Waves of Devotion

If not now, when? When will I fully realize my relationship with Krishna?  When you are hunkered down in America, with all the time in the world to chant Hare Krishna and hardly any other pressing concerns to distract you, these are the types of thoughts that arise. It becomes so clear that there is another world, a higher consciousness, that is incomparably more sublime than the one we wallow in now. That world seems so close, but the pure taste eludes me. Am I like the bee licking the outside of a honey jar? How can I enter that realm of sweetness? I am only separated from that world by my commitment, my firm dedication to pursue my highest ideal. Commitment changes consciousness!

Śrī Caitanya came to this world to taste and distribute love of Godhead, but He never manifested love of Godhead until visiting Gaya upon His father’s death. There He met His teacher and realized that the truth was embodied directly before Him. To realize that truth and manifest His full glory, He needed only to observe and listen to that godly person with faith. He became inspired, took initiation, and fully committed Himself to the teachings of His divine master. When He returned home from Gaya to Navadvīpa, the former scholar of logic could no longer be recognized. He was now intoxicated with love of Godhead! Commitment changes consciousness!

The Mahābhārata is full of stories about the exemplars of dharma like Bhīṣmadeva, Yudhiṣṭhira, and so on. Their main quality was their honesty, especially their firm commitment to their words. If one can follow those exemplars and develop such integrity, then one’s spiritual evolvement is assured, for all one need do is verbally commit oneself to perform a particular act of transformation daily, and one’s whole life will quickly evolve. Commitment changes consciousness!

This morning I realized I needed an extra push to enter deeper into my meditation. I tried to draw on my will power, but the well seemed somewhat dry. I thought about why. The reservoir of my determination needed to be replenished from a firm commitment to my duties the day before. For some reason, however, I was unregulated and became distracted, and my firm commitment to service waned. As a result, I had little to draw upon today. At least that’s the way I saw it. Commitment changes consciousness!

The door to bhakti is commitment. It is called śaraṇāgati, a faith in and commitment to God as one’s full shelter. What is that commitment? In all circumstances I accept what is favorable for the pleasure of Krishna, reject what is unfavorable, have confidence that Krishna will protect and maintain me, embrace the humble position, and give myself fully in heart to His service. If I want to achieve my innermost spiritual desires, the entry to real bhakti is clear: Commitment changes consciousness. 

Last week, I discussed the problem of poverty and the consequent protests in Colombia. I ended the post by proposing the necessity of adding a spiritual element to any solution. I think it is important to elaborate on this principle.

The first thing to understand is that for the common person to pursue spiritual life they require some degree of social, physical, and mental peace. There is thus not an absolute dichotomy between material and spiritual life. Organizing our material life properly according to the instructions of the śāstra and to help others in need through charity are both part of skilled living (dharma)[1], which helps keep us from being mired in selfishness.

On the path of bhakti, while acknowledging the necessity to both take care of ourselves and compassionately help others, there is also a higher dimension in dealing with social problems. It is certainly true that everyone has a need to enjoy the senses to some degree, and, in fact, without it, the body dies. We are instructed, however, that although there is a necessity for some level of enjoyment, one should never do it just for that purpose, but rather to keep one physically and mentally fit for the higher purpose of self-realization. If one doesn’t consciously make that higher connection in one’s duties, then one’s activities have limited value. Jesus Christ put it best: “For what shall it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, and loses his soul.” (Mark 8:36-38, KJV)

On the Vedic path, one is also taught that although one can’t neglect the suffering of others, one should never lose sight that ultimately suffering is a reaction to previous actions based on ignorance. Thus, while it is necessary to ensure that others have the basics they need to live, the higher level of charity is to purify people’s hearts by educating them in spiritual knowledge.

My initial article was about offering a solution to the frustration in society due to poverty. From the spiritual perspective, I should add that there will never be social peace in the world regardless of societal re-organization, without some system to elevate the consciousness of the populace, for if there is not some effort in society to temper greed and envy by spiritual teachings, a new leadership that arises will also exploit those below them out of greed, and even if the needs of the poor are met, people in general will still be envious of those who have more than them. Class disparity and struggle will continue.

In summary, welfare has many levels. On the base level, people’s basic needs must be met. To offer charity is thus part of one’s moral obligation. Higher than that is to help others cure the root of karmic suffering and avoid future distress by teaching them skilled living (dharma). The highest welfare, however, is to help people make a permanent solution to suffering by promoting self-realization. We’ll end with a metaphor that Śrīla Prabhupāda uses that aptly highlights the conclusion of this discussion, the necessity to help those suffering not only by providing their basic needs, but also by helping them come to a spiritual platform.

“There are so many welfare activities in the human society. People open hospitals, schools, colleges, charitable institution. They are nice. But the best contribution to the human society is to revive his lost relationship with God. Just like a rich man’s son. Some way or other he has left his father’s home and he’s loitering here and there. Somebody finds him: ‘Oh, you are Mr. Such-and-such. You are the son of such-and-such gentleman. He’s very rich man. Why you are suffering? Come, come with me. I shall take to your father.’ So this is one kind of welfare activity.

And another welfare activity, the same person who is loitering in the street, somebody says, ‘Oh, you are hungry. All right, come on. I shall give you some bread.’ That is also welfare activity. But this welfare activity, to get the lost son to his father, rich father, not ordinary father, that is the best service. “(Lecture Bhag. 2.2.5 Dec 2, 1968 LA)

[1] I heard a class by Jaya Jagannath Das where he described dharma as “skilled living”. I like the phrase and want to credit its source.

Before I left our ashram in Cali to return to the States, I was asked to address our congregation about the current crisis in the country. Protesters blocked the city roads, and basic commodities could not be trucked into the city in response to a new proposed tax during a time that many families are struggling just to put bread on their tables due to COVID. The lecture posed several challenges due to the complexity of the situation, the limited time I had to present it, and the fact that I wasn’t sure of the audience’s mindset. I thus decided to narrow my focus to how a misunderstanding of destiny exacerbates class conflicts, and how a class of learned teachers are required to guide society through the subtleties of class cooperation and mutual prosperity.

I began by describing an ideal cooperative social system through a common analogy that compares an ideal society to a body where the head (the intellectuals and religious leaders), the arms (the military and administrative class), the stomach (the mercantile class), and the legs (the laborer class) work cooperatively for the benefit of the whole body. Based on that, I discussed how a misunderstanding of destiny/karma can exacerbate class conflict.

For example, if the mercantile class is not cognizant of the law of destiny and instead embraces the concept of meritocracy, a philosophy that professes that whether one is fortunate or unfortunate is solely based on that person’s effort, they can easily become callous to the plight of the poor and not recognize that often, even with a sincere effort, it is impossible for many to overcome their hardships.[1] As a result, policies may be supported that plant seeds of resentment by allowing income disparity to reach a level where the basic needs of the poor are neglected while the more elite continue to prosper.

On the other hand, if those championing the working class seek the unattainable goal of economic equity because of their failure to understand that there will always be people who, by the law of karma, have and create more wealth, they will inevitably need to curtail societal freedom to achieve economic equity, which is artificial and karmically impossible. In that case, as history has often shown, not only will freedom be lost, but by destroying the incentive of those most capable of economic productivity, the over-all economy will become worse, and the most vulnerable and poor will continue to wallow in poverty, exploited by a new elite class: party bureaucrats.

To maintain a society that is economically prosperous, and to avoid a destructive revolution that makes things worse for everyone, the mercantile class must ensure that while expanding their profit the basic needs of all society are met either by a fair share of taxes or the establishment of substantial charitable foundations. If they don’t do this, and they neglect the hungry, the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam warns, they even risk their spiritual life.

“For a person having a differential outlook, who differentiates between the belly of himself and of other living entities, I (the Supreme Lord) appear in the form of all devouring death and continue his existence in the fearsome material world.” (Bhag. 3.29.26)[2]

Of course, this is a complex subject that needs a more comprehensive analysis than a short lecture or a two-page summary can offer. I hope, however, I did show how the knowledge found in our tradition, in this case the teachings of karma, is relevant in addressing social unrest.

I finished my talk by adding an important point emphasized by Śrīla Prabhupāda that needs to be added to any proposed social solution, otherwise even welfare work loses its value. Although one’s basic needs are required to function peacefully, ultimate happiness is internal. Without a class of trained spiritual teachers to guide people and teach the science of the soul, all of society, from the downtrodden to the elite, will be mired in dissatisfaction, envy, and constant strife, no matter how much prosperity they accrue. We must therefore keep Bhaktivinoda’s short instruction at the forefront of all our endeavors, even for social change, if our goal is lasting peace:

“This material world is full of suffering. Chant the holy name of Krishna as our only business.” (Aruṇodaya-kīrtana I, verse 6)

[1] https://aeon.co/ideas/a-belief-in-meritocracy-is-not-only-false-its-bad-for-you

[2] Translation (as per Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī’s commentary) by Hari-parshad das

Krishna is fully present in His holy name, but like any person He does not give Himself to those just offering words. The words must have heart.

I caught myself chanting listlessly. The problem? Chanting must be grounded in a spiritual identity. What is that identity? We are consciousness meant for service. I listened carefully to the mantra to see if my soul, a call for service, was sufficiently amplified.

It has become clear to me that the quality of my morning chanting does not just depend on my determination when I sit down in the morning, but how I have lived my life the day before. How else can I explain why the clarity of my chanting sometimes varies day to day, even when my effort is relatively the same?

Only in samādhi is one focused without distraction for extended periods of time with absolutely no cognizance of anything outside the object of meditation. Until that point, we will certainly, to one extent or another, be distracted during meditation. Before chanting, I try to place myself at the feet of our great teachers and in the lap of the most holy places, so that when my mind wonders instead of going to the mundane, it will reside in a sacred place that inspires me to refocus on the holy name.

Chanting inspires reading because it is important to have the right thoughts in mind while chanting.

A Chinese proverb that I previously wrote about suddenly came to mind: “Patience in a moment of anger can prevent one hundred days of sorrow.” It became so clear to me during my meditation how, in life, overreaction to challenges to the false ego can needlessly entangle one’s time and mind in a world of drama for days. As a result, those thoughts inevitably violate the sacred space reserved for the name during chanting.

Chanting must be grounded in spiritual sentiment. Go in consciousness wherever you can find it. Give life to your entreaty to the holy name.

Chant in gratitude. You can never sufficiently pay for what you get, for the holy name is Krishna, and there is nothing equal to the joy it gives. Have I fully realized it? Enough to be very grateful to Śrī Śrī Guru and Gauranga. The voice of “thank you, thank you” is the foundation of my chanting.

“I do not know how much nectar the two syllables ‘Kṛṣ-ṇa’ have produced. When the holy name of Kṛṣṇa is chanted, it appears to dance within the mouth. We then desire many, many mouths. When that name enters the holes of the ears, we desire many millions of ears. And when the holy name dances in the courtyard of the heart, it conquers the activities of the mind, and therefore all the senses become inert.”  (Cc. Antya-lila, 1.99)

“They are the happiest people in the world!” Well, maybe not the happiest, but that was my spontaneous thought when observing Ricardo, our gardener, and Mireya, the housekeeper. Their smiles reminded me of the type of smile Krishna wears called smita, a closed mouth smile without any external impetus that simply reflects one’s inner contentment. Why are there so many simple people here in Colombia who seem so content and joyful when they have so little, especially compared to the first world?

Before trying to unravel this query, let’s first settle on a standard measure of happiness to gauge my observation. There are several ways to define happiness. Let me choose one: Happiness is a mind of good thoughts. What are good thoughts? Good thoughts are attachment to the qualities that elevate one’s consciousness, like devotion and humility, and the activities that inspire those attitudes, and aversion to the qualities that degrade one’s consciousness, like pride and avarice. In other words, the more a person’s mind is imbued with healthy attachments and aversions, and the less it is imbued with unhealthy attachments and aversions, or bad thoughts, the happier a person is. Now let us look at the attitudes that are naturally invoked in a modest life that elevate one’s spirits.

Santosh (Contentment)

Happiness is contentment that is expressed in the good thought, “Enough!” It seems that people with a humble life seem much more content with the simple joys in life and their modest possessions, while those who live in excess of their needs are more imbued with the mode of passion and never feel that they have enough.

Assurance

There is certainly some truth in the Hebrew saying, “The more you have, the more worries you have.” One of those worries is the fear of losing any of the multitude of one’s attachments. All things being equal, people who live a modest life are less fearful.

Decisiveness

Studies have shown that the more choices one has, the more difficult it is to make decisions. Sociologists have called this the paradox of choice.[1] As society becomes more “affluent” and the choices in food, clothes, and travel increase, there is a greater likelihood that people waver on the plane of indecisiveness, increase their material expectations, and even become more dissatisfied with their choices, fearing they have made the wrong one. Modest people who have less, therefore, tend to be more resolute in the minimal choices they make and are in less anxiety.

Emotionally Stable

The single greatest factor for general well-being, including physical health, is the amount of quality relationships one has.[2] Affluence in the modern world gives one a mobility in occupation and residence, which makes it more difficult to maintain community and family relationships. Often, modest people have no choice where they live and work. To take birth, live, and die in the same place creates the maximum opportunity to have the meaningful relationships in life that fill the mind with thoughts of stability and support.

Gratefulness

The more you have, the greater your expectations are, and the less likely you will feel deep love and appreciation in exchanges with others. In contrast, simple people have modest expectations and are easy to please. In other words, people who live a humble life tend to have deeper thoughts of gratefulness and appreciation in their consciousness.

Devotion and Faith

Srila Prabhupada use to quote the British poet Cowper: “The city is made by man, and the country is made by God.” Modern civilization, in a myriad of ways, from the overdependence on technology to its postmodern view of education, tends to cover the Divine. By dint of the sheer simplicity of their lives, those who are more modest are less affected by the complexity of modern life and are therefore more likely to experience the beautiful impressions in the mind inspired by simple faith, a sense of the Lord’s protection, and the eternality of their existence.

Aristotle made the insightful observation that happiness is the goal, but it is never the means to anything else. You may counter his conclusion by offering some other goal, he challenged, but it would easily be rebutted by the simple observation that the goal proposed was simply the means to happiness.

So yes, happiness, is the goal, and we have a lot learn from Ricardo, Mireya, and the simple god-fearing people of Colombia.

[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_the_paradox_of_choice?language=en

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KkKuTCFvzI