Question: Today we were discussing the modes of nature and someone asked what the word for “forgive” is in Sanskrit. I looked it up online but I knew you would have more insight into the one word that best exemplifies it, or at least more than one word and how each one directly translates.

HDG:
Perhaps the most common root is ksham, to forgive pardon, etc.’ Here are some forms of this word in the Gita:

1. Bg 11.42, Arjuna begs Krishna’s forgiveness by using the ‘causative’ form of the verb: ‘tat kshamaye tvam‘, literally ‘I make [ask you to] forgive that.’
2. Bg 12.13 A devotee is kshami ‘forgiving’.
3. Bg 10.4 Forgiveness, ksama, is one of the qualities coming from Krishna.
5. Bg 16.3 Forgiveness, kshama, is a divine quality.
6. Bg 10.34 Among feminine qualities, Krishna is forgiveness, kshama
7. Bg 18.42 Kshanti ‘forgiveness’ is one of the brahminical qualities.

 

Question: I have had the impression from some devotees that family & friends, the beauty of nature, inspiring music, etc. are a hindrance to being a devotee. I have a wonderful family including six grand children, who are very loving and spending time with them gives me great pleasure and increases my capacity to love. I see my family and friends as gifts from Krishna and would have a hard time if someone told me I could not longer associate with my family and friends to be a good devotee (if I were to be initiated). Your thoughts?

HDG:
Family, friends, nature, etc. are not a hindrance to Krishna consciousness. Our mundane attachment to these things is the hindrance. I often say that the problem with family is not that we love them, but that we don’t love them enough. If we truly love another soul, then we want only the best for that soul. The best is Krishna.

Similarly, rather than think, ‘These people are MY family, MY friends,’ we should see them as eternal parts of Krishna. Somehow Krishna has brought us into a close relationship with these souls. Like all other things in this world, we should see and care for family and friends as eternal souls, rather than extensions of my bodily false ego.

So it all depends on consciousness.

 

Question: What does it mean to make the distinction between Krishna’s material qualitative incarnations and His transcendental incarnations?  I am referring to Canto 1, Chapter 1, Text 17:
As the supreme controller of both the material and spiritual worlds, the Lord has different incarnations of unlimited categories.  Incarnations like Brahma, Rudra, Manu, Prthu, Vyasa and so on are His material qualitative incarnations, but His incarnations like Rama, Narasimha, Varaha, Vamana, and so on are His transcendental incarnations.

HDG:
Here is the meaning. Prabhupada explains that we are qualitatively one with Krishna and quantitatively different. So Brahma, Rudra, etc. are qualitative avataras in that they have realized, and act upon, their qualitative oneness with God. Therefore, they act and teach with the same divine quality as Krishna. However, they are not quantitatively God, i.e. they are not plenary or full manifestations of the Almighty.

Rama, Nrsimha, etc. are in fact God Himself. They are ‘transcendental’ in the sense that they are beyond any limitations, being fully God.

 

Question: How I can make a script spiritual without imposing any religiosity? How can it be spiritual and yet close to human nature?

HDG:
One may say that a creative work is successful if it glorifies Krishna. This of course is a spiritual success, not necessarily a preaching success. To achieve success at both levels, our creative work must maintain both spiritual and artistic integrity.

To do this requires genuine spiritual realization and that can only come as the special mercy of Krishna. Ultimately, Krishna consciousness is not merely ‘religiosity’ but rather reality. The more we see Krishna and the soul as the simple truth of life, the more we are able to speak of our own struggles and realizations with authenticity and sincerity, not as a mere duty, but as a genuine inspiration and insight, the more our work will enter the hearts of the audience. And of course we should find ingenious ways to present spiritual knowledge so that it satisfies contemporary taste in dramatic structure and character development. And we should do all this in faithful Krishna consciousness.

 

Question: On Wikipedia, it seems to date Jarasandha, his son, and the Kurukshetra battle in and around 1500-1000 BC by citing Puranic references. How might this square with a 3500 BC date? I believe the Mahabharata cites astronomical information that secures the 3500 BC dating. How then does the Puranic references fit in?

HDG:
The Puranas themselves of course do not give an absolute date for these events, in the modern sense, since they did not use our calendar.

Scholars study the king-lists in the Puranas, calculate a likely average number of years for each reign, and then give their dates. The Puranas may simply give the main kings, leaving some out. That may explain why scholars calculate more recent dates for the events.

I believe Aryabhata, a brilliant ancient mathematician, calculated the date of Krishna’s appearance, 5000 years ago, based on archeo-astronomical information in the Sanskrit texts. I would go with those dates.

 

Pregunta: Estaba yo escuchando una conferencia que dio usted en Vrajabhumi en su última visita a Brasil, y en la clase hablaba sobre el hecho de que algunas personas quieren ser el centro y ser amados como una forma de querer ponerse en el lugar de Krishna. Yo veo esto mucho en mí, esta necesidad de atención y ser muy importante para alguien, la necesidad de ser amado. Así que me pregunto hasta qué punto es esta una anartha. En la misma clase también usted menciona lo valioso que es tener una verdadera relación amorosa, cómo el tesoro de tener un verdadero amigo. Por lo tanto hasta qué punto es legítimo querer afecto, de tener a alguien, tener una relación amorosa? Y si se trata de un anartha, ¿cómo puedo ser libre de ella?

HDG:
Usted plantea una interesante cuestión que es relevante para todos nosotros. Como se suele decir, siempre debemos mantener un equilibrio entre lo ideal y lo real.

En el Bhagavad-gita 6.16-17, Krishna, incluso dice que el yoga no existe para los que comen demasiado o demasiado poco, y lo mismo sobre el dormir, etc. Krishna dice que debemos ser moderados, incluso con el ocio y la recreación – vihara, y en el trabajo.

No hay duda de que debemos aplicar el mismo criterio de moderación en nuestra vida emocional. Debemos entender claramente ambas la ideal y la real, y realizar un balance un equilibrio personal entre ambas.

Por supuesto, incluso las concesiones que hacen sobre la “verdadera” deben ser espirituales. Por ejemplo, un devoto que siente que debe casarse, o tener un buen amigo / etc. primero dependerá de Krishna y sólo entonces aceptará el matrimonio o la amistad en la medida en que sea favorable para la conciencia de Krishna.

Además, aumentando nuestra conciencia de Krishna, nuestra devoción hacia Krishna, sentiremos un sabor superior y nuestras necesidades humanas, incluso si los síntomas no desaparecen, disminuirán. Y las de menor intensidad son nuestras necesidades humanas, las más fácil de satisfacer.

 

Pergunta: Existe a Superalma no mundo espiritual?

HDG:
Tanto quanto eu sei, a Superalma não habita nos corações de almas liberadas no mundo espiritual. Os Vedas ensinam que o Paramatma senta ao lado da alma condicionada dentro do coração.

Isto significa que mesmo neste mundo, Paramatma não está dentro da alma, mas sim ao lado da alma como um amigo. O Vedas comparam isso com dois pássaros pousados ​​no mesmo galho de uma árvore.

Por outro lado, o Gita 13.25 fala de pessoas que, por meio da meditação, conseguem ver a Alma dentro da alma. Isto pode significar simplesmente que se vê a Alma [a Superalma] ‘dentro’, ao invés de fora de si mesmo. Possível confirmação dessa visão seria Bg 15.11, onde o Senhor Krishna declara que uma alma realizada pode ver como a alma transmigra “dentro de si.” Transmigração da alma envolve claramente o assumir de um corpo, como se coloca uma roupa, mas o mesmo termo é usado: “atmani”, “dentro de si.” Então parece que o Gita às vezes usa esta palavra para significar “dentro,” isto é, pela meditação, em vez de vê-lo no mundo externo. Da mesma forma, Bg 6.26 afirma que se deve trazer a mente sob controle “dentro de si,” usando a mesma palavra “atmani.” Claramente a mente, manas, é parte da energia externa óctupla de Krishna, por isso aqui para trazê-lo sob controle “dentro de si,” não significa literalmente que a mente material existe dentro da alma.

Uma vez que no mundo espiritual a alma é o seu corpo, ao que parece, podemos supor que Paramatma não está dentro da alma, pois mesmo neste mundo Paramatma parece não residir dentro da alma, mas dentro do coração material. Almas liberadas não têm corações materiais.

 

Question: Is there Supersoul in the spiritual world?

HDG:
As far as I know, the Supersoul does not dwell in the hearts of liberated souls in the spiritual world. The Vedas teach that the Paramatma sits by the side of the conditioned soul within the heart.

This means that even in this world, Paramatma is not inside the soul, but rather beside the soul as a friend. The Vedas compare this to two birds sitting on the same branch of a tree.

On the other hand, the Gita 13.25 speaks of persons who, by meditation, see the Soul within the soul. This may simply mean that one sees the Soul [the Supersoul] ‘within’, rather than outside oneself. Possible confirmation of this view would be Bg 15.11, wherein Lord Krishna states that a realized soul can see how the soul transmigrates ‘within the self.’ Transmigration clearly involves the soul taking on a body, as one puts on clothes, yet the same term Atmani is used, ‘within the self.’ So it seems the Gita at times uses this word to mean ‘within’, i.e. by meditation rather than seeing it out in the external world. Similarly, Bg 6.26 states that one should bring the mind under control ‘in the self’, using the same word Atmani. Clearly the mind, manas, is part of Krishna’s eight-fold external energy, so here to bring it under control ‘in the self’ does not mean literally that the material mind exists within the soul.

Since in the spiritual world, the soul IS his or her body, it seems we may assume that Paramatma is not within the soul, since even in this world Paramatma appears to reside not within the soul, but within the material heart. Liberated souls do not have material hearts.

 

Pregunta: ¿Existe la Superalma en el mundo espiritual?

HDG:
Hasta donde yo sé, la Superalma no habita en los corazones de las almas liberadas en el mundo espiritual. Los Vedas enseñan que el Paramatma se sienta al lado del alma condicionada dentro del corazón.

Esto significa que incluso en este mundo, Paramatma no está dentro del alma, sino más bien al lado del alma como un amigo. Los Vedas comparan esto con dos pájaros sentados en la misma rama de un árbol.

Por otro lado, el Gita 13.25 habla de personas que, por su meditación, ven el alma dentro del alma. Esto puede significar simplemente que uno ve el alma [la Superalma] ‘dentro,’ en lugar de fuera de uno mismo. Posible confirmación de este punto de vista sería Bg 15.11, en el que Señor Krishna declara que el alma autorrealizada sabe cómo  el alma transmigra ‘dentro de uno mismo.’ Transmigración implica claramente que el alma toma un cuerpo, como se pone la ropa, sin embargo, el mismo término se utiliza Atmani, ‘dentro de uno mismo.’ Así que parece que el Gita a veces usa esta palabra para decir ‘dentro,’ es decir, por la meditación en lugar de verlo en el mundo exterior. Del mismo modo, Bg 6.26 establece que se debe traer a la mente ‘bajo control,’ utilizando la misma palabra Atmani. Es evidente que la mente, manas, es parte de las ocho energías externas de Krishna, así que aquí ‘poner bajo control’ no significa literalmente que la mente material exista dentro del alma.

Ya que en el mundo espiritual, el alma es El cuerpo de ella o El cuerpo de él, parece que debemos asumir que Paramatma no está dentro del alma, ya que incluso en este mundo Paramatma parece no residir en el alma, pero sí dentro del corazón físico. Almas liberadas no tienen corazón material.

 

Question:
I was listening to a lecture that you gave in Vrajabhumi on your last visit to Brazil, and in the class you talk about the fact that some people want to be the center and be loved as a way of wanting to be put in Krishna’s place. I see this a lot in me, this need for attention and to be very important to someone, a need to be loved. So I wonder to what extent is this an anartha. In the same class you also mention how valuable it is to have a true loving relationship, how it is a treasure to have a true friend. So to what point is it legitimate to want affection, to have someone like me, to have a loving relationship? And if it is an anartha, how do I become free from it?

HDG:
You raise an interesting question which is relevant to all of us. As they say, we must always maintain a balance between the ideal and real.

In Bhagavad-gita 6.16-17, Krishna even says that yoga does not exist for those who eat too much or too little, and so to sleep etc.. Krishna says that we should be moderate even with leisure and recreation – vihara, and at work.

No doubt we should apply the same criteria of moderation in our emotional life. We must clearly understand both the ideal and the real, and thus ascertain our personal balance between the two.

Of course, even the concessions that make the ‘real’ must be spiritual. For example, a devotee who feels he must marry, or have a good friend / etc. will first depend on Krishna and only then accept a marriage or friendship only to the extent that is favorable for their Krishna consciousness.

Also, increasing our consciousness of Krishna, our devotion to Krishna, we have a superior taste and our human needs, even if they do not disappear, diminish. And the less intense are our human needs, the easier it is to satisfy them.