BG 4.26 – Q&A at Sarvatma’s

Host: Are there any comments or questions? Maharaja is here to answer them, review them and view them, or confirm them, or share them. Any questions on these subjects?

Devotee: Maharaja, you mentioned that the householder offers up sense objects in the fire of the senses.

Giriraj Swami: Well, in other words, the sense objects come under the control of the senses, and the senses should not come under the control of the sense object. The senses in turn should come under the control of the mind, as it was mentioned for the brahmacharis. But the ultimate goal is the senses should come under the control of the mind for everyone, and the mind should come under the control of the intelligence, and the intelligence should come under the control of sadhu, shastra, and guru. So, I took the word “fire” to be metaphorical. Yesterday, I spoke to one friend who had worked very hard for one project, even at the cost of her health. So, she said that she offered her health on the altar of her project. So, it is a metaphorical expression. So, what I understood is that when the brahmachari offers, the process of hearing in the fire of mental control, it means really that he will control his hearing with his mind. And as Prabhupada explains in the purport, he won’t just allow his ears to hear anything and everything, but he will allow them to hear only kṛṣṇa-kathā.

Devotee: Why is Prabhupada speaking about unadulterated brahmacharis, pure brahmacharis? Where do we Westerners fall under? What category do we fall? In other words, this is not an instruction for people born in the West that are not naiṣṭhika brahmacharis; they are brahmacharis from great births.

Giriraj Swami: I believe the verse, you could read it again, but I remember the verse to be spoken not in the imperative.

Devotee: “Some” is the first word.

Giriraj Swami: Okay, so can you read it?

Devotee: Yes. “Some [the unadulterated brahmacharis] sacrifice the hearing process and the senses in the fire of mental control, and others [the regulated householders] sacrifice the objects of the senses in the fire of the senses.”

Devotee: Yes, “some” was dividing the two.

Giriraj Swami: Yes, but what I am saying is, it is not an imperative that only unadulterated brahmacharis should do it, or only regulated householders should do it. Unadulterated brahmacharis, by definition, do it, and regulated householders, by definition, do it. But as Sarvatma Prabhu said in the talk, we are all meant to try to do it. In other words, say we take the statement, “The pure devotees always remember Krishna.” So, it doesn’t mean, “Well, I am not a pure devotee, so I don’t have to remember Krishna.” It means the pure devotees, by definition, remember Krishna, but we are trying to remember Krishna and become pure devotees.

Devotee: Since this is a gradual process, again, I am speaking of the people born outside of Bhārata-varṣa, outside of India, should they not even bother with skipping some of the ashrams, like going from brahmacharya to sannyasa? Should they all, or a great majority, work towards a gradual understanding and progress in spiritual life by going through brahmachari, grihastha etc., or this is simply a signpost; you can do whatever you want? Because I do have a background of being a brahmachari for a number of years, and I was never given this talk, in other words, “Okay, now you are going to be a brahmachari, then possibly, most likely, you are going to be married, and then you are going to gradually continue on your progress in spiritual life.” It was more of the stoic. “Now you are a brahmachari. You should be a brahmachari. You must be a brahmachari until you take sannyasa.” In other words, no there is nothing gradual about it. And, as far as I know, and mostly in the movement when they join, they are not taught what the future is going to be like for them. They are not prepared, in other words. It is like, I can’t handle that anymore, so I will get married. So, they have no skills, whether it is for gainful employment or for relationships with the opposite sex, etc., etc. So, are we trying to adjust to a system that is actually not meant for us? It is meant for those who are unadulterated, if I may borrow the term.

Giriraj Swami: Well, in the Vedic system, brahmacharis, in general, do become grihasthas. In fact, in India, there is a misconception that a brahmachari must become a grihastha, and therefore Srila Prabhupada emphasizes, in the Bhāgavatam, with reference to Narada Muni, for example, that one is not compelled to go from brahmachari ashram to grihastha ashram. One can go directly from brahmacharya ashram to sannyasa ashram, but the general rule is that one goes from brahmachari ashram to grihastha ashram. And with the control of the senses that he learned as a brahmachari, he will be able to restrain the senses from coming under the control of the sense objects in grihastha ashram. So that is the basic plan. Again, principle: different choices of ashram are offered to different varnas. The brahmans, they have all four: brahmachari, grihastha, vanaprastha, and sannyasa. The kshatriyas have brahmachari, grihastha, and vanaprastha. The vaishyas have brahmachari and grihastha, and the sudras have grihastha, not even trained as brahmacharis.

Now, as far as the application, “kalau śūdra-sambhava” in Kali-yuga, everyone is born a sudra. And therefore, restrictions like the Vedas should be taught only to brahmans; they are difficult to apply because everyone is more or less born a sudra. Because even people born in brahman families are not properly considered brahmans because the families have not undergone the purificatory ceremonies to produce brahman children and raise them as brahmans. So basically, we don’t really know who is who, and therefore, “kalau śūdra-sambhava” and we distribute the books. We make the knowledge in the books available to everyone because we don’t know who is who. And therefore, acharyas, and especially Srila Prabhupada, have considered that we should give everyone the chance because society needs a head. Society needs brahmans, and therefore, even at the risk that people who are not qualified to receive the knowledge will reject it or abuse it, we make the knowledge available so that people who can become qualified as brahmans get the chance. But as you say, in India, the different categories are more apparent. It is not that one can ever say “I am born in brahman, so I am a brahman. You are born a sudra, so you are a sudra.” But there is some vestige of the Vedic culture. For example, we had a young man, his grandfather was very pious, his father was pious, and he was a little pious. And so, he offered to subsidize the publication of Back to Godhead in the vernacular language to be distributed free to the factory workers. And when I mentioned the proposal to Srila Prabhupada, he rejected it because he said that they actually shouldn’t be given the knowledge because they will misuse it.

Now, of course, there could have been exceptions, but pretty much in India the factory workers are in a certain category of qualification, and the factory managers are in a different category of qualification. But in the West, where there is no culture, you don’t know because we are all basically brought up the same way. Now it might be a little different, but say, in our generation’s childhood, everyone was brought up eating meat. Everyone was brought up pretty much the same way and everyone underwent the same type of education, so you couldn’t really tell. So Prabhupada would come to the university and speak, and some people would take to it, and some wouldn’t. In France, Prabhupada gave a talk, and I guess it is like Prabhupada said, the French love revolution. But anyway, the audience just became too envious because Prabhupada was sitting on an exalted seat, and they wouldn’t let him talk. They just made noise in protest because he was sitting on an exalted seat. And even at the first pandal in Calcutta, we had the same thing with the Naxalites, a type of communist youth movement. They tried to disrupt Prabhupada’s talk because they are envious, and therefore the Bhagavad-gītā says the knowledge should not be given to those who are envious, who are not austere, and so on. But generally, we don’t know when we have an open meeting; we don’t know who is who. And therefore, because it is so important that there must be some brahmans and, in particular, Vaishnavas, we give people a chance. We give everyone a chance, even at the risk of people misunderstanding the knowledge or misapplying the knowledge.

Devotee: So, if everyone who comes to the movement and wants to practice spiritual life, single males in this case, should be trained up as a brahmachari, just in case they happen to be one.

Giriraj Swami: Well yes. Brahmachari is open to everyone except the sudras for some time. And then the general rule is they will go on to grihastha ashram. But in Mayapur, where you actually get sudras, they may be sincere devotees but they just want to do labor, and so they are not trained as brahmacharis. They are just accepted as they are. And Prabhupada said they don’t have to chant sixteen rounds because they can’t, but he wanted at least that they should attend the temple programs and work hard, work sincerely.

Devotee: So, in the West, if a devotee comes, and then after some time, maybe it becomes apparent that they are not a brahminical person, should they just try to serve the other devotees? And our society is kind of set up that everybody should be trained to become brahmans.

Giriraj Swami: Well, I think we are sort of dealing with two issues at the same time. They are trained as brahmacharis, but brahmacharis can be vaishyas, kshatriyas, or brahmans.

Devotee: But I am asking the second question. In our society, it appears to me that I understand the society puts an emphasis on that we should train everyone. Everyone should be trained to come to the brahminical platform. But a devotee may be within the society for some time, and it may become apparent that they don’t actually have brahminical qualities or qualifications. So, then he may be a devotee but just not of a brahminical devotee. So, is there a position just to try to continue to serve within society by serving the other devotees?

Giriraj Swami: Yes. But once they are initiated, in other words, initiation is not reserved just for brahmans. So, once they are initiated, they are under the control of the spiritual master, whatever the varna and ashram may be. So, their duty is to follow the instructions of the spiritual master. But the spiritual master, in principle, should be intelligent enough and sensitive enough in terms of occupational duty to allow the person to engage in the activity that the person is suited to. And then there is the principle of Vaishnava. Vaishnava is higher than ordinary brahman, kshatriya, vaishya, sudra. And let’s not forget Maharaja Ambarish, who was a kshatriya, but he was a Vaishnava, and therefore his position was superior to Durvasa Muni, who was a brahman but was not a Vaishnava. And even when Ambarish Maharaja was in the dilemma of what to do about the Ekādaśī fast, how to break the Ekādaśī fast because Durvasa Muni was supposed to come back, and as the brahman, he was supposed to be the first to break the fast. But he didn’t come in time, and Ambarish Maharaja thought, well, if we don’t break the fast in time, then the whole fast will be spoiled. But at the same time, he didn’t want to offend the brahman, Durvasa Muni. So, he had the idea, he will take water because by taking water, in one sense, he will be breaking the fast, but at the same time, he will be allowing the first grains to be taken by Durvasa Muni. And in the purport, Srila Prabhupada comments that Ambarish Maharaja was the king, he had his council of brahmans, and he consulted his brahmans, but they couldn’t come up with the answer. But because he was a Vaishnava, he was actually in a higher position than they were, and he was the one who came up with the answer.

Devotee: Well, being a Vaishnava, he had superior intelligence, but he also always was able to behave in a brahmanical and exemplary way, even though he was not socially a brahman. My question had to do more with, you were talking about devotees in India that may come and may just by their nature or whatever, they may not behave in such a wonderful way. They are more suited for other. Usually, when I think of that first, the Vaishnava is superior to brahman, in my mind, I would think, but a pure Vaishnava has all the brahminical qualities anyway, although they may not be socially a brahman.

Giriraj Swami: Well, what you say is true, in a way, but not necessarily. A kshatriya has a very elevated position, almost like a brahman, in any case. But yes, in a way, what you say is true. Again, there are different definitions of pure devotees, but yes, in general, what you say is true. But even with a pure devotee, there may be some vestige of one’s past life or one’s nature, and therefore, we cannot conclude that because someone has a certain nature, born of a certain quality, that he is not a pure devotee or she is not a pure devotee.

Devotee 1: Can you just give an example of what you just said, though, about the nature?

Devotee 2: Can I give you an example. Vamsi dasa Babaji was a great pure devotee, but nobody ever saw him taking a bath, and he was illiterate. So those are not brahminical qualities. Still, he was a pure devotee.

Giriraj Swami: I thought of Jayananda. He does physical labor. He was a man of the people. The people liked him, and he could engage them. Vamsi dasa Babaji is a good example in one sense, but in another sense, he is a paramahamsa. Paramahamsas don’t act according to any varna or ashram. But the question is, if someone is within a certain varna but is a pure devotee, but still acts according to the particular varna or the qualities of the particular varna. But again, it is also an appropriate example because as paramahamsa, it is not necessarily that he was a sudra who didn’t learn to take a bath, but he just could have reached such an exalted stage that he was just like oblivious to the bodily demands. But, smoking bidis, now that is probably a habit that a brahman wouldn’t have. So, a pure devotee who smokes bidis is probably exhibiting a quality from some other caste, but he is still a pure devotee.

Devotee: Doesn’t Krishna consciousness transcend varnas and ashrams?

Giriraj Swami: Yes

Devotee: So, then, Vaishnavas, or being Krishna conscious, whether you are sudra, vaishya, kshatriya, brahman, if you are a Vaishnava, it is irrelevant of your ashram, varna.

Giriraj Swami: Yes. But in that context, they are different stages of Vaishnava. So, a neophyte Vaishnava isn’t really transcendental. The process is transcendental, and if he continues to follow the process, he will gradually be elevated to the transcendental position. But it is really an advanced devotee who is transcendental to varna and ashram. And therefore, Bhaktivinoda Thakura says that as long as one is conditioned by the modes of nature, even if he is a Vaishnava engaged in the practices of sādhana-bhakti, he should also act according to the rules and regulations of varnashrama-dharma.

Devotee: Maharaja, I was just thinking that something Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu said in a lecture that we were listening to quite recently. Prabhupada, when he first came to America, he was very impressed by the Western devotees and their enthusiasm towards Krishna consciousness. He was just thinking that, “Wow, just chanting Hare Krishna is really working, and these people are really becoming Vaishnavas.” But Ravindra Svarupa said that historically, though Prabhupada changed his mind later on, and later on, he began to think more and more about how to set up varnashrama because he saw that the concept of just simply touting and espousing brahminical society wasn’t functioning. It wasn’t successful, so he began to set up the varnashrama as an alternative. Because as you read at some places where Prabhupada talks about varnashrama, we don’t need varnashrama as it is transcendental to it.” There is a sense in which he does speak like that, but then later on, he begins to talk about it more. And there was something where Prabhupada was having a discussion with several devotees, and there he is talking with devotees and one of the devotees is saying, “But Prabhupada, I thought we were Vaishnavas,” in other words, we don’t have to do these different varnas. And Prabhupada replies by asking, “Are we, Are we really Vaishnavas?” And then the other one was where the devotees were discussing with Prabhupada, and he was saying, “Well, what to do about all these problems that were arising in the society with the family difficulties and everything?” And one devotee suggested, “Well, Prabhupada, I guess we will just have to all become Krishna conscious.” And Prabhupada replied, “Another impractical solution.” So, there seems to be a point where Prabhupada began to recognize this problem and wanted to do something about it. But it seems that some devotees have kind of latched on to certain statements. That is my own understanding, perhaps why we were strong on the brahminical education without recognizing the need for developing varnashrama in the earlier days. Maybe you can deny that or corroborate.

Giriraj Swami: Well, one could give different explanations to the same phenomenon, but I don’t know if we should really take the time right now to discuss the different reasons that Prabhupada introduced a greater emphasis on varnashrama-dharma later. But the fact is that unless one is sufficiently elevated in Krishna consciousness, he is still obliged to follow the rules and regulations, and he cannot claim to be transcendental just because he is a neophyte devotee on the path of Krishna consciousness. But I thought I might take a few minutes just to respond to Sarvatma Prabhu’s description of his introduction to brahmachari ashram when he joined and his lack of education in other future possibilities like grihastha ashram. And I will give the example of Chaupati because they have implemented the idea more completely than I have seen in other places.

From the beginning, they inform the new devotees who are unmarried that there is brahmachari ashram and there is grihastha ashram, and that most people enter grihastha ashram. And that because they already have, now again, in our generation and our situation, many of us didn’t really have an educational career going, or an occupational career going. A lot of us were just searching. So that is a different case. But if you take India, almost all the people who come to the association of the devotees there, either have an educational career in process or an occupational career in process. And so, the leaders inform them that most people do enter grihastha ashram and will need to maintain their families, and therefore, you should not disrupt your education or your career to join the temple as a brahmachari, unless you are sure that in the future you will be able to remain a brahmachari. Because if you are not going to be able to remain a brahmachari, it is better to continue your education or continue your work. And of course, there are young men who don’t know for sure. They say, “Well, I would like to remain a brahmachari, but I can’t say for sure.” So, then they are given six months in the temple to live as brahmacharis and see how they feel. And usually, someone can take a leave from work for six months or leave from one’s education for six months and go back to it without much prejudice. And even then, after six months, someone will say, “Well, I am doing all right, but I am still not completely sure.” So, then they can get another six months. But basically, they are encouraged to make a realistic assessment of whether they can remain brahmacharis for their whole life. And if they are not, they are encouraged to continue with their educations or their careers so that they are not in a situation like Sarvatma Prabhu mentioned, where they have lived in the temple, they have no particular educational qualification, and no particular work experience, and then they have to struggle to maintain their households.

So, I believe it is a wiser approach to inform the new devotees of what the different future courses are open to them and then help them make a realistic assessment of what would be appropriate for them and help them work towards it. And I have even heard intelligent people comment that they thought that one of the reasons that there is so many difficulties in the marriages in ISKCON is because there is such a negative attitude towards marriage from the beginning. It is just for the ones who couldn’t make it as brahmacharis. So, they are already feeling bad about themselves because they failed as brahmacharis, and they might even feel bad about their wives, that their wives got them into it, or whatever. And maybe the other way around as well. But if the ashram is described as, not only a viable approach to gradual spiritual advancement, but the most appropriate for most people in the present time, and it is glorified for what it is, which is a chance to engage in devotional service in an appropriate ashram and a chance to make further progress. Then, the attitude of the partners in the marriage would be more positive towards the ashram they are in, and it could be developed.

And then, like Sarvatma Prabhu said, they could be educated, not like it is something we don’t want to talk about it because if you talk about it, you might think about it, then if you think about it, you might do it, and then that would be a catastrophe. Yes, this is one course, lifelong brahmacharis. There are only a few people who could do it, but it is one course, and if you can do it, it is great. But if this is another course grihastha ashram, for most people grihastha ashram will be more appropriate, at least for some major period of time. And this is how it works; this is what the husband does, and this is what the wife does, and if they have children, this is what they do as parents. And it is all above board and very bona fide, which it is. It is bona fide when done in the proper way. So, I hope that the leaders of the movement will take a more mature approach and give the new people the credit for being intelligent human beings, and if they don’t think they are intelligent enough to understand the whole process and to assess their own place in it, then it is a very artificial situation. Because they are basically treating them like sudras; like you are not fit to get knowledge. You just do what we say. So, they are treating them like sudras, but at the same time, they wanted to remain renounced, like the most elevated learned person. So, it is a bit contradictory.

Devotee: That is pretty deep insight.

Giriraj Swami: But all differences are reconciled over kṛṣṇa-prasāda. There is no brahman, kshatriya, vaishya, sudra; brahmachari, grihastha, vanaprastha, sannyasi, when it comes to prasāda, they all are the same. Hare Krishna.

Host: Thanks to you all for coming. And we are going to have Maharaja announce, it is actually a surprise and then we are going to have prasāda.

Devotee 2: Is it that brahmacharis are austere?

Giriraj Swami: Except on Sunday. And because Sarvatma was busy, he is going to be busy Sunday, we commuted Sunday to Saturday. So, we are allowed once a week, everyone is allowed once a week to have a feast. And if it is not a feast, if it is too austere, we may turn up at your doorstep. We want our Sunday feast, that is our quota, that is our right. But it will be a feast, I have no doubt.