gives joy

 

There are two types of happiness—to enjoy and control the world or to appreciate and serve our destiny. We are not the enjoyer and controller, so to wire our brains, so to speak, to that high and unachievable threshold, means that we will rarely, if ever, feel fulfilled. In contrast, realizing that what comes to us is for us allows us to feel the joy or gift of mercy in any circumstance thus lowering our threshold for feeling contentment. Gratitude makes this joy achievable.

 

Gratitude creates the yogic mind

 

Yoga means controlling the mind. It begins by first developing the proper ethical restraints (yamas) and moral observances (niyamas).

 

The most important moral restraint is ahi(non-violence). To the extent you can remain in a state of gratitude, you spend less time comparing yourself to others, which is the basis of envy and hate. Gratitude develops ahi.

 

One of the most important moral observances is santoṣa (contentment). If one is not content, then material desires intensely cloud the mind. This is antithetical to yoga, which is defined as stopping the fluctuations of the mind. Gratitude turns what we have into enough which develops the important moral observance of santoṣa (contentment).

 

Gratitude develops good character

 

Voltaire said that which we appreciate belongs to us. Unfortunately, as described above, being envious and ungrateful are connected.  Therefore, one not in a state of gratitude out of envy will inevitably miss many opportunities to appreciate others and develop good character and wisdom.

 

Gratitude grounds you in the present

 

“Now” is rarely the problem. Our problem is hankering (what I want in the future) and lamenting (what I lost in the past), but never gratitude (what I have and appreciate now).

 

Gratitude awakens the bliss of service

 

Gratitude naturally awakens the service mind, for the more we can be grateful for the gifts of others the more we develop a desire to serve others. As service and devotion are the bases of happiness, in this way also gratitude leads to fulfillment.

 

Gratitude is the basis of feeling love

 

Spoiled or entitled children are never grateful for the love of their parents even if the parents give them the world, where in contrast a humble and grateful child can feel the parents’ love even in the slightest gesture of care. Similarly, only one in a state of gratitude can feel the love of others and God.

 

The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam describes and strongly recommends gratitude as a state of being:

 

“My dear Lord, one who earnestly waits for You to bestow Your causeless mercy upon him, all the while patiently suffering the reaction to his past misdeed and offering You respectful obeisances with his heart, words and body, is surely eligible for liberation, for it has become his rightful claim.” Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.14.8

 

Knowing this, if you are not an optimist, you’re an atheist!

 

 


[1] I believe this was a statement by Śrīla Bhakti Raksaka Sridhara Swami.

[2] https://wavesofdevotion.com/2025/01/20/believers-and-the-elephant-in-the-room-tackling-the-challenge-of-evil-2/

 

Correction to last Monday Morning Greetings

June 12th, 2025

I received a lot of feedback from my last Monday Morning Greetings, “Is Chanting Sixteen Rounds a Principle or a Detail?

 

Some corrections:

 

In my last Monday Morning Greetings I wrote:

 

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhanta himself took strict vows of chanting and encouraged his disciples in chanting the holy name. But there is no history of him demanding a pledge of a minimum of sixteen rounds to demonstrate a firm dedication to His mission by harināma initiation.

 

Further research indicates I was wrong:

 

“Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī considered chanting a lakh of names more important for ghasthas than for maha-vāsīs, because maha-vāsīs are always engaged in Kṛṣṇa-sevā whereas most householders’ focus is on earning for family maintenance. He said that in the evening after their daily work, ghasthas should attend the Maṭha, and that if it were necessary for completing one lakh of names, they should chant throughout the night. But the majority of householders could not live up to this ideal.

 

“Understanding the plight of many ghasthas, Śrīla Sarasvatī Ṭhākura advised some who had taken harināma but not dīkṣā, and who did not live at the Maṭha, to chant at least four mālās; and he instructed others just to chant, without specifying any particular number of mālās. He exhorted that tulasī beads should not ‘fast’; every day they should be chanted on. Usually householders were simply given beads and told to chant as much as possible. His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda stated that in his household life he chanted sixteen mālās daily.

 

“Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī further explained that simply to complete a quota was not the objective, for a devotee must also strive to remain attentive while chanting and to become free from offenses to the holy name. Regarding a sannyasi disciple who repeatedly exhorted others to chant japa attentively, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī remarked, ‘He himself does not hear properly when chanting, but is preaching to others about the same fault.’”

 

(Excerpt From Śrī Bhaktisiddhānta Vaibhava Vol. 1 by Bhakti Vikāsa Swami)

 

I also wrote as the theoretical argument for change:

 

In contrast, Śrīla Prabhupāda didn’t even develop a congregation. He essentially brought all the members of ISKCON into the temple/ashram and that standard continued for some time after he left. Even married people lived near the temple and were engaged in full service to the mission under the authority of the local ISKCON leader.

 

One reader wrote:

 

“Prabhupada initiated many who had ‘9-5’ jobs. Gopal Krishna Goswami was working at Pepsi! Atreya Rsi Prabhu at Ernst and Young. Brishakapi Prabhu was supporting his family of wife and three kids in Chicago at the time of initiation. Ambarisa Prabhu was not living in a temple (maybe a palace!) Sauri Prabhu was a businessman in Toronto. Brahmatirtha Prabhu was working. Of course, the examples of Satsvarupa Goswami, Brahmananda Prabhu, and Jayananda Prabhu are well known. Visval Tattva, Subha Vikasa, Dhriti did, and numerous others are examples that were no exception to the vrata of sixteen rounds despite having responsibilities of jobs and family.”

 

 

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #24 – Is Chanting Sixteen Rounds a Principle or a Detail?

June 9th, 2025

Śrīla Prabhupāda made it very clear what he expected of his disciples:

 

“My advice is always chant sixteen rounds minimum and follow the four regulative principles. All of my disciples must agree on this point otherwise they are not my disciples. Let one live anywhere, but stick to the principles…”

 

Very strong words! But is the requirement of sixteen rounds a principle or detail of devotional service?

 

It is both a detail and a principle. Let me explain.

 

When we say something is a detail, we are not minimizing it or calling it trivial. A principle is a fundamental truth that remains constant, like following the order of the spiritual master. A detail is something that can be adjusted according to time, place, and circumstances, like the specific method of following that principle. That is by no means inconsequential.

 

So, for those who follow Śrīla Prabhupāda, chanting sixteen rounds as a prerequisite for initiation is the principle of following the order of the spiritual master.

 

Śrīla Prabhupāda, himself, however, at the beginning of the Krishna consciousness movement, gave careful thought to how many rounds he should recommend for his disciples as minimum. He came up with sixteen rounds after considering even more. If it was a principle of devotional service, he wouldn’t have taken that leeway to decide how many rounds he should prescribe. I know at least one exceptional case where Śrīla Prabhupāda even prescribed fewer.

 

What about those in lineage from Śrīla Prabhupāda? Do they have the leeway, at least in some cases, to prescribe fewer rounds as a prerequisite for harināma initiation according to what they see as necessary according to time, place and circumstance, or is it a principle for them to prescribe the minimum of sixteen rounds?

 

Let me give the argument for changing the requirement and then the argument against changing it and try to reconcile the two views.

 

For Change

 

Despite the weight of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s standard of vowing to chant sixteen rounds as a prerequisite for harināma initiation, it is still not a principle in the line of Śrī Caitanya. For example, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhanta himself took strict vows of chanting and encouraged his disciples in chanting the holy name. But there is no history of him demanding a pledge of a minimum of sixteen rounds to demonstrate a firm dedication to His mission by harināma initiation. And that’s the usual standard in the Gauḍīya line. They are more lenient with harināma so that people who are in the world can more easily commit to their lineage. They then put more emphasis on second initiation as the full commitment to the mission.

 

The circumstances when Śrīla Prabhupāda preached were unique and different from those of the Gauḍīya Maṭha where most of their disciples lived outside their centers. In contrast, Śrīla Prabhupāda didn’t even develop a congregation. He essentially brought all the members of ISKCON into the temple/ashram and that standard continued for some time after he left. Even married people lived near the temple and were engaged in full service to the mission under the authority of the local ISKCON leader. That meant they had the opportunity to attend the morning program where two hours were allotted for chanting one’s vow of sixteen rounds.

 

The condition of ISKCON is very much different today. People live, work, and raise their families outside the temple. Although Śrīla Prabhupāda foresaw that living and working in cities would not be conducive to Krishna consciousness, ISKCON developed very few of the rural communities he wanted where “simple living and high thinking” would give devotees the environment and time for chanting.

 

Of course, there are high souls who can live the hectic city life and still have the discipline to meet their chanting vows. But for many, to eke out the time for chanting, and even more important to maintain the sattvic mode of living necessary for concentrated meditation, is nearly impossible. I therefore suspect that many, at least in the West, who get initiated cannot meet their vows for chanting, or their japa meditation is perfunctory at best.

 

Considering how different the circumstances are now than when Śrīla Prabhupāda instituted his standards, wouldn’t it be better to adopt the more traditional standard of harināma initiation instituted at a time when most people lived and worked in the world independent of the temple? People could commit themselves to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s mission with a more achievable vow in chanting and then meet the higher standard for chanting at the time of second initiation, if they qualified. Isn’t that better than discouraging many sincere devotees from formally committing to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s line because they can’t meet the standard now set, or vowing to chant sixteen rounds for initiation but feeling guilty when they can’t meet their vows?

 

Imagine an established church where their members regularly go to service on Sunday, attend Bible study and serve in the food pantry and so on, and then suddenly are told that to be fully recognized members they need to meditate two hours a day. Would that church grow? That’s ISKCON!

 

Against Change

 

There is not much to argue. Śrīla Prabhupāda was not just a spiritual master who set a standard, he was the world ācārya who ushered in Krishna consciousness to the West. And not only that, but he was also vastly successful in doing so. He brought in and trained so many quality people in the West in Krishna consciousness. Sure, some people faltered, but at least they know the standard. And so many perhaps would have not met the standard and attained the level of Krishna consciousness they had attained if a lower requirement had been demanded. Śrīla Prabhupāda initially considered a vow of much more, so chanting sixteen rounds seems to be the minimum required to properly advance on the path of bhakti. After all chanting is the foundation of bhakti. By the blessings of Śrīla Prabhupāda the Hare Krishna movement has continued to grow despite so many challenges that might ordinarily destroy any movement. Certainly, that’s only by Śrīla Prabhupāda’s blessings. You are playing with fire, so to speak, if you minimize something that he stressed so much. Without his blessings all is lost. What are we even discussing!

 

Reconciliation

 

Let me rephrase the problem in a simple way. We must consider the difficulties of those people whose present life situation and mode of living makes the commitment to be a serious meditator of japa difficult, if not impossible. They are people who sincerely want the link to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s lineage and movement, which is often recognized by the bestowal of a name as a servant of Krishna. They might decide not to get initiated because they fear they could not fulfill their vows. Or they might be initiated and meet their vows of chanting for some time, and later falter in their chanting due to the pressures of their life situation, as many have. Should we make harināma less demanding, as it was in parts of the tradition, so they can both commit to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s mission and maintain their vows?

 

It may be difficult or perhaps impossible to alter Śrīla Prabhupāda’s standard, but the problem exists wherever our lives are busy. Does that problem have to be confronted for Śrīla Prabhupāda’s mission to flourish in the West?

 

I guess I am just stirring an important conversation here:

 

Is sixteen rounds a principle or detail?

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #23 – AI and the Dumbing of Vaiṣṇava Learning and Scholarship

June 2nd, 2025

AI and the Dumbing of Vaiṣṇava Learning and Scholarship[1]

 

There is a very interesting concept in Bhāgavatam philosophy (Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 7.9.43) called māyā-sukhāya, illusory happiness. Śrīla Prabhupāda would sometimes explain māyā-sukhāya in terms of material advancement. It temporarily gives the appearance of happiness but ultimately ushers in misery.

 

One example would be the advancement in our modes of transportation. Where would we be in today’s world without air travel? But have we truly advanced when in old age instead of being surrounded by family and community in the same village or town, one’s own children often reside in different states, or even continents, thousands of miles away?

 

New technology always starts off with promises for a better life. Didn’t the Internet and social media promise a more broad-minded, educated society with enhanced feelings of community? But in fact, as a result are we not more divided and lonelier than ever?

 

AI promised to give us the facility to think faster and better and increase our knowledge. But will it?

 

A good way to foretell the impact of technology on the whole of society is to see first how it plays out in schools. Are students equipped with AI deepening their knowledge? Or are they discouraged from learning by never having to use their intelligence to struggle to understand things or even to read a book?

 

My thought this week is to examine how this technology will play out in the Vaiṣṇava world in terms of learning and scholarship, where directly engaging with the text is not just an intellectual exercise, but a revelatory one, a direct communion with God.

 

Śrīla Prabhupāda said his books were written by Krishna. Those who deeply study and write on śāstra know something of what he means. The texts talk to those who serve them with prayer and deep thought. Will there be something lost in terms of the depth of our realization, and our nuanced and creative understanding of our philosophy, to the extent we turn the struggle of learning over to an artificial third party? Will there come a time when our minds become so atrophied that the Vaiṣṇava society never again produces geniuses in wordcraft like the Six Gosvāmīs who could write volumes of the most brilliant philosophy and poetry in perfect verse with just the tool of their minds?

 

Of course, with any technology there will be a minority of people who know how to selectively use the technological advances in communication and learning without withering their intellectual, creative and devotional muscles. And certainly there are devotees who will be able to do that effectively in the service of Krishna. I am not denying that.

 

What I am doing here is just raising some concerns based on the history of technology and this principle of māyā-sukhāya. Have we not seen played out again and again in history, including within the Vaiṣṇava world, the initial excitement and happiness in engaging in a new technology turning into misery, amplifying the worst in us by dumbing down our intellect and feeding our self-centeredness and taste for distraction?

 

So what will be the effect of AI?

 

Sādhu beware! “The medium is the message” was a phrase coined by the renowned late Canadian philosopher and media theorist Marshall McLuhan. He argued strongly, based on his extensive research, that the form a medium of communication takes has always had more effect on society than the content it carries, and the effect is not always pretty. We therefore need to be thoughtful on how we bring AI into our lives.

 

Will AI, despite our initial euphoria, result in amplifying our communication of spiritual teachings, or will it weaken Vaiṣṇava learning and scholarship and deteriorate our intellectual and devotional prowess?

 

Has history already spoken or will time tell?

 


[1] Many of the ideas I got for this article on the effects of AI came from a debate on the subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHMxDKPa_BQ

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #22 – Should we trust Dandavats.com?

May 26th, 2025

Should we trust Dandavats.com?

By Jayadvaita Swami

 

Where is Dhanurdhara Maharaja? Why has this week’s Monday Morning Greetings been written not by him but by one of his readers—that is, me? Dhanurdhara Maharaja is alive and well, but something has happened that deserves to be told, and he shouldn’t have to be the one to tell it.

 

Two weeks back, as you may recall, Maharaja published a Monday Morning Greeting about the first Russian devotees to come to Vrindavana, back in 1991. He entitled the piece “Queen Kuntī was right!”

 

Two days later, the article appeared on Dandavats.com, an official ISKCON website that offers ISKCON news and teachings. Apparently Dandavats had thought the article would be an inspiring read for a wider devotee audience.

 

Only one thing: They stripped off the author’s name—Dhanurdhara Swami—and replaced it with the name of one of our godbrothers, Suresvara Dasa.

 

What?

 

When another of my godbrothers, a natural peacemaker, asked what had happened, an editor explained: Suresvara Dasa had read the article in a recent class, the editor had transcribed it from there, and since “Suresvara did not mention the author of the material he was reading from,” the editor attributed it to Suresvara.

 

Honest error?

 

When we listen to Suresvara’s class, here’s how he begins his reading:

 

This is a story. . . I have a godbrother—maybe you. . . . Dhanurdhara Swami. Or is it “Dhanurdhara Swami,” right? [Perhaps noting an issue in pronunciation.] So he has a blog, and he just shared a story, and the moral of this story is “Queen Kunti Was Right!” Listen to this. . .  This is Dhanurdhara Maharaja: [Begins reading the article.]

 

Suresvara mentions Dhanurdhara Maharaja three more times—twice in the middle and once more at the very end.

 

Meanwhile, the editor wrote, the article had “gone viral.” And since the peacemaker had now kindly let him know who the author was, “I’ve updated the article to more clearly present it as a narration from Suresvara Prabhu.”

 

When the peacemaker gently suggested that this wasn’t quite honest, Dandavats just took the article down.

 

When it comes to light that a responsible publisher has plagiarized, is taking down the offending article all he does? Or does he issue a correction and apology?

 

Well, having plagiarized the article in public, the editor now wrote to Dhanurdhara Swami privately. Offering his “heartfelt apologies,” he wrote:

 

It was never my intention to misrepresent or cause any disturbance to you or those close to you. I deeply regret this oversight.

The origin of the mistake lies in a class I recently listened to by Suresvara Prabhu, in which the story of the Russian devotees was shared. I found the narrative inspiring and wanted to make it available to our readers. To that end, I downloaded the automatic transcription from YouTube and used ChatGPT to extract and format just the story for publication. At the time, I did not catch that the story was actually being relayed by Suresvara Prabhu as originally told by you. I thus mistakenly attributed the story to him.

 

And so, the editor wrote, he had now removed the article “to avoid further misunderstanding,”

 

and am now writing to offer my apology and an explanation. I understand this may have left you wondering about how the article was handled, and I hope this message helps to clear up any confusion or ill feeling.

 

So this offense would never have happened were it not for the sins of YouTube and ChatGPT. To test the credibility of this story, we used a feature of Microsoft Word to compare Dhanurdhara Maharaja’s original article with the version published on Dandavats. Miraculously, apart from some editorial intrusions, the two versions matched, even down to the sentence and paragraph divisions and down to the very punctuation marks.

Among the editorial intrusions: It seems that at Dandavats we can’t say good things about anyone Officially Out of Favor. So not only had the editor replaced Dhanurdhara Maharaja’s name. He had also obscured the name of Kesava Bharati Goswami. And even Sannyasa Dasa and Kamala Mala Dasa—the two Russian devotees whose glories the article had celebrated—came in for similar treatment. No longer officially blessed. Names replaced.

 

Bringing all this to the editor’s attention, Dhanurdhara Swami wrote to him:

 

Dandavats is an ISKCON GBC sponsored publication. Overt plagiarism therefore puts them in a terrible light. No respectable institution does this and if it is done, they correct it.

Please don’t unnecessarily carry this controversy on. Own the mistake and rectify it, for my readers, Suresvara Prabhu, ISKCON and myself.

 

Dhanurdhara Maharaja made three requests:

 

First, Dandavats should publish “an article whose headline clearly says it’s a correction and (should you choose to apologize) an apology.” Maharaja didn’t ask that his own name be mentioned, but Dandavats should admit the wrong attribution, put a link to Maharaja’s original post, and properly identify the three devotees whose names Dandavats had changed.

 

Second, “I also request you to contact some of the major ISKCON blogs where the plagiarized article was shared and ask them to publish your apology. I found the plagiarized version on Desire Tree, for example.”

 

Third, “I also request you to arrange a zoom call to speak to me personally.”

 

Maharaja wrote that if Dandavats did this, that would be the end of the issue. And if not, then in the next Monday Mornings Greetings “I will use my experience with Dandavats to highlight an important message—the challenges institutions face in adhering to even the most basic ethical guidelines.”

 

Maharaja ended, “Ultimately, for your sake, I pray you correct this egregious mistake that hurt many Vaisnavas.”

 

Well, Dandavats did reach out to “Desire Tree.” And Dandavats did publish an apology (https://www.dandavats.com/?p=115718). The apology admits the misattribution, expresses regret, credits the original author, provides the link, tells all the real names—and once again assigns the blame to YouTube and ChatGPT.

 

Oh, and one thing more: Dandavats published their apology on May 20 but dated it May 16, so that when published it lay buried under three or four days of intervening articles and news.

 

Should we trust Dandavats.com? It’s up to you. But this isn’t the first time I’ve seen Dandavats pull this kind of trick. So they and I have for many years had an understanding: They are not to publish any of my classes or any of my writings on Dandavats.com.

 

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #21 – The Pope and Reincarnation

May 19th, 2025

I was intrigued by the papal conclave. I was happy the new pope looked and acted saintly, a pastor to the poor and not just a prince of the church. I also looked at it through the lens of my own tradition. I had a few insights.

 

A reporter asked his older brother, also a devout Catholic, about the pope’s youth:

 

“He always wanted to be a priest from the earliest age. Even at five years old he would get my mother’s ironing board and have us cover it with a white cloth. He would call the rest of the family, and he would imitate the Eucharist by handing out the small Necco wafers that my mother provided him. Many of our neighbors seeing his saintliness would joke that he would one day be the pope.”

 

The reporter followed up his first question by asking if the pope was like this from birth:

 

“No, I think maybe he just picked up something from my parents who were devout Catholics.”

 

I thought my tradition explains such phenomenon much more clearly through the concept of reincarnation.

 

“The unsuccessful yogī, after many, many years of enjoyment on the planets of the pious living entities, is born into a family of righteous people, or into a family of rich aristocracy.” Bhagavad-gītā 6.41

 

It seems that his desire to be a priest was the result of a pious past life, or many such lives. In other words, he was just continuing his spiritual evolution in this life from a past life. Therefore the transmigration of the soul is the best explanation for why a child without prompting develops such a strong desire to be a priest from the earliest age and never wavers in that commitment. In that sense, I am proud of the insights of my own tradition.

 

Everything concerning the conclave intrigued me. I watched as about thirty young seminarians (priests in training) were glued to their seats after seeing the white smoke bellowing from the chimney of the Vatican awaiting the announcement of who the new pope would be. When his name was finally announced, and they realized that the pope would be American, I was shocked and amused by their reaction.

 

Like young “middle Americans” at a MAGA rally they wildly pumped their fists in the air again and again and in a type of euphoria shouted for some time:

 

“USA! USA! USA!”

 

Strange! I couldn’t understand how a limited nationalistic expression came from their hearts after such deep theological training.

 

“One who identifies his self as the inert body composed of mucus, bile and air, who assumes his wife and family are permanently his own, who thinks an earthen image or the land of his birth is worshipable, or who sees a place of pilgrimage as merely the water there, but who never identifies himself with, feels kinship with, worships or even visits those who are wise in spiritual truth — such a person is no better than a cow or an ass.” Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.84.13 [emphasis mine]

 

Two seminarians in Rome were interviewed after Pope Francis died. They were impressed:

 

“He told us not to give up playing sports and our taste in music.”

 

There was a controversy about the new pope. Was he a Chicago Cubs fan or a Chicago White Sox Fan? He was for the Sox! In the same regard, it was mentioned that Pope Francis was a lifelong and passionate fan of soccer, particularly his hometown team, San Lorenzo de Almagro. He was even a card-carrying member of the club.

 

I don’t get it. Shouldn’t the pope or an ācārya, especially as renunciates, exemplify a higher level of transcendence? I like my tradition’s definition of pure devotion:

 

Bhakti, or devotional service, means engaging all our senses in the service of the Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all the senses. When the spirit soul renders service unto the Supreme, there are two side effects. One is freed from all material designations, and one’s senses are purified simply by being employed in the service of the Lord.” From Nārada-pañcarātra quoted in Bhakti-rasāmta-sindhu 1.1.12 [emphasis mine]

 

My tradition is bhakti. Although, I may see the universality of religion, what I attempt to show here is that I trust the tenets and metaphysics of my tradition over others. That’s natural for any adherent of a tradition. But what I also want to make clear is that if one has allegiance to a tradition, that doesn’t mean one is more spiritually elevated than an adherent of another faith, even if one feels that other faith is philosophically less comprehensive. Substance is more important than allegiance. One must do the work of the tradition, not just belong to it.

 

When I visit Colombia, I am in awe of the depth with which the general populace accepts Jesus. I often don’t see that degree of piety in my own tradition, which was transplanted in the west.

 

By cable car and hiking I visited Monserrate, a sacred place and shrine 10,000 feet above sea level in Bogota. When I ascended the steps and reached the shrine I was huffing and puffing. I was therefore shocked when I saw people up there who were much older and very frail. When I entered the church, I saw so many ordinary people deep in prayer at the various shrines within the church, almost in trance. As I sat in one of the beautiful shrines in my brownish tinted robes with a matching hoodie, one old lady came up to me to offer respects and seek my blessings. She mistook me for a priest! I humbly indicated with my hands that I wasn’t a Catholic priest, but I still put both hands up in the air to give her blessings. She smiled reflecting a humility and devotion of heart that I can only pray to obtain in this life.

 

I was surprised that some of the things expressed during the conclave seemingly lacked the depth of philosophy of my tradition, including the explanatory power of reincarnation. I was also left, however, with an admiration for the depth of their tradition and the power of the Catholic Church to inspire love for Jesus.

 

I wish the new pope well and pray that his mission to spread love of God succeeds. My deep personal prayer is that I develop in substance the ideals of the profound spiritual tradition gifted to me by our divine master.

 

Śrīla Prabhupāda ki jaya!

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #20 – Queen Kuntī was Right!

May 12th, 2025

When I grew up in Krishna consciousness, we were very sympathetic to the Vaiṣṇavas in the former Soviet Union. After all they were persecuted, jailed, and tortured by the KGB, but they were seemingly indomitable and couldn’t be broken. In 1991, however, the Soviet Union disbanded and we soon received word that the first group of Russian devotees would come to India.

 

Kesava Bharati Maharaja was one of the Vaiṣṇavas who greeted them in Calcutta when they first arrived. He told me a touching story:

 

“When the devotees from the Soviet Union came, we offered them a big feast. I sat next to one humble soul. He looked at his plate and picked up a piece of papaya in his hand raised it up and turned to me and asked, ‘A fruit?’ I nodded. He bit it and cried. I was shocked that his previous existence was so seemingly deprived.”

 

When the first contingent of devotees from the former Soviet Union visited Vrindavan, we met them at Bhaktivedanta Gate on Bhaktivedanta Swami Marg and then ushered them into the temple for kirtan. As they approached the front entrance to the temple, we showered them with rose petals from above.

 

Sivarama Swami and Govinda Swami were especially eager to honor them, and Govinda Swami, a gourmet Hare Krishna cook among his many talents, made them an amazing feast which they served in Tamal Krishna’s house. They had a plan to honor them for their sacrifice. When I describe it, it may seem strange, but their plan represents how much we honored these devotees’ courage, and the sacrifice they underwent to spread the mission of Śrī Caitanya. Their plan was as follows.

 

The two maharajas would serve them so much prasadam that their plates would be piled with their remnants. They also placed sand in front of the doorway so that when they left “the dust of their lotus feet” would mix with that sand. After the Russian devotees left, they would eat their remnants and bathe in the dust of their lotus feet. And they did!

 

As for me, I was housing arguably the most persecuted and toughest of the Russian devotees, three Armenian brothers—Sannyasa Dasa, Kamala Mala,  and a third brother whose name I forget. After the feast at Tamal Krishna’s house, Sannyasa, who was tortured in prison, started to complain to me. He was disturbed when he found out that the maharajas had eaten their remnants and bathed in the dust of their feet. In general, the high level of respect he received since coming to India upset him. In broken English with a heavy Russian accent he expressed his feelings about it.

 

“I think it is even more dangerous here than in prison. In prison they can only harm your body, but here with all this worship they can kill your bhakti!

 

Just as he was griping about the worship he was enduring, Kamala Mala, a very tall imposing person, was walking by and overheard what his brother was saying. He, stopped and turned his head to me and in a very heavy tone commented:

 

“Queen Kuntī was right!”

 

For those unfamiliar with that reference, he was referring to the famous statement by Queen Kuntī. She lamented that Krishna was leaving because the horrible war which called for His presence, and caused her family untold suffering, had now ended.

 

“I wish that all those calamities would happen again and again so that we could see You again and again, for seeing You means that we will no longer see repeated births and deaths.” Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.8.25

 

We generally feel closer to God in times of tragedy, but how many of us value God’s presence and shelter to that degree?

 

Dear Śrī Lord Krishna, I pray that one day I can value your presence in my life so much that I too may proclaim:

 

“Queen Kuntī was right!”

 

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #19 – Is Forgiveness the Most Important Quality of an Aspiring Yogi?

May 5th, 2025

Recently I gave a talk on forgiveness titled “How to give up justified hate?” While giving the talk it dawned on me how important it is for one on the path of yoga to be forgiving. My reasoning, which connected yoga with forgiveness, was based on a quote that connected the two:

 

“The shadows of resentment keep our spiritual light from shining through, never allowing us to fully experience who we are.”[1]

 

Yoga means to bring the mind to sattva, literally the original state of being. The mind is like a lens or mirror. Its original state of being, the state of sattva, appears therefore when it’s clean and not distorted. This is accomplished by meditation which means concentrating on one thing, usually a mantra. By doing so, the other disruptive thoughts emerging from the ego, which distort or sully the mind, are quelled. The mind then naturally moves toward sattva, its natural state, where the lens of the mind is clear and we can perceive or experience who we really are.

 

Meditation means controlling the mind. It begins with rules or instructions on how to control the mind’s activity in relationship to others. Such rules are called yamas. The first and most important yama is ahi, nonviolence, and it takes precedence over all other rules and regulations. For example, one can even lie and transcend the second yama of satya (truthfulness) if the intention is to protect another from violence. In that way ahi takes precedence over every other yogic ethical rule and is thus the foundation of yoga. If you can’t control the mind to the extent that violence against others physically, verbally, or even in your thoughts, is restrained, you haven’t even attained the most rudimentary platform of yoga.

 

Forgiveness means “to give up resentment against, to give up desire to punish, stop being angry with, pardon, to overlook.”

 

What about a situation in which someone has done something horrible to you or others? There is certainly a discussion to be had about when it’s appropriate to drop one’s resentment, or if there is a psychologically needed period of moral outrage required for one who has faced or witnessed such abuse. That is a deep subject beyond the scope of this post. Still, any type of hate, even “justified hate,” “keeps our spiritual light from shining through, never allowing us to fully experience who we are.” A yogi must therefore be forgiving and rid the heart of resentment.

 

There are many good reasons to forgive. A thorough discussion of the topic would certainly cover many of them. The ultimate reason to forgive, however is simply spiritual. Resentment deters our movement towards a clear mind and the realization of the self. It’s often a great challenge. But a yogi must forgive, even when our hate is “justified”!

 

“Forgiveness means to give up all hope for a better past!”

 


[1] I had been careless taking notes and as a result I often there have forgotten to put the attribution to the citations I collected. Therefore, in my posts occasionally I list a citation without citing its source. I have two such instances in this post.

 

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #18 – Perception, Contentment and Fake News

April 28th, 2025

Perception, Contentment and Fake News[1]

 

The black snake was still sitting on the last step of the ghāṭa. It hadn’t moved one inch since I initially saw it when descending the stairs for my bath. A little fearful, I stopped suddenly and walked fifty meters to a safer spot. I didn’t have my glasses, so I had to squint to see why the snake was seemingly motionless. Oh, it was just a ripped black tire! I had an epiphany.

 

All problems are perceptual and not actual. I felt threatened by the black snake, but what was my problem? Was it a matter of what was actually there or rather something perceptual—what I thought was there?

 

The best example of a perceptual problem is death. When we lose what we are attached to, we suffer. At death we seemingly lose our very existence. We are, however, eternal. Therefore, death itself is only the illusion of non-existence and, in that sense, not an actual problem.

 

Every school of spirituality and self-improvement is based on overcoming perceptual or illusory problems. For example, the focus of the yogic process is to conquer distress and invoke contentment by purifying one’s perception, which is distorted by the static of thoughts born of ego.

 

Yoga corrects one’s vision by bringing the mind to sattva, which means the true nature of being. The original nature of the mind, which is like a mirror or lens, is one that is not distorted or dirty. The yogic technique for cleaning the mirror of the mind and bringing it to its true state is called meditation. By concentrating on one thought, the thoughts which distort the mind are quelled. The lens of the mind thus gradually moves to the platform of sattva, a higher level of perception and contentment, which are the main symptoms of sattva.

 

Similarly, in its own way, modern psychology seeks to help solve one’s mental problems by giving one a higher perspective to encounter them. Traumas, phobias, and anxieties, for example, are distortions of one’s thinking and perception. An expert in psychology may help one to identify the irrational patterns of thought that skew one’s perception and cause distress. He or she then helps one to change those patterns of thought hoping to bring one to a higher level of perception and contentment.

 

The purpose of the law of karma is also to elevate our vision by putting us in situations that teach us lessons to help us better understand ourselves. In that way, all spiritual schools of thought serve a singular purpose: to enlighten us or to elevate our perception to make us content or happy.

 

I was initially inspired to write this Monday Morning Greetings highlighting how all problems are perceptual not actual by reflecting on the perils of the internet. It skews people’s perception, forcing them to live in polarized views imbued with hate and misery. When it is used in this way it is certainly not a pramāṇa, a valid means of knowing meant to help us increase our perception and contentment. And it is surely not the world where the saintly reside. Śrīla Prabhupāda therefore condemned such media strongly:

 

“To read ordinary literature and books or newspapers is compared to the pleasure place of crows. The crows, they are very much attached to the rejected refuse, garbage.” (Lecture on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 2.3.17, Los Angeles, July 12, 1969)

 

 


[1] This is an edited reprint of February 24, 2020.

 

Next »