->

Archive for June, 2025

Monday Morning Greetings 2025 #27 – Seeing, But Not Seeing, and the Five Components of Perception

June 30th, 2025

Recently, someone shared with me “the gorilla on the screen” experiment.[1] In the experiment people watch a video of two groups passing a basketball. They are instructed to count the passes made by one of the teams to the other requiring them to be very focused. During the video, a person in a gorilla suit walked through the scene, even thumping its chest before walking away. Surprisingly, half the participants were so focused on the task of following the ball they did not see the gorilla, which demonstrates that perception requires attention, not just the senses.

 

After seeing this, it dawned on me how important this point is. In fact, when I thought about it more deeply, I realized that there are several factors required for perfect perception. I came up with five in total. Most importantly, I realized how important these components of perception are in the practice of bhakti. Before I get into that, let me describe what I came up with.

 

The Senses

The objects we perceive are composed of five sense attributes—sight, sound, smell, touch and taste. Our initial experience of the world is therefore through five knowledge-acquiring senses—the eyes, ears, nose, skin and tongue. Pratyakṣa, direct observation, is therefore one of the three most important pramāas, means of knowing.

 

Attentiveness

As our experiment showed, however, the senses alone are insufficient for good perception. The focus of the mind on the appropriate sense viewing that object is also required. Therefore, even if an object comes into the range of our view, we may not perceive it. Some of us may have had that experience in a conversation or a class. The mind wandered and we did not momentarily hear what was said, although the sound vibration we were listening to was still in the air.

 

Understanding

Even if we are attentive and perceive an object, if we lack a proper understanding of an object our perception may still be faulty. In other words, if you don’t understand what something is, you are not really perceiving it. For example, imagine you present an iPhone to a tribal person who never had contact with Western civilization. He picks it up and stares at it. Could you truly say he is perceiving an iPhone?

 

Attitude

Even if we are attentive and understand what we are seeing, our perception of that object is still questionable. We also need to have the proper attitude. For example, let’s say you meet with someone that you know, but you are envious of them. If out of envy you fail to recognize some of their good qualities, to what extent then are you fully perceiving them? Our attitude, especially when we hate or like, certainly skews our perception.

 

Revelation

Perception depends on the will of the object when that object is a person. People are, fundamentally, understood in terms of their nature as a servant, master, friend, parent or lover. That attitude can only be perceived if that person chooses to reveal it. For example, one may work with someone and know and respect them, but still not know their intimate side. As a result, one may never perceive that person’s nature as a friend, unless that person chooses to reveal himself as one’s friend.

 

Let’s end this post with just a few simple examples of how important understanding the complexity of perception is to the practice of bhakti.

 

Attentiveness and Bhakti

Whether we are chanting the mahā-mantra or hearing the Bhāgavatam, our perception and experience of Krishna depends on our attentiveness. Here’s a simple reference from Śrīla Prabhupāda about perceiving Śrī Krishna in the Bhāgavatam.

 

“One should hear with rapt attention from the real person, and then he can at once realize the presence of Lord Krsna in every page.” Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.3.44, purport

 

Understanding and Attitude

The goal of the Bhāgavatam is to understand and feel our relationship with Radha and Krishna. It is not presented until the Tenth Canto because without a proper understanding and a purity of heart, we will not perceive the Absolute Truth when we hear Their pastimes. Instead, we will perceive something phantasmagorical or mundane. Therefore, one must first study the first nine cantos to purify our understanding and heart (attitude). Only then when hearing about Radha and Krishna we will perceive and experience what They truly are, the highest reality.

 

Revelatory

“To those who are constantly devoted to serving Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come to Me.” Bhagavad-gītā 10.10

 

We should therefore understand that perception of Krishna in the form of His name, pastimes, deity, holy dhāma, and pure devotees is not possible without rapt attention, the proper understanding, a pure heart, and the mercy of God. In other words, all the components of perception must be operating.

 

Understanding that “seeing, is not seeing” is therefore especially relevant for one on the path of bhakti.

 

 


[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo

 

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