Gita 18.66

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003, sumeet1981 wrote:

> Explaining "Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto

> Me"

> SP comments:

> "The Lord has described various kinds of knowledge, processes of

> religion, knowledge of the Supreme Brahman, knowledge of the

> Supersoul, knowledge of the different types of orders and statuses of

> social life, knowledge of the renounced order of life, knowledge of

> nonattachment, sense and mind control, meditation, etc. He has

> described in so many ways different types of religion. Now, in

> summarizing Bhagavad-gita, the Lord says that Arjuna should give up

> all the processes that have been explained to him; he should simply

> surrender to Krsna. "

> And then He writes:

> "According to the devotional process, one should simply accept such

> religious principles that will lead ultimately to the devotional

> service of the Lord."

>

> Now all the processes he listed above how come they are inimical to

> devotional service of Lord ?

 

Pranams, Sumeet. Jaya Srila Prabhupada! Hare Krsna.

 

Thank you for presenting such a wonderful question. Actually, you've raised an

important range of related concerns so large that it's difficult to know where

even to start. I don't know very much about devotional service (and I've

realized even less), but I'll try to at least address some of these points as

you bring them up. Hopefully the more enlightened ones will elaborate more.

 

If there's a general answer to the specific question above, it's that the

various abovementioned modes of approaching Krsna are based on one's own

qualification (adhikara), which is itself determined mainly by the magnitude of

one's desire to attain Krsna. Hence, Rupa Gosvami says, intense greed for pure

bhakti is ultimately the only thing necessary (Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila,

8.70).

 

We are advised to accept things favorable and rejects unfavorable to this pure

devotion. Such will always be highly relative to our own conditioning. One's

specific and personal adhikara will necessitate a particular emphasis--as a

matter of conditional strategy--and must be arbitrated by one's bonafide

spiritual master, i.e., a pure devotee. Early on in Bhagavad-gita, Krsna thus

advises accepting such a guru, because anyone who seriously tries to apply

Krsna’s teachings will realize that in order to do so, such a guide is a

practical necessity--as well as one’s personal sponsor into Krsna’s personal

entourage.

 

 

 

 

> I can understand that impersonal jnana

> and any sort of activity done keeping an eye on its fruit and

> acknowledging doership is certainly inimical to devotional service of

> Lord, but other than these how are the rest of the processes inimical

> to Lord Krishna's devotional service.

 

Karma and jnana are very broad categories, into which all materially tinged

activities may be placed, including even dharma and yoga. So there’s not

really any scope for “other than these” two.

 

 

 

 

> Also, dharmas like stri dharma, putra dharma, pati dharma etc

> etc..... are what maintains proper order in the society by telling us

> what is to be done and what is not be done. Lord Krishna also

> indicated that in deciding what should be done and what shouldn't be

> done sastras are supreme authority. So if we give up acting all these

> dharmas won't there be a chaos in the world and society ?

 

Yes--if we do so against Krsna's will. However, if everyone works in perfect

accord with Krsna's will, there can only be perfect harmony. Of course, in this

world, that's almost always only an ideal, but it's nonetheless one that we've

been encouraged to attain, while we have the means. And we do. Srila

Prabhupada encouraged varnasrama throughout his books, and one of his final

instructions was that his disciples should establish it now. So for most of us,

there isn’t really any big dichotomy between that and total surrender to pure

devotional service anyway.

 

It's worth noting that although Lord Krsna acknowledges that one who is fully

Krsna conscious has no need to perform such duties (Gita 3.17), he also points

out (Gita 7.3, 7.19) that such persons are rare enough to render that principle

moot, pratically. Moreover, He emphasizes that, given the reality of most

people's base propensities, sustainable Krsna conscousness largely rests on the

substrate of sinless, virtuous behavior (7.27-28). That's particularly germane

for those of us socialized in the modern, demoniac societies that now

predominate and jeopardize this planet. For example, we all need to take into

account the reality that in this world someone else gets AIDS every 14 seconds,

and we need to act accordingly.

 

It comes as no surprise that in the following verse (18.67), Krsna cautions

against preaching the abandonment of all dharmas to those without adhikara.

 

People hardly need to “renounce” rules they can’t follow to begin with, as much

as “transcending mere piety” hardly has relevance in a society of ignorant

sinners. Since a solid example is always better than lofty precepts, the Lord

(who sets one Himself, a la Gita 3.22), also reminds us of how consequential the

actions of any leader are—even regarding this very question (3.20-21).

 

That said, because bhakti is both powerful beyond calculation and dynamic,

anyone who takes it up seriously can be very quickly elevated (cf. Bhagavata,

2.4.8 and 2.8.4). We must do so too, or we will inadvertently mislead others.

 

It is also possible to get stuck in the dharmas more appropriate for those less

devotionally inclined (i.e., for those whose adhikara is less), if one isn’t

guided very well. This is why Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami can even call dharma

“ignorant cheating” (Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 1.90). We also know that due

to its subtle nature, sattva-guna is practically the most pernicious of the

three material modes. Sattvika attachments become difficult to even detect--what

to speak of rooting them out—especially since Vyasa has given them ample

encouragement even in scripture.

 

In sum, the lesser dharmas mentioned in Srila Prabhupada's 18.66 purport are not

at all equal to pure bhakti (cf. Caitanya-caritamrta, 7.84-5), even though they

most often act as its foundation. In short, dharma is ultimately like so many

“zeros” that are useless unless the “one” of Krsna consciousness is placed in

front of them. And ultimately, dharma is whatever Krsna says it is anyway

(Bhagavata, 6.3.19). Everyone simply has to make Krsna his or her exclusive

refuge, by doing whatever that takes.

 

My understanding is that Srila Prabhupada felt varnasrama was practically

necessary for our spiritual advancement. As for the fact that every endeavor is

marred by flaws of some sort (Gita 18.48) and that this is no exception, see his

purports to Gita 3.30 and especially 3.31.

 

 

 

 

> If we

> simply abandon all such dharmas then from where will we get

> information on what should be done and what shouldn't be done ?

 

Of course, as always, sastra is the ultimate resource for material and spiritual

knowledge (Vedanta-sutra, 1.1.3; Gita 16.24, etc., etc.). However, the sastras

are many and varied. Lord Caitanya concluded (Cc. Madhya-lila, 17.85-6):

 

“A devotee’s behavior establishes the true purpose of religious principles. The

behavior of Mädhavendra Puré Gosvämé is the essence of such religious

principles.”

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu continued, “‘Dry arguments are inconclusive. A great

personality whose opinion does not differ from others is not considered a great

sage. Simply by studying the Vedas, which are variegated, one cannot come to the

right path by which religious principles are understood. The solid truth of

religious principles is hidden in the heart of an unadulterated, self-realized

person. Consequently, as the sastras confirm, one should accept whatever

progressive path the mahäjanas advocate.’”

 

 

 

 

> How is Shuddha Bhakti or pure devotional service defined ?

 

The mahajana Sri Prahlada maharaja said (Bhagavata, 7.5.32):

 

“Unless they smear upon their bodies the dust of the lotus feet of a Vaiñëava

completely freed from material contamination, persons very much inclined toward

materialistic life cannot be attached to the lotus feet of the Lord, who is

glorified for His uncommon activities. Only by becoming Kåñëa conscious and

taking shelter at the lotus feet of the Lord in this way can one be freed from

material contamination.”

 

Again, beyond the general definition you’ve probably already heard

(anyabhilasita-sunyam, etc.), to define Krsna consciousness personally, in terms

of what any particular individual should do--is exactly what bonafide spiritual

masters are meant for. In all cases, though, Krsna consciousness comes through

the mercy of the Lord or His pure devotees and is a standard process in general.

The principles of Krsna consciousness are always one, though specific details of

their application may vary, according to the time, place, circumstances,

individual qualifications, and the insights of various acaryas.

 

I hope this helps.

 

MDd