Waves of Devotion

Agency means the ability to initiate and control actions and thoughts. Various schools of Indian thought have various views on this.[1] The Bhagavad-gītā seems to say that the soul has no agency:

“The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature.” (Bg. 3.27)

But how can that be? If we have no ability to initiate and control action, then what is the meaning of the law of karma? How can we then be held responsible for that which we have absolutely no ability to initiate?

This is a deep and debated philosophical concept in the Indian philosophical tradition far beyond the scope of my posts. I am therefore not going to pretend to have exhaustively argued my own position that there is agency in the soul, but it is obvious that that is what Śrīla Prabhupāda taught. We therefore understand a deeper meaning to the above verse—to the extent we are acting against our constitutional nature as devotees of God is the extent to which we have surrendered our agency and are forced to act helplessly by the modes of material nature. In other words, one can compromise one’s agency by how one associates with the modes of nature, but it is not that the soul has no agency.

I am going to do something in this Monday Morning Greetings that I have never done before: print another person’s article. The article was sent to me by a close friend during a personal discussion with him. I thought it was so relevant to what I wanted to write, and it was penned with such clarity and force that I decided to make an exception and share it here. The article was written by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta’s disciple, Professor Sanyal, who was his English editor, but just as renowned for his devotion. Above, I wrote just a few words to introduce the concept of agency. I will say a few more words below to introduce the article and explain briefly its relevance to our discussion:

The article explains how although we cannot know God by our own initiative alone, we do have the agency to cultivate the will and humility to depend on His grace, to allow God to do the rest and act through us. I won’t go further. I will allow Professor Sanyal to elucidate the subject further. I think you will enjoy it.

“We must stop and reflect on the cause of our perpetual and utter failure. If we do so sincerely we make the real discovery with Kant that we cannot know the Truth by means of our present faculties. But we need not, therefore give up the quest as hopeless. We are to question again and then we shall get the true answer. That answer will be that the Absolute Truth for Whom our souls hanker is not a dead thing or relations of dead and limited things or thoughts but something Who is akin to ourselves. He is something that is living or self-conscious. He is also Spirit like our souls. The next question that will arise in our minds will be, why cannot we see Him? The answer will be, ‘Because He does not show Himself to us.’ If we ask again, ‘Why does He not appear to us?’ We shall be told that He is so because we do not seek for Him. We never seek for the Truth but always seek for the half-truth. That is the disease. The real Truth Himself comes to us the very instant we seek for Him. And we seek for Him only when and as soon as we really understand His nature. This is the vicious circle. At present we have no real idea of the Truth and so whenever we seek for anything that thing is necessary untruth. Then at last the conviction dawns on our understanding that the whole process hitherto pursued requires to be reversed and we begin to understand the mystic words of the scriptures. ‘Give up once for all the empiric quest for the Truth and wait for Him to take the initiative. You cannot go up to Him. When you try to go up to anything of your choice you go away from it. So you must submit to be enlightened. He has the power and the will of making Himself known to you.’

“At this stage one naturally asks, ‘Shall I then sit idly and do nothing?’ And now Truth answers in a definite manner, ‘No, let your mind and body do what appears to them to be their proper functions but you yourself stand apart and do not identify yourself with them, but wait for communications from Me. Rely wholly on Me and I shall guide you to the goal which is Myself.’ Thus faith is kindled in the doubting heart and we are in a position to profit by the instructions of the good preceptor whom Śrī Krsna sends to us the moment we really seek to be enlightened in perfect humility. Then we are also able to understand the words of the good preceptor as being identical with the words of the scriptures. Being now convinced of the real ability of the good preceptor to guide us on the path of the Absolute we take hold of his hand that is ever extended to us and submit to be led without hesitation and much questioning at first. As we gradually learn to walk in the path of service our vision slowly clears up and we see The Truth for ourselves. Then only we understand what it really is.”

Yes, we are forced to act helplessly, but if we are humble enough to muster the will and humility to beg for His Grace, then we do have the agency to change ourselves and even change the world. That was the teachings of Śrī Caitanya and what Śrīla Prabhupāda taught us.

[1] Free Will, Agency, and Selfhood in Indian Philosophy, Matthew Dasti and Edwin Bryant, Oxford University Press

It rains every few days—mostly in the night—just enough to keep the weather pleasant and temperate. Govardhan has become so verdant you practically can’t even see the hill behind its foliage. Although there are plenty of pilgrims packing the path, it is not a loud-blaring-festival time of year and barely a soul comes to my door. I’m here alone. It keeps my stay sacred—an ideal time to chant the holy name!

Chanting—the lens or mirror of the mind is cleansed, and what do you see? You see and feel the real you, the devotee of Krishna. A mirror is also held up to the false ego. Sure, that enables you to distinguish it from the soul, but you also see that false-self parading around as if those temporary material designations of body, birth, and position are you. How embarrassing! More painful is looking back and realizing how much folly was done in the name of illusion—the mistakes made, and the harm caused. Should I continue to go deeper and obliterate the rest of my extraneous attachments and ultimately come to point of seeing my envy of God? Chanting—the lens or mirror of the mind is cleansed, and what do you see? The agony and ecstasy.

But there is no duality on the path of bhakti, because both the joys and struggles in devotional practice are born from devotion. If we can lament and feel the pain of separation from Śrī Krishna, like a child crying for his mother, as Śrīla Prabhupāda instructed, isn’t that pain of separation our highest devotion and thus joy at the same time?

Some Other Thoughts on Chanting

The holy name is a person, and people only reveal themselves in love. The first principle of love is to give attention to another. If our taste for chanting is waning, it’s because we haven’t given the holy name enough attention and He hasn’t revealed His presence and love, which is the taste of chanting. If we keep anyone a stranger by neglecting them, why would they reveal themselves, and how will we ever taste what that person may have to offer us in a relationship?

A sādhu visited and gave some advice: “If we keep the body absolutely still while chanting, even while sitting in a chair, and concentrate on pronouncing every syllable very carefully, in four round intervals at a time,[1] then with a little effort we will become absorbed in the name, and God will reveal Himself quickly, even to a neophyte. The principle is that, when sitting, the mind’s focus naturally flows to where the body is moving, and when we keep the body totally still the focus will more easily gravitate to where directed—in the case of chanting, the tongue and the ears. Sure, the mind may still wander, but without the body grabbing the consciousness, the focus on chanting will intensify.” The sādhu’s experience mirrored my own, which was reaffirming, but the real glory of Vrindavan is that at any moment a sādhu may walk in the door.

The Yoga Sutras say that when chanting a mantra we must dwell on its meaning. Makes sense. How can you be attentive to chanting a mantra if you remain oblivious to its meaning?

It is still very early morning here in Govardhan. I am laying back on my recliner chair, shirtless under a fan, enjoying the pleasant night breezes coming through my open door and window. My computer rests on my lap. I just finished this week’s Greetings, and now I will begin my chanting—and like all relationships, it’s a work in progress.

[1] I asked the sādhu why four rounds at a time. He said that that was usually the amount he experienced that most people could muster up the determination to focus. He said the break may be just for a moment to stretch, change position, or sip water, and then refocus the mind on chanting. It is not a hard and fast rule.

Do you?

On Śrī Nārada’s quest to find the topmost recipient of Śrī Krishna’s mercy, he is eventually directed by Lord Indra to see Lord Brahmā, and for good reason. Brahmā’s quantity and quality of service to Śrī Krishna is unfathomable. He acts as the secondary creator of this universe, is the dispenser of karma and appoints, empowers, and supervises all the demigods in the service of the Lord. Most importantly, on his planet, he facilitates the highest level of ritual worship in the universe for the Supreme Lord in the form of the many armed Mahāpuruṣa who resides there. When Śrī Nārada hears of the glories of Lord Brahmā from Lord Indra, he enthusiastically rushes to Lord Brahmā’s planet to see for himself. He is more than impressed with what he sees and profusely glorifies Lord Brahmā. Lord Brahmā, as a devotee, however, neither wants, accepts, nor even believes such laurels and thus counters Indra’s claims that having such a powerful position, even in the Lord’s service, is a sign of Śrī Krishna’s mercy:

“By the power of Krishna’s maya, I am always deluded by various conceits. I think myself the controller, grandfather, and spiritual master of the universe. Proud of my birth from Krishna’s lotus navel, I think myself a great ascetic, His great worshipper […]” (Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta 1.2.60)

He further disses the conception that his power and position is an example of Krishna’s mercy by expressing his fears:

“[…] I live in terror of the all-devouring end of time. All I want for myself is liberation.” (Br.Bhag. 1.2.62)

In his purport, Gopīparāṇadhana Dāsa sums up Lord Brahmā’s reaction:

“According to Brahmā, being the Lord of all creatures in the universe is not the sign of Krishna’s favor. On the contrary, it is the cause of great trouble. His worldly responsibilities fill him with false pride and expose him to all kinds of anxiety.”

Brahmā is wealthier and more powerful than Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and all the wealthy people of this world combined, and—it goes without saying—infinitely wiser and more devotional. But still, as Brahmā described above, the powerful all have one thing in common. To the extent that they became deluded by their various material designations based on their powerful position, and consequently increase their pride and identification with the temporary material body, is the degree to which they live in terror of losing it all at death. The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam describes the mechanics of such illusion and suffering:

“Material life begins with turning away from God, which means turning away from our imperishable selves because what we are is in relationship to God, His Servant. God fulfills this desire not to be His devotee, by reflecting our consciousness on a particular body and simultaneously covering us with the illusion that we are the enjoyer and controller. Naturally, from this illusory and flickering designation arises duality and fear.”[1]

Don’t we see this play out every day with the abject misery of the rich and famous who become immersed in various conceits and thus live in confusion, anxiety, and fear? And don’t we see it every day in our lives to the extent that we want to enjoy and control rather than be God’s servant?

The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam thus advises:

“Persons who are actually intelligent and philosophically inclined should endeavor only for that purposeful end[2] which is not obtainable even by wandering from the topmost planet [Brahmāloka] down to the lowest planet [Pātāla]. As far as happiness derived from sense enjoyment is concerned, it can be obtained automatically in course of time, just as in course of time we obtain miseries even though we do not desire them.” (Bhag. 1.5.18)

So, who wants to be a billionaire?

[1] I took liberty to substantially paraphrase SB 11.2.37. The original verse:  https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/11/2/37/

[2] The purposeful end is going back to Godhead. Śrīla Prabhupāda’s purport explains why this, and not intense material endeavor, should be our goal: https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/1/5/18/

I am enjoying Akincana Krishna das’s class, “Smaraṇaṁ: Meditations on Śaraṇāgati”, one of the four main song books that the great Vaiṣṇava ācārya Śrīla Bhaktivinoda composed. Akincana teaches the songs of “Śaraṇāgati” for memorization and prayer.[1] Included in the class are simple classical mnemonic devices that, in my experience, enable one to memorize the songs in a fraction of what it would normally take, and techniques for deeply meditating on them. Besides the memorization and prayer, what intrigues me most in studying “Śaraṇāgati” is the way in which Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, in verse after verse, uncompromisingly presents the concept of Śaraṇāgati (surrender), such as is expressed in today’s title, which is from the third verse from last week’s song:

“Slay me or protect me as You wish, You are the master of Your eternal servant.”

What I was wondering, which will be the substance of today’s discussion, is how people coming to the path of bhakti today, who are generally influenced in their upbringing with a post-modern mind, which tends to psychologically react negatively to authority, what to speak of the idea that there is a truth that we must fully acquiesce or surrender to, can properly understand this concept of Śaraṇāgati. Śaraṇāgati also has all the trappings, at least externally, of a codependent relationship, the mood to totally reject one’s own needs and to plan one’s entire life around pleasing another.[2] What I want to try to do in this post is to, in a simple and brief way, explain the concept of Śaraṇāgati, and in doing so save it, so to speak, from the filter of the post-modern mind and any sense that the concept of surrender is akin to a psychological aberration such as codependence. Here’s my attempt.

I think the key to freeing Śaraṇāgati from such burdensome thoughts is to understand the feelings of surrender as the symptom and cause of love, which is a more universally accepted and appreciated principle than surrender. One way to define love is finding your happiness in the happiness of another without any motive or expectation of return. Śrīla Prabhupāda taught us that the best example of this in the material world is a mother’s love for her child. Isn’t such love where the mother selflessly gears her life around the needs of her child one of the most beautiful things in this world to see, what to speak of to have in one’s life? The point is when there is true love, whether it is in servitude, friendship, parental, or conjugal love, there is sacrifice that invokes beautiful and laudable feelings of selflessness and surrender.

My argument here is that when we accept love as the highest principle in this world, and when a symptom of that love is selfless surrender, then why should we deny such love and the symptoms of love in relation to its ultimate source, the realm of the divine? The Taittirīya Upaniṣad thus declares, “raso vai saḥ,” that the divine is the highest exchange of love, which means that in perfection we are meant to share in the highest love, which is accompanied by the highest sentiments of totally giving oneself to another—the perfect other, the Supreme Lord, one who can perfectly reciprocate our love. I am thus looking forward to Akincana’s next class where again we will study, meditate, and aspire for the sentiments of Śaraṇāgati:

“While sitting up or lying down, I will constantly meditate on your lotus feet. Whenever you call, I will immediately run to you and dance in rapture.” (bosiyā śuiyā, tomāra caraṇa)

(Goptṛtve-Varaṇa – song 3, verse 4)

[1] Those interested in Akincana Krishna’s next online seminar on “Śaraṇāgati” may contact him at [email protected].

[2] There is a difference between codependence and pure love, especially love of God. In pure love one is fully focused on the object of one’s love for their pleasure, whereas in codependence one’s life is focused on the object of adoration, but mixed with motive born of one’s own attachments and fears.