Waves of Devotion

Suffering is when we either don’t have what we are attached to (hankering), or we lose that which we are attached to (lamenting). Therefore, the greatest suffering is death where our present life ends, and everything connected with it is taken away. Death, however, is the illusion of non-existence. Our greatest problem therefore doesn’t exist. Death and all material problems are thus ultimately perceptual and not actual.

All spiritual processes therefore deal with raising one’s awareness or perception with an understanding that the higher the level of our perception (the more we are free from illusion), the higher our contentment. We will discuss a few of those processes here.

Yoga: The purpose of yoga is to bring the mind to sattva, which literally means the nature of being or reality. The mind is a lens or mirror which in sattva, or its true nature, is not distorted or stained by frivolous thoughts. This is accomplished by meditation, or the focus on a single thought or object, which quells the other thoughts distorting the mirror of the mind and brings it to a higher level of perception and contentment.

Dharma: At any moment we are faced with a myriad of choices. Dharma is the science of correct or righteous action, the option we choose which elevates the mind to a higher level of perception and contentment.

Karma: Karma is God’s law that provides a destiny to give us realizations that elevate us to a higher level of perception and contentment. Reality is like an intricate crossword puzzle and realizations are the pieces of that puzzle. Karma gives us those realizations that help us fill in the picture of the ultimate truth.

Śāstra: Our mind is composed of two types of thoughts—kliṣṭa-vṛtti, bad or troubling thoughts and akliṣṭa-vṛtti, good or untroubling thoughts. Bad thoughts are attachments to those things degrading to our consciousness (lying, lust and so on), and aversion to those things that are elevating for consciousness (simplicity and sexual restraint and so on). Good thoughts are just the opposite—attachment to elevating thoughts and aversion to degrading ones. A good and peaceful mind is therefore one with elevated awareness due to a predominance of good thoughts. But how do we change the mind? We change the mind by good ideas which come from the śāstra. If śāstra is presented properly, it will inspire us to contemplate the benefit of good thoughts and then see the world through them. If this is done repeatedly, those thoughts become firmly embedded in our mind as akliṣṭa-vṛtti and we no longer see the world skewed by our selfish desires.

Bhakti: The first glory of chanting the holy name is ceto-darpaṇa-mārjanaṁ, it cleans the mirror of the mind.

One time a student was visiting me for a retreat in Colombia. It was a very challenging time in her life. She said she would just come to my class and that was it. Somehow, she decided to sit just for a few minutes for Jaya Jagannath’s class on the Yoga-sūtras which was directly after mine. It was so engaging that she stayed for the whole thing. Directly after class she came to see me and with fervor expressed her realization after hearing the morning classes, especially the Yoga-sūtras, reflecting on her own challenges, “It’s the mind!”

Conclusion, our problems are perceptual and not actual!

I was recently asked, “When something happens to a devotee, is it karma or krishna-lila?” My response:

First, the question is phrased wrong. If something happens to a devotee, the cause can be Krishna, but it’s not krishna-lila, a pleasure pastime of God. The question is therefore better asked “Is it karma or Krishna?” Good question.

In the Brahma-saṁhitā we read:

“All fruitive actions and their reactions (karmāṇi) for a person engaged in devotional service (bhakti-bhājām) are destroyed (nirdahati).”

Well, there you have it. It’s Krishna. But wait a second! Why then do devotees get astrological readings, which chart one’s destiny, and which work reasonably well? Even at Śrīla Prabhupāda’s birth, it was predicted that he would open many temples at an advanced age. So, is it karma? How can it be?

When one surrenders to Krishna, one’s purification comes directly under His supervision. But as our karma is specifically Krishna’s law geared to purify us and bring us closer to God, especially if one responds appropriately to one’s fate, why then should Krishna not allow our fate to unfold? In other words, although a person engaged in devotional service is no longer directly under the law of karma, Krishna still sanctions our destiny to continue because our karma is uniquely geared to purify us. That’s certainly true, but if one’s karma is under Krishna’s direct control, can Krishna change our karma?

Yes. The purpose of “bad” karma is not to punish us, but to purify us. So if by spiritual education and the practice of devotion we are learning the lessons karma meant to give us, certainly Krishna can interfere and reduce our “bad” karma. But does he have to? Not necessarily, for a devotee sees everything as coming from Krishna and therefore is focused not on destiny (what comes to one), but how one reacts (one’s free will). Every situation, for a devotee, is therefore a unique opportunity to serve God. Do not the most challenging situations often offer the most opportunity to serve God, even if to set an example for others? Also, if we deserve to have our “bad” karma reduced, God doesn’t have to change what happens to us. By studying the Bhāgavatam and applying it in one’s life, one has already reduced the suffering caused by the events in our life by enabling one to see and digest things from a higher platform of understanding.

Is it karma or Krishna for a devotee? It is both. For even if one surrenders to Krishna, our destiny or karma has been designed by Krishna to move the world around us to bring us closer to Him. Would not our compassionate Lord still sanction our destiny, His own law, to continue to serve us to the extent we need lessons in life to purify our hearts?

Peterhof and Donald Trump Today I will share two thoughts from my recent visit to Moscow:

Peterhof and Donald Trump

Peterhof is a series of stunning palaces and gardens located in St. Petersburg envisioned, commissioned and supervised by Peter the Great. Perhaps the greatest technological achievement of Peterhof, and one that especially impressed me while visiting, was the sixty-four exquisite and awe-inspiring fountains. What struck me about them is that they are driven entirely without the use of pumps, but just from the pressure collected in reservoirs from natural springs in the upper part of the property. It’s really something to see. Now what does this have to do with Donald Trump?

I am not much of a tourist. But my hosts were enthusiastic to show me the city, so I took the opportunity to broaden my perspective by some sight-seeing. I thought that might be something that could inspire my writing. Besides appreciating the splendor of Peterhof, I naturally looked at things through the eyes of the Bhāgavatam. In this case, I particularly recalled the monarchal rule in the Bhāgavatam where the king had the pedigree, training and power to be the proper leader. I didn’t know much about Peter the Great. But I saw the expertise and beauty of St. Petersburg, most of which was accomplished in his lifetime in what was previously mostly a swampy area. I assumed that here was someone who did the work and had the qualities to rule, although now there is some controversy about how noble he was. Anyway, walking through Peterhof and seeing its grandeur, and attributing that to a noble leader, I thought of Donald Trump in comparison, and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris also, and all the other clowns posing as world leaders today in contrast with the noble kings of the past, at least as they are found in the Bhāgavatam. The Bhāgavatam (SB 2.3.19) says in very strong language that we shouldn’t be surprised that democracy can often produce the kind of leaders we see today:

“Men who are like dogs, hogs, camels and asses praise those men who never listen to the transcendental pastimes of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the deliverer from evils.”

Sure, monarchy can produce tyranny, and democracy can provide guardrails against that, but something about the brilliance of this place, inspired by a king, made me hanker for rāma-rājya!, leadership that is competent with impeccable moral qualities.

The Danger of Luxury

I returned today from Russia. The trip was wonderful. Jagadish and I were treated as royalty. A few days ago, we went to St. Petersburg, a city of unparalleled beauty. Our sponsor sent us first class train tickets for the four-hour bullet train. You can’t imagine its luxury. She also owns an apartment exclusively for distinguished guests, and that is where we stayed. I think that facility was better than a five-star hotel. Evidently, our host owns a company and is very generous, but her focus seems to be devotion, which naturally means she thinks of others before herself. Although she seems to have the means for comfort, she even traversed the quite austere Vraja-maṇḍala parikramā fourteen times. Anyway, we certainly enjoyed our stay and in some ways the facility made it easy for us to put our energy into our service there. I also started to observe that if one is not careful, one can be conditioned and attached to a higher standard of material facility. It made me consider if this standard of living, so far beyond my means, could grow on me with a creeping sense attachment, and I began to reflect to what extent luxury in general was really happiness. My thoughts:

The key to happiness is internal satisfaction, not what you have, as long as your needs are met.

I wondered how much I will be conditioned by this standard and what would happen if I don’t get it next time I am traveling. I usually travel in coach or economy; will I experience a discontentment that I never had before? In other words, does being conditioned to a standard way above one’s needs counterintuitively create in the long run less contentment and happiness?

The pleasure which comes from the satisfaction of a material desire can be very vibrant, but it is very limited because it is so short in duration.

Even if I could afford that standard again, the satisfaction of one desire immediately impels another desire, so that type of happiness also ends in some form of dissatisfaction anyway.

Next year, I have already been promised the same facilities and pray I use them in the proper mood. I see deep down, however, that I can’t wait until I get to ride that luxury coach again. It was so much fun. Will I accept it with some sense of detachment, or have I been spoiled? Such is the nature of luxury beyond needs. If one is not thoughtful it can certainly lead to more discontentment and thus unhappiness. Don’t forget, the rich and famous are often the most miserable. Hare Krishna!

Bhakti is the path of radical humility:

“One who thinks himself lower than grass, who is more tolerant than a tree, and who does not expect personal honor but is always prepared to give respect to others, can very easily always chant the holy name of the Lord.” Śikṣāṣṭakam 3

Although bhakti in many senses is easy in the sense that it is available for anyone without any material prerequisite, its application is still difficult because of its spiritual demands, specifically in the matters of humility and tolerance, as expressed in a Bengali saying about the path of Śrī Caitanya:

“I was attracted to the mission of Śrī Caitanya. It looked so inviting, but then I read the third verse of the Śikṣāṣṭakam.”[1]

But does humility on the path of bhakti have to be so extreme? It depends on what frame of reference you have when you make that consideration. From the standpoint of this world where each soul is embodied due to false ego and naturally strives for superiority and control, such levels of tolerance and humility as described by Śrī Caitanya certainly seem extraordinary.  If however we gauge such humility from the platform of the soul, which attains its fullness in unalloyed service to God, then such deep humility is just the natural condition of the soul. This becomes evident when we look at humility from the perspective of the two natural opulence’s of the soul—pure knowledge (awareness) and pure love (devotion).

Pure Awareness—when one attains transcendental knowledge, one is free of ignorance and can clearly perceive the truth. Such awareness of reality is called advayam-jñāna, non-dual consciousness. Advayam-jñāna means that one sees nothing as outside of God, the Supreme consciousness, and that one is simply an infinitesimal spark within God meant for His service. This is a vision which is certainly awe-inspiring and devotional. I remember thirty years ago traveling in the Himalayas. Before that I always somehow had the image of the Himalayas as being just a tall vertical mountain. I was so stunned to see the scope of not just a tall mountain, but of many vast, tall mountain ranges, that I stopped the bus party I was leading just to go outside to gaze and be humbled by the vastness of the Himalayan mountains. I remember being overcome with the sweet feeling of insignificance and reverence, which I coined as “happy small”, the definition I use now to explain humility. So just imagine the pure awareness of realizing God’s immanence, which is infinitely grander. Would not that state of pure awareness, the natural condition of the soul, invoke in one extreme humility and devotion?

Pure devotion: Love means that the happiness of the object of one’s love becomes one’s own happiness. In a sense, in true love we surrender our agency to the wishes of another. The greater the love, the more we become controlled by the object of our love. It’s the humblest position where our lives are ruled fully in love by the needs and pleasure of another. I suppose, especially, most mothers have realized this. But the highest form of love is universal love, where we love God and thus in a sense everything. The utter humility of this position is nicely described in a video conversation with ŚrīlaB. R. Sridhara Maharaja, where he describes the moment of enlightenment when out of intense devotion one’s consciousness is imbued with what he defines as transcendental knowledge (divya-jñāna). He describes a radical shift of consciousness, from seeing oneself as the subject having everything as the object of one’s will, to viewing oneself as the object of God’s will who is the real subject. He then dramatically describes how the soul is “captured,” in that it moves exclusively out of pure love. In other words, in pure devotion one’s false authority is completely relinquished by means of full surrender to the lotus feet of the Lord, which is the position of utter humility.

Thinking in this way, perhaps such humility is not so radical. After all, Śrī Caitanya, the most munificent avatar, is calling everyone to embrace it:

“Raising my hands, I declare, “’Everyone please hear me! String this verse [Śikṣāṣṭakam 3] on the thread of the holy name and wear it on your neck for continuous remembrance.” (Caitanya-caritāmṛta Ādi-līlā 17.32)

[1] Sometimes I remember a quote but can’t locate it and have to paraphrase it. If any readers find the exact quote please send it to me.