Basic Teachings - Too Difficult?

[suchandra]

Gaudiya-Vaishnavism is now being spread in the Western hemisphere for quite some time. Its basic message, if you actually love God, then you naturally should love everything what God created - all His children - animals and human beings.

So far, any prominent people did adopt this understanding?

 

 

M. Roche-dieu: Yes. Love God and love the man too.

Prabhupāda: Why man? Simply love God; then you will love everyone. Because God is the center, God is the father of everyone, so if you love the father, automatically you love the sons. It is not required that you simply love this son and not that son. That is not love of Godhead. “I love human being but I do not love the poor animals. Send them to the slaughterhouse.” This is not love of God. So in the Bhagavad-gītā, you will find, God says,

sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya mūrtayaḥ sambhavanti yāḥ tāsāṁ brahma mahad yonir ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā [Bg. 14.4]

So God is the Supreme Father. It is not that He is father of the human being. He is father of the animals, He is father of the trees, He is father of the animals…

M. Roche-dieu: Living being.

Prabhupāda: Living, any living. We are all living beings. We are in different dresses. Just like you are European; you have got a different dress. I am an Indian; I have got a different dress. But dress is not consideration. You are a human being; I am a human being. Similarly, all the living entities, they are dressed in 8,400,000’s of dresses. But they are living being. And all the living beings are part and parcel of God.

M. Roche-dieu: (French) Life is a whole view, and there is no division between animals and man.

Prabhupāda: Spiritually advanced man, God conscious, there is no such distinction that “Here is an animal; here is a man.” He sees that spirit soul is there in the animal and in the man, in the tree, in the plant, in the aquatics, the same spirit soul. Read that.

Nitāi:

sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya mūrtayaḥ sambhavanti yāḥ tāsāṁ brahma mahad yonir ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā [Bg. 14.4]

“It should be understood that all species of life, O son of Kuntī, are made possible by birth in this material nature, and that I am the seed-giving father.”

Prabhupāda: Yes. The father is God, and they are all sons. But they have, they have been given different types of dress according to karma. So when actually one loves God, he loves all of them as brothers, not that only human being. That is not love of God. Then he does not know what is God. In the Bhagavad-gītā you’ll not find a single sentence where it is recommended that “Only love the human being.” There is no such thing.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Frenchman: (French)

Yogeśvara: He’s asking, “Well, that’s all right. But this love that we have for God, only man can give it. An animal can’t love God. A tree can’t love God.”

Prabhupāda: But you can love animal. You are not animal. Animal… Just like we are discussing about theosophy because we are grown up, and the child, he cannot understand. That does not mean we shall be unkind to the children. He may be ignorant, the animal may be ignorant, but I am not ignorant. How can I kill the animal?

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He’s asking, “How do we see ourselves and how is it that we intentionally distinguish ourselves by dressing differently, by having a different presentation than the rest of society.”

Guru Gaurāṅga: Given the fact that all others, they are loving God too, the same principle, Christianity…

Prabhupāda: No, symptoms must be there. If you love God, then you should love everything of God. You cannot distinguish that “These are human beings. They should be given service, and the animals should be sent to the slaughterhouse.” That is not love of God. That means he does not know what is God. He is still unaware of God. Just like father. Father has got ten sons. Out of them, one is very intelligent or two are very intelligent; others are fools. And if the intelligent sons propose to the father, “Father, these are useless sons. Let me kill,” will the father agree? So God is father of all living entities. He is providing food for the animal, for the man, because He is father. There is, in the jungle of Africa elephants. They are eating at a time hundred kilos. The father is providing. And the ant, a small ant, is eating one grain of sugar. He is providing. Within the hole of your room there are millions of ants. The father is providing food for them. That is God. Eko yo bahūnāṁ vidadhāti kāmān. That one is providing all necessities of life to everyone, all living entities. That is God. So if I know God, then I can know also that all of them are sons of God and God is providing all their necessities of life. What right I have got to kill them?

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: (translates) He says, “Yes, but we see that among the animals there are certain, many species that do eat meat.”

Prabhupāda: Among the animals. But you are not animal.

M. Roche-dieu: They do not eat anything else.

Prabhupāda: But you are not animal. Animals among… The tiger, he is destined to eat meat. But you are not animal. You are human being. Why should you eat? Why you should imitate an animal? Then why there is religion?

Frenchman: (French)

[suchandra]

continued:

Yogeśvara: (translates) There’s a story. Someone asked Lord Jesus to describe how we should love all people. Describe… Just like a man who has one hundred sheep and there is one of them who has gone astray, he is lost, so the man leaves aside all of his other hundred sheep to go looking for that one sheep. So in the same way, he says, we must take care of the people who are suffering. The minority, those who are suffering, they must receive food, they must be given help and fed.

Prabhupāda: That’s all right. But why you should kill animal?

Young Swiss Man (3): At the beginning of Bhagavad-gītā…

Prabhupāda: And Christ says, “Thou shall not kill.” Why you are killing? From the very beginning disobedience. How you can become Christian?

Young Swiss Man (3): Isn’t it at the beginning Arjuna hesitates to kill his family and doesn’t want to go to fight, and what he is taught, through Bhagavad-gītā in some way is that he should not restrain and that…

Prabhupāda: But first of all you take your Bible. You are ordered not to kill. Why you are killing? Then go to Bhagavad-gītā. When there is aggression you have the right to kill but not unnecessarily you can kill. Suppose a tiger attacks you; you can kill. But you cannot go in the forest and kill the tiger. That is sinful.

Young Swiss Man (3): Why does the distinction stop with animals and not with plants?

Yogeśvara: Why do we make the distinction between not killing animals and plants? Why do we kill plants?

Prabhupāda: We do not kill plants also. We take… Of course, by nature’s way some living entity is the food for another living entity. Jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. That is the nature’s way. But if you give that argument, then I can say, “Why you are killing cows? Why don’t you kill your own children?” If that is the way, that “Because I have to eat some animal,” so why go outside? Just inside the family there are so many animals. You can kill them and eat. there must be discretion. Apart from this point of view, we Kṛṣṇa conscious people, we do not kill even a plant because, Kṛṣṇa says—find out this—patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati.

Yogeśvara: (translating) …jīvo jīvasya jīvanam (French)…

Prabhupāda: There is no jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. Here Kṛṣṇa says, “Give Me these things, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyam.” There is no question of jīvasya jīvanam.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Prabhupāda: Just hear. Kṛṣṇa is ordering, “Give Me this food.”

Yogeśvara: (translates) Patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati. (translates)

Prabhupāda: So we take Kṛṣṇa prasādam. We don’t directly do anything. Kṛṣṇa says, “Give Me this foodstuff containing of vegetables, fruits, flowers, grains.” So we offer them and then you take. If there is any sinful activity there, it is Kṛṣṇa’s, not mine.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Frenchman: (French)

Prabhupāda: (aside) Why don’t you open this?

Yogeśvara: He says, “That may be so, but in the Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa orders Arjuna that ‘You must kill.’ ”

Prabhupāda: You must kill always. Where is that…? Where is that quotation?

Yogeśvara: (French)

Prabhupāda: Are… You know… Where is the quotation in the Bhagavad-gītā?

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He says in the beginning of the Gītā, Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna to fight.

Prabhupāda: Why? “Because you are kṣatriya. There is fight, war, you must fight. You are meant for…” Just like my hands, kṣatriya. If there is attack it is hand’s duty to protect me. The hand is being asked to give protection. That is natural. If I go to attack you, immediately you spread your hand. This is the duty of the hand. So when there is attack, the other’s party, they have come to fight. You must fight because you are hand.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He says, “But then Kṛṣṇa says, ‘Why are you afraid to fight? After all, the soul is eternal, but the body is only temporary.’ So isn’t that a justification…”

Prabhupāda: But Kṛṣṇa does not say, “Therefore you open slaughterhouse and go on killing animals.”

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Prabhupāda: Well, if you have killed some man and you go to the court and if you say that “He is not killed,” will you be saved?

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He says, “How is this, that the only thing we’ve talked about since we’ve gotten here has been eating of meat? Is that the only…?”

Prabhupāda: Huh?

Yogeśvara: He says, “How is that that the only thing we’ve talked about since we came today has been eating meat? Is that the only thing that the Bhagavad-gītā teaches?”

Prabhupāda: Yes, because our proposal is that unless you become… Find out that verse, yeṣām anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ janānāṁ puṇya- karmaṇām, te dvandva-moha-nirmuktāḥ. This is the beginning of theism. Theism means you must be free from all sinful activities. That is theism. If you remain sinful you cannot make any progress in theism. That is the point. [break]

Yogeśvara: Doesn’t that make us rather exclusive, that we have some facility for spending all of our time meditating and purifying our lives? Doesn’t that make us a rather exclusive group of people? If only those who are completely pure can engage in service, that means only people like us who have time to sit and meditate…

Prabhupāda: What meditation? The thing is that here it is stated, “Unless one is free from all sinful activities, he cannot be engaged in My service.” And the pillars, according to Vedic, pillars of sinful activities… Just like four pillars. One is this meat-eating, the other is illicit sex, the other is gambling, and the other is intoxication. So unless we break these four pillars of sinful life there is no meaning of meditation or worshiping God. You cannot ignite fire, at the same time pour water on it. So sinful life means destruction of spiritual life. So once you begin spiritual life, and other way you begin sinful life, then how it will be? It is counteracted. There is no progress.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

[suchandra]

continued:

Yogeśvara: He says there are other sinful activities as well. For example, egoism and jealously.

Prabhupāda: But first of all begin these primary principles, and then others will be automatically stopped.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He does not think that they will follow naturally just by stopping these four things.

Prabhupāda: Naturally it follows, but if somebody wants to cheat, that is another thing. Naturally it follows.

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: This gentleman suggests that he prefers someone who may be committing all four of these sinful activities but who helps his fellow man.

Prabhupāda: The fellow man helping, what does he gain?

Yogeśvara: (translates) He says, “Even if someone is committing all kinds of sinful activities…”

Prabhupāda: No, no. What you gain by helping your fellow man? First of all that is the question.

Yogeśvara: He says, “The purpose of helping other people is not to gain something for yourself.”

Prabhupāda: But I say that you help your fellow man. So do you know how to help him?

Swiss Man (1): Certain circumstances.

Yogeśvara: He says, “In certain circumstances.”

Prabhupāda: In certain circumstances, but if you do not know how to… Suppose a man is diseased and you think… The doctor says that he should not eat anything. But if you think that “Let me give some food. The doctor is very cruel. He is not giving food,” is it, that, helping or fully pushing him towards death? First of all you must know how to help. If I do not know—I help in the opposite way—that is not helping. That is degrading. These are all manufactured things. They are not… Helping means, real helping is, that a man or anyone… Everyone is suffering for want of knowledge. So if you can give knowledge, that is real help.

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: The first thing is that this gentleman doesn’t agree. He doesn’t think that the major problem is ignorance. But this gentleman suggests that there is a danger, there’s a danger in what he calls “spiritual pride,” “spiritual egoism,” that is to say, thinking that we have helped someone and actually…

Prabhupāda: But that pride is there. That gentleman is proud that he’s helping someone. That prideness is there. But out of these two kinds of prideness, one prideness which is real, that is welcome. If one is falsely proud, that is useless. But if one is actually proud of doing something, then he… That is good. Just like in the Vedic literature it is recommended that you should feel ahaṁ brahmāsmi: “I am Brahman.” This is also ego. This is real ego, that “I am spirit soul.” This is not bad. But when one thinks, “I am this body,” he’s a rascal. If one thinks that “I am servant of God,” that is real ego. And if one thinks, “I am servant of Satan,” that is not very good.

Yogeśvara: I think this gentleman still isn’t feeling satisfied about his question.

Prabhupāda: What is that?

Yogeśvara: That how can we say that to give people…, that the only real problem is to give knowledge. There are people who are starving; there are people who are sick; there are people who are in so much distress.

Prabhupāda: But you cannot do. You cannot do. There are so many people starving in the hospital. What can you do?

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He says, “Probably not very much.” He said, “But maybe we can do something.”

Prabhupāda: Then this is simply a false pride, that “I can do something.” You cannot do anything. Rather, you can do this service, that “There is God. You are servant of God. Please become servant of God.” And if you make this program, “I can give food to so many,” what you can do? There are millions and millions. People are starving all over the world. What can you do? It is simply false pride. You cannot do anything. Now, just like I have heard that in your country, because they have got excess milk supply there was recommendation to kill twenty thousand cows. Is it a fact?

Guru Gaurāṅga: Yes.

Prabhupāda: So is it very good intelligence? Because there is excess of milk supply, why not supply it to others who are starving for milk?

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: You want to translate that?

Guru Gaurāṅga: “But when we go to India, on the other hand, you may see cows dying of hunger, just bare skeletons.”

Prabhupāda: But there are so many human beings also dying out of hunger. Is it to be recommended that they should be killed? There are many human being also; they are also skeletons. They have no sufficient food. So if you think that the cows are skeletons for want of food, you supply them food. Why you are restricting? If… The Americans, they are throwing tons of food in the water. Why they do not send to India for feeding the skeleton cows? What the cows have done? They are also living entity. Why you are thinking of human beings, not of the cows?

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He says for Protestants especially, there is a feeling that to think that we can become purified of our sins by following some formulary, that is a kind of false pride, that actually to become free…

Prabhupāda: Then why Christ recommend, “Thou shall not kill. Thou shall not covet. Thou shall not do this. Thou shall not…”? They are all false thing? Now let us talk of knowledge. We have talked so many outside knowledge. What is the real knowledge? The real knowledge is that everything is the property of God. Īśāvāsyam idaṁ sarvam. No land belongs either to the Americans or to the Swiss people or to the Indian people or to German people. No. Everything belongs to God. And all living entities are the sons of God. So everything produced out of God’s land, either on the land or in the sky or anywhere, it is God’s property, and all the sons, they have the right to share. So there is no scarcity in the God’s kingdom. Simply due to our mismanagement we have created so much trouble. If we accept God as the center and all living entities sons of God, then we can actually live very peacefully in God consciousness. Therefore this is the recommendation, how we can live very peacefully, all of us, both men and animal and everyone. That is said here. Annād bhavanti bhūtāni. Read it.

Yogeśvara:

annād bhavanti bhūtāni parjanyād anna-sambhavaḥ yajñād bhavati parjanyo yajñaḥ karma-samudbhavaḥ [Bg. 3.14]

(translates)

Prabhupāda: Sacrifice means to satisfy God. So you satisfy God. By God’s mercy there will be sufficient rain. And when there is sufficient rain you produce sufficient food, food grains, and both the animals and men eat and live in God consciousness. Read the purport.

Yogeśvara: (reads purport in French)

Prabhupāda: So far I have studied… I am traveling all over the world. It is my calculation that we can produce food to give food ten times of the population if we properly utilize the whole planet according to this—produce food. Why because the milk is produced more, the cows should be slaughtered when there is a need of milk? It is so nice foodstuff. So on account of this false nationalism, “This is my land, this is my land, this is my land…” And why not take it as God’s land and produce enough foodstuff. There will be no scarcity. There will be no skeleton. And distribute it. Where is that consciousness? There is so much land uncultivated all over the world, especially in America, in Australia, and in Africa, so much, huge land, no cultivation. They are keeping some cows and slaughtering them and exporting. What is this? Why don’t you produce food?

Yogeśvara: (translates)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: He says all of these things, they are known. They know there’s enough land and all these nonsense things are happening. He says simply to give this…

Prabhupāda: And therefore knowledge is required.

Yogeśvara: He says that knowledge isn’t sufficient. You have to have enough love of mankind so that these things will be put into practice.

Prabhupāda: If you have love of mankind, then you’ll kill the cows. That is not love. I love you and kill this man. That is not love. Why? Why for loving you I shall kill him? What is that love? That is not love. Love means… You see the description of love is there, paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ.

vidyā-vinaya-sampanne brāhmaṇe gavi hastini śuni caiva śva-pāke ca paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ [Bg. 5.18]

That is not love, “I love you and kill your brother.” That’s all.

M. Roche-dieu: Yes, but true knowledge is, we think, love.

Prabhupāda: That’s all right, but you do not know what is love. You love somebody and you kill others.

M. Roche-dieu: No, no.

Prabhupāda: That is not love. If you love God, then you will love all His sons.

Yogeśvara: Here’s that verse.

Prabhupāda: Here is the verse.

Yogeśvara:

vidyā-vinaya-sampanne brāhmaṇe gavi hastini śuni caiva śva-pāke ca paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ [Bg. 5.18]

(reads French translation)

Swiss Man (1): (French)

Yogeśvara: His point is that he agrees that love alone is not sufficient; there must be knowledge. But he is feeling, I think, a little bit disappointed that up until this point the knowledge that we have been giving him is very elementary. He says there must be some higher knowledge that you know that can actually liberate people. He is looking for that. He wants to know what is that.

Prabhupāda: But if you cannot understand lower knowledge, how you can understand higher knowledge?

 

Room Conversation

with His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

June 5, 1974, Geneva

 

 

full conversation: http://causelessmercy.com/t/t/740605r2.gen.htm?i=1974

[cbrahma]

I heard that being vegetarian is not the point. Prabhupada said "Pigeons are vegetarian"

Everything is supposed to be prepared according to a whole bunch of dietary rules and procedures then offered.

I find that way too complicated in my workaday life to accomplish.

Especially the no eating grains cooked by non-devotees.

No sandwiches. No restaurants.

Impossible.

[Kulapavana]

 

Gaudiya-Vaishnavism is now being spread in the Western hemisphere for quite some time. Its basic message, if you actually love God, then you naturally should love everything what God created - all His children - animals and human beings.

So far, any prominent people did adopt this understanding?

 

I think part of the problem is that attaining the stage of actually loving God is not at all easy.

 

After 28 years in the movement and several more previous years of very theistic life I can't say that I actually have love for God. I have deep appreciation for Him, but it is not love. Yet I never had a problem understanding my unity with other living beings and I knew that we are all God's children.

[Inedible]

Can you love God if you don't love yourself?

[Kulapavana]

 

Can you love God if you don't love yourself?

 

Most people very definitely love themselves - to one degree or another. It is the most basic principle of our ego and egoism. I am not sure there is a connection between loving God and loving ourselves.

 

I might rather say that it is difficult to love God if we never really loved someone else besides ourselves.

[suchandra]

 

I think part of the problem is that attaining the stage of actually loving God is not at all easy.

 

After 28 years in the movement and several more previous years of very theistic life I can't say that I actually have love for God. I have deep appreciation for Him, but it is not love. Yet I never had a problem understanding my unity with other living beings and I knew that we are all God's children.

Thanks Kula for taking the time to write, yes, this is of course what great devotees say, I have no love for God although trying for so many years.

 

Conversation above shows that Prabhupada's guests are trying hard to defeat Prabhupada by logic. Prabhupada then uses their own arguments:

 

"Just like father. Father has got ten sons. Out of them, one is very intelligent or two are very intelligent; others are fools. And if the intelligent sons propose to the father, “Father, these are useless sons. Let me kill,” will the father agree?"

 

This argument seems to skip the option, that the sons are excused because they don't love their father and simply appeals to common sense. When putting forward that animals also eat other animals, Prabhupada tries again to appeal to common sense, no there has to be discretion in human society, otherwise,

 

"Of course, by nature’s way some living entity is the food for another living entity. Jīvo jīvasya jīvanam. That is the nature’s way. But if you give that argument, then I can say, “Why you are killing cows? Why don’t you kill your own children?” If that is the way, that “Because I have to eat some animal,” so why go outside? Just inside the family there are so many animals. You can kill them and eat. There must be discretion."

 

In sum, 1974 when conversation above took place in Geneva and now 2007, the understanding of people in general has not changed one inch. People consider that the only thing that counts is that the physical needs are being fullfilled.

What raises the question, if people don't understand such knowledge, why preach it?

Is peoples' capacity for understanding higher knowlegde misunderstood?

[skp]

May 25th, 1976

 

...Using the logic of the downward flow of liquid, Prabhupada concluded, "I love Krsna and, because the soul is part and parcel of Krsna, therefore I love the soul. And because the soul is within this body, therefore I love the body. There is no difficulty to understand."

 

Source: "A Transcendental Diary Vol 2" by HG Hari Sauri dasa

[Inedible]

 

Most people very definitely love themselves - to one degree or another. It is the most basic principle of our ego and egoism. I am not sure there is a connection between loving God and loving ourselves.

 

I might rather say that it is difficult to love God if we never really loved someone else besides ourselves.

 

Personally, I find that the more difficult it is to enjoy my existence, the more my tendency to blame God for it remains.

[Kulapavana]

 

Personally, I find that the more difficult it is to enjoy my existence, the more my tendency to blame God for it remains.

 

We are all on different stages of this journey. I dont ever recall time when I doubted the existence of God, or blamed Him for anything. If I had a complaint it was that He is so aloof... As a young boy I wrote a poem where I promised Him to live my life in such a way that He will be forced to care and embrace me. I think I'm doing it, and now I see He cares more then I ever thought was possible.

 

The joy is within.

 

If you just gobble up food without taking time to truly appreciate it's taste, it will not be enjoyable - even if the food is truly superb. But if you take time to appreciate what you are eating, even simple bread toast will taste great. The same is with enjoying our existence. Take time to smell the roses and make effort to taste your bread.

[Kulapavana]

 

In sum, 1974 when conversation above took place in Geneva and now 2007, the understanding of people in general has not changed one inch. People consider that the only thing that counts is that the physical needs are being fullfilled.

What raises the question, if people don't understand such knowledge, why preach it?

 

We have to first really absorb this knowledge and give it to others in a way they can relate to. I think there was too much difference between Prabhupada and general population for this knowledge to be widely accepted. Becoming parrot disciples is not enough. It is not working. We must digest this knowledge and speak from the platform of our cultural heritage, using language that truly registers in our peers.

[suchandra]

 

Personally, I find that the more difficult it is to enjoy my existence, the more my tendency to blame God for it remains.

 

Enjoy my existence? Krishna says, renunciation is better!

 

O best of the Bhāratas, now hear My judgment about renunciation. O tiger among men, renunciation is declared in the scriptures to be of three kinds.

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is 18.4

 

 

 

 

PURPORT

Although there are differences of opinion about renunciation, here the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa, gives His judgment, which should be taken as final. After all, the Vedas are different laws given by the Lord. Here the Lord is personally present, and His word should be taken as final. The Lord says that the process of renunciation should be considered in terms of the modes of material nature in which they are performed.

[Inedible]

I'll try to ask a different way.

 

It is said that God loves me and that God wants only good things for me. What if I don't love myself and maybe I keep finding ways to punish myself and then I blame God for the results?

[theist]

 

I'll try to ask a different way.

 

It is said that God loves me and that God wants only good things for me. What if I don't love myself and maybe I keep finding ways to punish myself and then I blame God for the results?

 

Fair question. This is a well known pyschological state...self sabotage.

[Inedible]

Yes, self-sabotage. As long as I'm doing it, can I really love myself, God, or anyone else? Naturally, there is a certain amount of resentment being generated toward all three in response to my own self-sabotage.

[Kulapavana]

 

I'll try to ask a different way.

 

It is said that God loves me and that God wants only good things for me. What if I don't love myself and maybe I keep finding ways to punish myself and then I blame God for the results?

 

There is no end to possible permutations of basic human mentality.

 

If you dont love yourself and keep finding ways of punishing yourself - it should produce some measure of satisfaction if you actually succeed. But because that is a mode of ignorance type of activity - the satisfaction never comes.

 

Loving yourself (basic self interest) may seem like a solution in that case because you have to move up to at least the platform of mode of passion. That platform however, is a loooong way from loving God.

[theist]

 

Yes, self-sabotage. As long as I'm doing it, can I really love myself, God, or anyone else? Naturally, there is a certain amount of resentment being generated toward all three in response to my own self-sabotage.

 

No. There is no real love present in such a mind set. This is why Krsna consciousness is understood as a gradual process. Along the way one of if not the most basic understanding will be that we are actually all part of Krsna. And everyone else is also a spiritual spark of Krsna. In such a state of realization there is no room for acting against ones self interest or the real self interest of anyone else.

 

In our beginning state we should act for our self interest. Our real self interest. We have to be a little wise. Staying in the mind set of self sabotage will never make one happy and underlying everything else is a desire to be happy ..even for the masochist.

 

Pay attention to the nature of this material world beyond just the pretty sunsets and really ask yourself if this is the kind of existence you want to experience eternally.

 

To perceive the evil of birth, death, old age, and disease is basic knowledge.

[Inedible]

Basic self-interest is a reason to learn to love God. If you have basic self-interest mastered, and loving God is the best thing that you can do for yourself and everyone else, then it would follow naturally. If you don't love God, you must not love yourself either and that is why you are holding yourself back from something so positive and natural, yes?

[Kulapavana]

 

Basic self-interest is a reason to learn to love God.

 

I am not sure about that. Learning to respect and obey God's law is a quite advanced phase of self-interest - not basic, in other words. And there is a huge gap between respect for God's law and loving God.

 

Besides, I am not sure that love is something you can persuade yourself to learn. It is a matter of true attraction, not a business proposition ("it is in my interest to love you")

[theist]

 

I am not sure about that. Learning to respect and obey God's law is a quite advanced phase of self-interest - not basic, in other words. And there is a huge gap between respect for God's law and loving God.

 

Besides, I am not sure that love is something you can persuade yourself to learn. It is a matter of true attraction, not a business proposition ("it is in my interest to love you")

 

Ever ask yourself why you are trying to love God or even considering it? You are looking out for your self-interest and nothing more. This is why it is understood that real love for God is an activity of the liberated soul. A liberated soul is atma-rama or satisfied in the self. No more seeking for self interest then he becomes attracted to love Krsna.

 

And as a conditioned soul suffering in samsara I am at the most basic level of doing business with God. That is no secret to me. I am far from loving Krsna. That is a far distant ideal.

 

This is why I cringe when I hear people feigning lamentation over why they haven't been able to obtain love for Krsna even though they "have been trying so hard for so long." 'Oh Boo Hoo'.

 

99.99% of the devotee community are beginners and as beginners we are liberation seekers. By the grace of the Vaisnavas and Krsna we have become philosophically persuaded to see a goal beyond sayuja-mukti but our motivations are really not much different from the mayavadi's.

[theist]

TRANSLATION BG 8-12

Humility; pridelessness; nonviolence; tolerance; simplicity; approaching a bona fide spiritual master; cleanliness; steadiness; self-control; renunciation of the objects of sense gratification; absence of false ego; the perception of the evil of birth, death, old age and disease; detachment; freedom from entanglement with children, wife, home and the rest; even-mindedness amid pleasant and unpleasant events; constant and unalloyed devotion to Me; aspiring to live in a solitary place; detachment from the general mass of people; accepting the importance of self-realization; and philosophical search for the Absolute Truth—all these I declare to be knowledge, and besides this whatever there may be is ignorance.

 

 

PURPORT

This process of knowledge is sometimes misunderstood by less intelligent men as being the interaction of the field of activity. But actually this is the real process of knowledge. If one accepts this process, then the possibility of approaching the Absolute Truth exists. This is not the interaction of the twenty-four elements, as described before. This is actually the means to get out of the entanglement of those elements. The embodied soul is entrapped by the body, which is a casing made of the twenty-four elements, and the process of knowledge as described here is the means to get out of it. Of all the descriptions of the process of knowledge, the most important point is described in the first line of the eleventh verse. Mayi cananya-yogena bhaktir avyabhicarini: the process of knowledge terminates in unalloyed devotional service to the Lord.

 

[...]

[gHari]

People don't have a lot of time. And only carefully come between them and their enjoyment - you will become the target of the resultant anger.

 

I find we have only a tiny window every now and then to give some clues. After those seeds reach the surface then maybe they can have another clue. We will see them gradually move from ignorance to passion to goodness - maybe less drunken, maybe less out of control, maybe cleaner, maybe a bit more introspective.

[Kulapavana]

 

Ever ask yourself why you are trying to love God or even considering it? You are looking out for your self-interest and nothing more. This is why it is understood that real love for God is an activity of the liberated soul. A liberated soul is atma-rama or satisfied in the self.

 

you are wrong here on several counts.

 

I am not trying to love God. I never pray for that. I seek out His presence because this is what my heart is telling me to do. I pray to become worthy to be admitted to His presence. Is it self interest? perhaps, but it does not feel egotistical - and I know THAT feeling. I am iron attracted to a magnet - a natural property. I follow the heart to see where it leads me on this journey. I never tried to become a gopi or a gopa because it may not be natural state for me. Perhaps my position is a mere admiration of God in shanta rasa - I dont really care what it is.

 

The atmarama riddle has many answers. The most obvious one is actually shanta rasa. I have glimpses of that already. Seems more then adequate for me. Love for God is millions of miles away from that point.

[theist]

OK you are attracted to God. Most of us are attracted to His modes of material nature or freedom from suffering.