In2-MeC

IBSA (ISKCON Bhaktivedanta Sadhana Asrama), Govardhana, India
7 February 2004

During the middle two weeks of the month of March I am scheduled to give a seminar on philosophy--Vaisnava philosophy, of course, but it is wanted that I look at at the methods and concerns that are general to all traditional philosophy, East and West. The seminar is to be held in Salem, Tamil Nadu (South India). A couple of days ago I received an email from one of the organizers. He suggested that during the course I spend a little time on the following:

destiny and personal endeavor

No need to endeavor (tasyaiva hetoh prayateta. . . , sukham aindriyakam)

vis-a-vis

nahi suptasya simhasya pravisanti mukhe mrgam

The first two verses cited (tasyaiva hetoh and sukham aindriyakam) are from Srimad-Bhagavatam 1. 5. 18 and 7. 6. 3. The last verse mentioned is from Hitopadesa. The two Bhagavatam verses tell us that the happiness and distress one achieves in this life come by the superior arrangement of nature. Thus there is no need to endeavor for relief of distress nor the securing of happiness, since these are one's karmic due and can't be adjusted. The Hitopadesa verse seems to make the opposite point--that while a lion may be king of the jungle, it still has to go out and hunt for its food. It cannot just lay in its cave waiting for food to be served.

In terms of Western philosophy, the question raised here is of "free will versus determinism. " The deterministic viewpoint holds that all the events in our lives are settled up before they happen, either by the blind mechanistic arrangement of nature or by the will of God or the demigods. This point of view is also called fatalism. The free will viewpoint is that man is the architect of his own destiny (a phrase Srila Prabhupada often used).

The problem comes up in Vaisnava philosophy also. Within the Sri Vaisnava community of South India are two subsets of the sampradaya that go by the names Tengalai and Wadagalai. Members of each subset wear their tilaka a little differently from the other. Doctrinally, one side believes liberation will come by surrendering completely to the Lord, as a kitten surrenders to the mother cat when she picks the baby up by the back of the neck with her mouth. The other believes that liberation requires a degree of endeavor on the part of the devotee, as when a baby monkey clings to the mother monkey as she moves about.

In the Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy, both viewpoints have their place. On the one side, the individual soul is responsible for what transpires in his life. Thus by suitable exercise of will he can shape his destiny for the better. On the other side, the soul's will is subordinate to the superior law of the Lord and nature. He cannot just do whatever he likes. Whatever he gets, comes by the mercy of Krsna.

From the Govinda Bhasya commentary of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana on Vedanta-sutra, we have a most helpful analysis of both sides of the question. Below are some portions of the second chapter, third part of Govinda-bhasya. The translation is by my Godbrother HG Kusakratha Prabhu.

In their liberated positions in Krsna-lila, the individual spirit souls eat, play and enjoy. Thus by their own original, transcendental nature, the living entities are performers of action.

The Chandogya Upanisad (8. 12. 3) describes the activities of the liberated souls:

"In the spiritual world the individual spirit soul eats, plays, and enjoys. "

Therefore action by itself does not brings pain and unhappiness to the soul, rather it is the bondage of the three modes of nature that brings unhappiness. This is so because the three modes of nature obscure the reality of the soul's spiritual nature.

In the Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad (2. 1. 18) it is said:

"In the dreaming state the individual spirit soul acts like a king. The soul grasps the life-airs and does as it wishes. "

In the Bhagavad-gita (15. 8) it is also said:

"The living entity in the material world carries his different conceptions of life from one body to another as the air carries aromas. Thus he takes one kind of body and again quits it to take another. "

In these passages it is seen that the individual spirit soul does perform actions, for the soul moves the life-airs as a magnet moves iron. The life-airs may move many things, but it is the individual spirit soul who moves the life-airs. Nothing else moves them.

In the Taittiriya Upanisad& (2. 5. 1) it is said:

"Consciousness (uijnana) performs yajnas. Consciousness performs actions. "

These words clearly show that the individual spirit soul is the primary performer of Vedic and ordinary actions. If the word "vijnanam is interpreted to mean not the individual spirit soul, but the intelligence, then the grammatical structure of the sentence would be different. Then the word "vijnanam" would be in the instrumental case, for the intelligence would be the instrument by which the action is performed. However, the word is not in the instrumental case. If the intelligence were the performer of the action here, then another word must be given in the instrumental case to show with what instrument the intelligence performs the action, for there must be an instrument in every action. However, if the individual spirit soul is the performer of the action there is not need for another word in the instrumental case to show the instrument used, for in that situation the individual spirit soul is both the performer of the action and the instrument employed.

Here someone may object: Is it not so that the individual spirit soul, being independent and able to act as he likes, will naturally act for his own welfare and will not perform actions that bring him harm?

To this I reply: No. It is not like that. The individual spirit soul desires to benefit himself, but because his past karma acts against him, he sometimes creates his own misfortune.

For these reasons it is clear that the individual spirit soul certainly performs actions. When the scriptures sometimes say that the individual spirit soul does not perform actions, the meaning is that the soul is not independent and free to do exactly everything he wishes.

Here someone may object: It is not possible that the individual spirit soul is the performer of actions, for it is clearly seen that these actions often bring him suffering.

To this I reply: No. It is not so. If the individual spirit soul is not the performer of actions, then the scriptural descriptions of [different kinds of sacrificial rituals] would not make any sense.

In previous sutras it was shown that if the individual spirit soul were all-pervading, then consciousness would be vague and indefinite. In the same way if all-pervading material nature were the sole performer of all actions, then all actions would bring the same result to all spirit souls simultaneously. Clearly this is not so. Also, it could not be said that the individual spirit soul would need to be near the place where a certain action was performed in order to experience the result of that action. The Sankhya philosophers cannot say this, for in their theory each individual spirit soul is all-pervading and is thus already near the places where all actions are performed.

If the material nature is the performer of actions, then material nature must also experience the good and bad results of those actions. However, the Svetasvatara Upanisad (1. 8) affirms:

"The individual spirit soul enjoys the good and bad results of actions. "

In this way the idea that the material nature is the performer of actions is refuted. Because the individual spirit soul enjoys the good and bad results of actions, the individual spirit soul must also be the performer of those actions.

Actions are meant to bring one to liberation from the material world. Because it is not possible for the material nature to act in such a way and attain such a goal, the idea that the material nature is the performer of actions cannot be entertained. Liberation means understanding the truth "I am different from matter". Because it is unconscious, and also because it really is matter, it is not possible for the material nature to come to this understanding. In this way it is proved that the individual spirit soul is the performer of actions.

As a carpenter performs actions, employing both his own power and a host of tools, so does the individual spirit soul, employing both his own power and the various life-airs. Thus the soul employs the material body and other instruments also, to perform actions. It is the pure spirit soul who thus uses the modes of material nature to perform actions. That is why the scriptures sometimes say that the modes of material nature are the performer of actions.

That the individual spirit soul is indeed the performer of actions is confirmed in Bhagavad-gita (13. 22), where it is said:

"The living entity in material nature thus follows the ways of life, enjoying the three modes of nature. Thus he meets with good and evil among the various species. "

These words explain the scripture passages that declare the modes of nature to be the performers of action. It is foolish for a person to think himself the sole performer of action and ignore the five factors of action. Of course it is not that the individual spirit soul never performs any action. The idea that the soul never does anything is clearly refuted by the many scriptural statements urging the soul to act such a way that he may attain liberation. When in the Bhagavad-gita (2. 19) the Lord says:

"The self slays not nor is slain. "

That does not mean that the individual spirit soul never performs any action, but rather that the eternal spirit soul can never be cut or slain. The meaning of the statement that the soul never acts has thus already been explained.

In both this life and the next the devotees perform various actions of devotional service to the Lord. Because these actions are free from the touch of the modes of nature, because they are under the jurisdiction of the Lord's spiritual potency and because they lead to liberation, these actions are said not to be action, for they are not material actions. This is explained by the Supreme Lord Himself in these words:

The individual soul is responsible for his destiny. His responsibility arises out of his choice of association. If he chooses pure association, he is freed from the grip of material nature. If he chooses impure association, he bound by the three modes.

"One who acts without attachment is in the mode of goodness. One who is blinded with desire is in the mode of passion. One whose intelligence is broken is in the mode of ignorance. One who takes shelter of Me is free from the grip of the modes of nature. "

That the pure spirit soul experiences the results of his actions is described in Bhagavad-gita (13. 21):

"The living entity is the cause of the various sufferings and enjoyments in this world. "

Because it is by nature conscious it is the soul that experiences the results of actions, the modes of nature do not experience them. This refutes the idea that the modes are active and the soul is not. In this way it is proved that it is the conscious soul who experiences happiness and other sensations. In this way the individual spirit soul brings knowledge to itself and others. Both kinds of action exist for the soul. In the Prasna Upanisad (4. 9) it is said:

"It is the soul who sees, touches, and hears. "

Thus, by this example of the carpenter, the idea that the individual spirit soul is the only factor in action, and there are no others, is clearly refuted.

To the degree the living entity neglects pure devotional service, which is facilitated by the antaranga-sakti or internal potency of the Lord, to that degree he comes under the jurisdiction of the bahiranga-sakti, the external, material potency. In that condition his activities take on the characteristics of struggle, for he is bound by the three gunas of goodness, passion and ignorance. As Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana noted above, it is this condition of bondage that brings suffering to the living entity, for the three gunas obscure the pure eternal, conscious and blissful nature of the spirit soul. Suffering is not brought by activity itself.

Srila Prabhupada taught that one endeavoring to make spiritual progress should be "callous" to his material situation. He should not let either sukha or dukha provoke him to take desperate measures to adjust his karmic situation. One should tolerate material happiness and distress and focus his energy on spiritual activity. Strenuous attempts to change one's material situation constitute the struggle for existence under the modes of nature. We become devotees to end that struggle. Therefore sthane-stithah sruti-gatan van manobhir, it is said in a Bhagavatam verse much appreciated by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu for expressing the essence of pure devotional service. One should accept the situation awarded by his karma, and in that position one should associate with devotees and hear about Krsna.

So in this sense a devotee is "fatalistic. " For example, if he was born in a body with dark skin and African facial features, a devotee will not spend untold thousands of dollars in cosmetic surgery like Michael Jackson did, trying to look white and beautiful artifically. A devotee knows that manipulating the external energy in this way cannot bring real happiness. At best such manipulation only seemingly improves one's life. But in time all happiness based on arrangements of the external energy must be lost. Therefore such happiness is not real. And so the Bhagavatam advises us not to waste our efforts on ephemeral goals.

But this does not mean that a devotee doesn't act at all to improve his situation. We have seen above that Baladeva Vidyabhusana states that actions are meant to bring liberation from the material world. Thus a devotee does endeavor to liberate himself from the body by acting under the shelter of the antaranga-sakti. Such action yields a spiritual result.

There is nothing wrong with working to get a better body. One should go about it in a spiritual way. Acting under the internal potency in pure devotional service results in a pure spiritual body that is never lost in time.

Impersonalists wrongly conclude that material nature is the cause of action while the soul is inherently inactive. The logic of such a doctrine leads some impersonalists to extreme attempts to liberate themselves by ceasing activities.

Another point that ought to be mentioned is that both the exernal and internal potencies are related to Krsna as His saktis. Thus, just as it is hopeless to invest one's full energy in seeking happiness in the external energy, it is also hopeless to pretend that one has no relationship whatsoever to the external energy. If matter has a relationship to Krsna, and I have a relationship to Krsna, then I will surely have a relationship to matter also. A devotee works within the material world, but his work is devotional sacrifice. Such sacrifice transforms matter into spirit. Thus matter is not "bad" in and of itself. It is an essential start-ingredient for service to Krsna. For example, at present we have a body that is material. It is surely nowhere near as nice as a spiritual body, but that is not a reason for stopping all actions in this body. We should act to purify and spiritualize this body so that it becomes less and less of an obstacle to Krsna consciousness.

Some impersonalists artificially neglect the body. Actually, what they are neglecting is devotional service, which is conducted with a sattvik attitude towards material nature. The impersonalists try to conduct their spiritual lives without letting go of the mode of ignorance; they can't let go of the tamo-guna because they are averse to taking shelter of Lord Krsna's lotus feet as His humble servants. Due to ignorance, the extreme tapasvis among the impersonalists try to cease all activity. In Gita Krsna clearly points out that this is impossible. Other impersonalists admit that impossibility. But due to ignorance they are unable to properly discriminate between material activities and spiritual activities. And so they fall back into bodily indulgences.

A devotee uses the body in Krsna's service, neither neglecting it nor indulging it. Devotional service is actually transcendental because it is aimed at satisfying Krsna only. But Krsna has instructed us how to live and work within His external energy. The reference point He gives to matter is the sattva-guna. As long as we have a psychophysical body, there is no avoiding a relationship to matter. We can satisfy Krsna by relating to matter in the mode of goodness while performing our devotional service to Him.

To return to the original point, one of the characteristics of that sattvik way of relating to matter is tolerance. Whatever embodied state and place I may have achieved under the laws of nature, I should tolerate. In this position my active energy is to be focused on satisfying Krsna. But in the course of trying to satisfy Krsna, His internal potency--in the form of hari-guru-vaisnava-bhagavata-gita, i. e. the Holy Name and the Deity, the spiritual master, the society of devotees, the revealed scriptures--may direct me to change my position. The object of such an authorized change is to satisfy Krsna even more. For example, some ISKCON devotees perform their devotional service in countries other than the ones in which they were born. In other words, they didn't "stay in their position" (stane-stithah). Yet that change was not wrought in search of material happiness. The object is to satisfy the Lord.

Thus a pure devotee lives and works in the mode of goodness but under the authority of the internal potency. Because of the direction of that potency, it may appear to some who are conditioned by the material mode of goodness that a pure devotee is not "steadily situated" in sattvik life. They see him endeavoring very strongly for big results--he writes, prints and distributes many books, he opens large temples, he attracts many people, he even makes a lot of money. "Then what about na janam na dhanam na sundarim kavitam va jagadisa kamaye?", they ask. The answer is that for himself, the pure devotee is content to chant Hare Krsna and live as a simple sadhu under a tree. He has no personal desires to change his position in the external world. But the internal potency impels him to satisfy Krsna by making strenuous endeavors. Hanuman, Arjuna, and our own Srila Prabhupada are such devotees--greatly empowered yet completely selfless servants of Sri Krsna.

Srila Prabhupada ki Jaya!

<< Back