0:01Peshwambhar, Parv. Hare Krishna, Yogyakura, thank you for the opportunity to ask a question. So it's like two questions, but very close to each other. It's a question about how to adopt Archana for very young devotees and beginners, because when I just started studying from Sadkirti a little bit, I faced with some controversial.
0:43You mercifully explained that a young devotee, he should perceive his Gurudev like Nityananda Prakash before high level. So, just for example, in when we should be before wake up details, we should like wake up gurudev and I think how I can wake up gurudev if I'm not perceived here like manjari and if his form like sadhaka form, Vaishnava is not sleeping, so like first question very strange and with offering prasadam you explain that it depends on your level how to think about it.
1:14so it's many things in Archen are like overreaching and I ask you to explain how to like very young devotees should perceive it and the second part of this question that in our daily practice some parts of Madhuri rasa like very high just for example just for example one day you explain that like in Mangalarati we singing like like gopis teasing Krishna like nrisimha and before I read it like nrisimha who destroy all obstacles but after I understand that another explanation and some like very high level things for very young devotees they can this is very simple first of all our chan is performed according to viddhi and so there are rules and regulations how to do it so
2:18So, when the devotee is doing archan, he wakes up the spiritual master in the morning, tisht, tisht, shi, guru, jahi, nejam, kripamaya, so, this is the waking up guru in sadhak form, because the mantra, when the archan to guru is, in archan, when the archan to guru is performed, then one remembers, prata, sri, navadvip, that in the morning, it's morning time, and Gurudev is in navadvip, and then, so we remember guru in the sadhaka form, the mantras literally say that.
3:17In archan, there are also some mantras, tuam gopi, ka, bari, shava, resta, niyanti, kesi, that describing guru in the manjuri form as well, but for waking up guru in the morning and doing the archan with the sodas upacara, The mantras literally describe the sadhaka form of the guru. So it's very straightforward. And then the other mantras, so that you can know that ultimately, guru has a form not only in Gora-lila, but also in Krishna-lila. And after some time, one will become qualified to meditate on that form. When we remember Guru Mantra and Guru Gayatri, also we pray for the revelation of the form of guru in Vrindavan-lila. That's right.
4:07And then you said something about that Shiguru doesn't sleep in a sadhak form or something. This is completely not true. Every, yeah, every, in sadhak form and siddha form, Shiguru takes rest. But there's a difference between the sleep of a conditioned soul and the sleep of a liberated soul. When conditioned soul goes to sleep, it's because the mode of ignorance has come, and it forces them to fall asleep, and because of passion is there, so they dream some bizarre things, which is a mixture of their samskars, and then they go into deep sleep due to the mode of ignorance.
4:55but whether Sri Guru is in the sadhak form and also in the siddha form. There's also waking, there's also dreaming and there's also deep sleep, but it's not caused by the gunas. Then when a pure devotee goes to sleep, it's called swapna samadhi, dream trance. He goes into samadhi, but it looks like he's dreaming, but it's actual samadhi, so that's called swapna samadhi. And the amazing thing is that Krishna, Krishna, Krishna has described in the message that he gave to Uduv, to Braj-gopis, how when the Braj-gopis going to deep sleep, they still have darshan of Krishna, in deep sleep even.
5:47This is something amazing, because in the material deep sleep, there's consciousness, but consciousness of nothing. There is no alamban, that means there is no foundation for some perception to take place, some object of perception. But gopis even have perception of Krishna and love Krishna in deep sleep. So, it is quite amazing. Okay, so, yes, this is just those points, first of all.
6:21The mantras actually say that you wake up your guru in sadhaka form and that you do arch-ante-guru in sadhaka form. though there are some mantras for remembering the siddha form, they'll become more relevant later when one makes more advancement and that pure devotees both in sadhaka and siddha form, they also take rest.
6:44So then the next thing about the Mangalartic, the Mangalartic is for the advanced devotees, it's a meditation on Radha Krishna's Nishanta Lila. So in Nishanta-lila, the whole lila is confidential. There is no aspect of Radha Krishna's astakali lila which is not confidential. So then what should the more junior devotees do? The junior devotees should sing the song of Mangalachic. It is straightforward. It is very straightforward because Srila Bhaktipraga and Keshava Goswami has written this song in such a way that the song is completely safe and suitable.
7:34suitable and appropriate for persons on the path of Vaidhi-bhakti. But because it's kabhya, that means because it's poetry, then it has layers of meaning in dhvani, that is, in the power of suggestion. And so all the confidential, some confidential details of Radha Krishna's Nishantalila are there in the dhvani of the poetry, not directly in the shabdhartha, the direct meaning of the words. So any new person can read the book and sing the song and the translation and that's it. It's very straightforward and very simple. Only if sometimes if someone is lucky, then after some time, then they hear from advanced devotee, what is the dhwani and anudhwani and pratidhwani, different layers of suggestion within the poetry. Is it clear? Everything clear? Yes. Yes.
8:57that's why you have to either you should not be there and in most cases most devotees don't have the chance to hear and if you do have the chance to hear then you there's no one in the qatar who did not learn bhagavad-gita right and bhagavad-gita explains that you are a soul, you are not the body, and that Krishna is, his body is his soul, and his body is transcendental and eternal and beyond the gunas, and his lila gives liberation, and even those who are liberated, they aspire for that lila, so all of these things, these are very basic things, so this is why if a person is not very qualified, first of all, he should not listen a lot, from time to time,
9:55to time he may hear something to develop some greed. But the emphasis should not be on confidential things for the person in their beginning state. And if by chance he has an opportunity, just for example, if you read the Krishna book of Srila Prabhupada, all the Rasalila is there, but Srila Prabhupada will say something and then in the next line he'll remind you, but Krishna is the supreme personality of Godhead and this past time is completely not lust. It's the opposite of lust. The senses of Krishna are transcendental. They're not material senses. This is beyond the gunas. So if by chance you hear something, I think, I don't think it's reasonable to say that you don't know or that you don't understand that this is transcendental.
10:49You know that it's transcendental. The only thing is that upon hearing it, then your material mind may superimpose something coming from the sanskars. So it becomes, that becomes an aparadha, it becomes an offense. But also for the speaker, speaker should be careful not to speak very high in confidential topics in front of new people because they will naturally make offense. So if you are making someone make offense then that is also an offense as well. So, but also we should know that if there are devotees They've been practicing 20 years, 30 years, 40 years, and they're in the dharm, and they're sitting in sevakunj, then they will not discuss Bhagavad-gita, and they don't have to discuss Bhagavad-gita, and so if someone is by some good fortune, they're a junior devotee, and they happen to be in the company of very more senior devotees, who've been practicing for many years, if there's something that they don't understand, they should just be respectful,
12:00and focus in their life on the things that they need to focus on according to their level. Okay, just raise your hand if you have a question. Yes, Ruhu?
12:21Do you need the microphone?
12:24We hear it is the most subtle body and the interface through which we can witness the form of Krishna.
12:33And though in Shastra, I noticed that there's different translations regarding the citta. for example, in Bhagavad-gita, the Chaitanya is sometimes translated as the mind, like, is your mind, have you listened with an attentive mind, whereas in the first verse of Sikshyastakam, it is translated as Chaitodapramajam, the purification of the heart, so my question is, does the Chaitanya have a form of its own, through which, what kind of an interface is this Chaitanya?
13:10does it have a form that that yeah I'm trying to imagine like see how it might maybe look at it so first of all your question raises a few points you said that the word chitta is translated in different ways in different places it's true but the english words themselves are not precise if you ask a scientist what is the mind then he actually has no clue I mean everyone knows
13:51know subjectively, I have a mind, I'm thinking in my mind. But if you ask a scientist, what is the mind, they have no clue whatsoever. And in most cases, they'll think that it's some type of epiphenomenon that arises from this random collisions of molecules in the brain, like this. It's just philosophically untenable. So whatever English word you use doesn't really matter, because these these words don't have any strict definitions that anyone agrees upon what they are. Also another thing is very often you'll see a translation and the translator himself doesn't have any realization of what it is either. This often happens as well. So these things are not important. What is important? Paribhasa, only the definition is important. So if you want to know what the
15:06the word citta is, then you have to go to the verse in Shastra that gives you Paribhasa, the precise definition of what it is. Then when you know the definition every time you see the word citta, then you don't read it by some random English word or Italian word or French word, which is vague and fuzzy and no one can agree what it really means. When you see the word citta, then you take it to be a reference.
15:40to what is defined in the verse which defines citta. So, the definition is given in Srimad Bhagavatam. This is very beautiful. The third canto, in the third canto, we find the teachings of Lord Kapil Dev, and there Kapil Dev describes the creation of the world. In the second canto, there's also an explanation of the the creation of the world. And also in the 11th canto, Krishna himself teaches Uddhuv, a description of the creation of the world. So those descriptions of the creation of the world, they're there again and again in Srimad Bhagavatam, because you need this model to understand, to understand anything about this world and the soul, what is not the soul, and what this world is, how the soul is or isn't related to the world.
16:45You cannot understand it without understanding the process of creation. In other words, what all the elements are. So the first thing we have to know about citta is that it's the first manifest material element. It's mahatatva. So first you have to know the definition of mahatatva. What is mahatatva? And then you can know that the portion of the mahatatva, which is because all the elements are in your body, So the portion of that element which is in your psychological body of mahatatrui is called chitta.
17:25So then each of the elements have their symptoms. So Kapil Deva said,
17:39He also describes the symptoms of akash, because you're asking, does chitta have form? Well, to have form, first of all, it's not spiritual, so it doesn't have spiritual form. has material form. And anything that has material form must have some dimensions to manifest the form, right? So the dimensions in which something has form is called the akash, or space. Now when we say space, we don't mean the modern scientific abstract idea of space, which is emptiness, but space itself has
18:21some qualities. Akash has qualities. If you study the history of science also, they have changed the idea whether space has qualities or doesn't have qualities, right? At first they called space the ether, and they thought they had qualities. Then later, mathematical space had no qualities. And now again, they came, well, space does have qualities. It can even be curved. You can have the curvature of space-time.
18:55So like this, as different scientific revolutions go on, the definition of what space is keeps changing, but in Shastra the definition is the same, and it will always be the same, it will never change, and there will be no discovery to cause it to be changed, because Shastra is the manifest from the Supreme Lord, Shastra yonitvaat, the Supreme Lord is the origin of Shastra, So he has created the world, knows what the world is and how it works.
19:32And so his manifest revelation of the world is unchanging.
19:57So now, what is citta? The characteristics of citta have been defined. The characteristics of akash, which is the disnyatuan, means that is the fundament, the foundation, or the space in which citta can expand and contract. So citta does have a form. It's actually atomic in nature, very tiny, but the soul is even more atomic.
20:25Atomic. So when the soul is covered by the citta, then he thinks his citta is something very big relative to his own nature. So Vedanta Sutra says that the senses also have atomic forms. So the five senses are actually atoms in the heart chakra. And the mind, or we can say the citta, is another atom. And the soul is also atomic. And the soul is by his icha drawing the six atoms, the atoms of the five senses plus the atomic citta.
21:01otomic mind towards himself. So the forms of all of these things are described in Shastra, and you can also see them, but you can't see them with eyes, you cannot, and of course the citta being more subtle than mind, you know, the ahankar is a devolution of citta, and then the mind and the intelligence are devolution of ahankar.
21:34And so, the finer elements can give insight into the lower elements, but the lower elements cannot give insight to the higher elements. So the citta can understand what is ahankara and mind, but the mind cannot even understand what is ego. Understand? Because the mind is a later devolution of the ego. So the higher things can be instrumental to investigate the lower things, But the lower things will not be instrumental to investigate the higher things. And this is why the hierarchy or the gradual grossification of prakriti into the different elements, it's a very important model to understand.
22:29And if you become fluent in that model and you know your way around that model, you can understand what things are possible and what are not many things which are possible and which are impossible.
23:22Jai, Saci, Radha, Syama, Srimad, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Jai, Syama, sundara, juki, jai, chamarka, Radha, Syama, sundara, juki, jai. Krishna's bluish effulgence and Radhika's golden effulgence mixed together and everything became green. So in receiving this, the education of Sankhya, which is described again and again in Srimad Bhagavatam to clarify the nature of this world. So first, try to have a clear picture of the elements
24:09themselves and how they're related to each other. And afterwards, by contemplation, by vichara, by deliberating on it, and especially by hearing, well, especially by hearing. Then, not only do you understand the model itself, but the implications. What are the implications, the model to practical life? What are the philosophical implications? Now, another point you raised is sometimes you see the word mind is there for the citta.
24:47And you can see the way that the word citta is used in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, that it's an umbrella term for the entire psychological, the mental instrument, we can say.
25:14So generally a person will think about, well, there are physical elements, it's the gross body, and then you have your mind, your psychological functions. And so, because the citta is the foundation of the psychological body, and because the ego and the mind and the intelligence are just, we can say, degrees of contaminated citta, so it's all citta, you understand?
25:50So in a certain context, it's not illegitimate to just use the word chitta to refer to the mind or the ego or the intelligence in a certain context as an umbrella term because these are all just phase transitions of the chitta like this. And so, if you want to understand the subject clearly, then you have to, first of all, as I said, know your definitions to define the terms, and then if in some context, the terms are used not exactly according to the definition, but in a more broader sense, then you have to recognize that, that the words are also used in different contexts, sometimes in a more broader sense.
26:44For example, let's say, if you say the Kauravas, so in one context, that will include Duryodhana and his brothers, his 99 brothers, the 100 Kauravas, the sons of Dhritarashtra, but actually the Pandavas are also Kauravas, because they're in the Kuru dynasty. So, strictly speaking, the Kauravas includes Duryodhana and all of his brothers and the five Pandavas, actually, according to the definition.
27:27And not only that, but it includes all of their descendants and also their ancestors, right? But because you're used to seeing the word Kaurava in the context of a conflict between Arjuna and Yudhishthira and Maharaja, so when you hear the word Kauravas, you usually don't think of the Pandavas. And you probably don't think of their ancestors or their descendants either. You'll just think of Duryodhana and his brothers. You see? So there's a word, there's a definition of the word, and then there's the context in which the word becomes loaded with particular meanings. So this is the nature of language and communication, loading and framing, you know, due to the use of words again and again.
28:24then certain words which means one thing end up becoming loaded with another meaning and so that's also relative to the framing because we're seeing the use of this word within the frame of a particular context and if we'll see the same word within a bigger context then we see that the loading is not legitimate so it's the same in every language and every discussion loading and framing takes place so if you want to actually we have a discussion, you have to agree on your definitions and then dialogue can take place.
29:08Is that clear? Everything clear? Yeah. Okay. We can have one more question? Okay. I guess we have to take something from the ladies' side to have some balance. Yes. I have a question. One moment. Actually, give me if I don't, I'm not able to formulate. Well, anyway, reality is what we are thinking, So there is not objective reality, well, there is a supreme reality, okay, that's, because I heard a video, I was watching a video of Paramgurudeva, in which somebody asked, and he said that the gopis never separated with Krishna, because they were constantly, continuously thinking and absorbed in him, so reality is a state of mind or consciousness, what is it?
30:10When you say, when we face, put our face towards Krishna, we are in the spiritual world. When we give him the back, we are in the material world. So it seems to me, to my limited conscious state of consciousness of this present moment that basically we are always in the same, not space or place or state of consciousness.
30:38and it's just in what our mind is observed that changes this reality. Okay, so first of all, your mind does not change reality. You change your mind, but the reality is the same. So don't think like this. Oh, your mala is on the ground. Don't keep your mala on the ground. So, this is like a solipsism. Solipsism is the idea that nothing exists except for me, and the whole of existence is the creation of my mind. And then you have all types of the nihilistic relativism, like in the 60s, one slogan became popular.
31:47When drugs became popular, then one slogan became popular, reality is the verdict of the majority, right? As if reality is decided somehow or other by some democratic process. Because obviously, if there's so many people all sitting together, and they're all on drugs, and they're all hallucinating, then whatever the experience is in their minds, but the majority of the people in the world are just, you know, having direct perception.
32:22let's say a valid sensory perception of the objective physical world. And so then someone will make the idea, well, what you are calling reality, it's just the verdict of the majority of people. And if everyone was hallucinating, then we couldn't decide, then there would be no reality. So these are all kinds of nihilistic ideas and foolish ideas. Of course, there is objective reality, but when we come to Krishna Consciousness, then it takes on a nuance, and that is that the reality is not a thing.
33:08Thing. No, it's not a thing, it's a person. Because we tend to think that I'm a person, but like reality, it's a thing, you know? It's some inert structure. It's an insentient structure that's everywhere, and I'm a living person, and I am navigating my way through this inert structure. and reality is the combination of that the individual person navigating through an inert structure and even obviously in materialism they have the idea that being a person is an illusion and that your body is just an inert structure which is you know so complex that it's manifesting these symptoms that we call personality so materialism monism nihilism
34:15all of these things. They are very much against theism and against antithetical to the devotional conception of life. So what is different is this, that the soul is real and the world is real and God is real. This is true. But the world is one manifestation of God himself. It is the Virat Rupa, universal form. And because reality is not a thing, reality is a person. So the speciality of a person is that a person is responsive. You know, if there's a bottle, there you go, there's a bottle there. If I'm in a good mood or a bad mood or whatever mood I'm in, the bottle is a bottle and it makes no difference. The bottle will not respond.
35:25Said, how are you today? There's no response. But a person is responsive. And so Krishna said, he's explained his own nature, how responsive he is.
36:00So on the one hand, though God is an objective fact, but on the other hand, that reality will be experienced differently by every person because God, the objective reality, is personally responding to everyone.
36:19Now because the materialistic person has turned away from God and is indifferent to God, so God presents reality as something which is indifferent to Him. And therefore we think that the world is a cold, indifferent structure, right?
36:43Just like, take an atheist like Richard Dawkins, who wrote The God Delusion. He said the world is just matter according to physical laws, and it's completely pitiless, completely pitiless. It doesn't matter how you suffer anything, the world doesn't care, it has no pity.
37:11And so he's an atheist. So he perceives the world as having no pity. That means no mercy. And so for him, for him, it's true. Of course, it's an illusion. It's an illusion. He is wrong. But that's his experience because he is against God. He has become indifferent to God. So to reciprocate with him, God is presenting a world which is indifferent to him.
37:41Because the atheist is indifferent to God, he experiences a world which is indifferent to him. So if one person will give up their indifference to God and show an interest in trying to please God and also be kind to other living entities, then God himself will reciprocate and show a world which has kindness to you and which is not indifferent to you.
38:14So, because reality is not a thing, but a person, so the very limited categories of subject, what is subjective and what is objective, it does not hold exactly, because yes, there is subjective, but what is objective can be also just for you and not for someone else. So it's still an objective reality, but it's only you as the subject will experience that reality, which is not dependent on your speculation. It's real. It's a mind-independent reality, which is reciprocating with your state.
39:06And so the truth does not fit conveniently into the categories of persons who conceive the world as a thing. So remember this, reality has personality. Reality has personality. This is the difference between atheism and the real theism, bhakti, our bhakti tradition, and even the spirituality, which is impersonal.
39:46So we can say this is the difference between materialism and also spirituality, which is impersonal, and personal spirituality, that for us, reality has personality, and for them, reality also has personality, but they don't know it.
40:04And because they don't want reality to have personality, then the personality of reality acts as if he doesn't have personality. Just like when Sarvabha Bhattacharya being an impersonalist, he was explaining Vedanta Sutra for seven days and nights to Mahaprabhu, Mahaprabhu was just sitting there, expressionless, completely, he was reciprocating, you are saying the supreme truth is impersonal, does not have any responsiveness, so I'll just sit here being unresponsive, reciprocating, but then at the end of his long, long explanation of that the truth is impersonal, he said,
40:55You're not giving any response. Have you understood or not? I cannot tell from your behavior if you understood or not. So then he asked for directly a response from Mahaprabhu and then he reciprocated and said, well, the sutras of Vedanta, they shine, they're self-evident, they shine like the sun. So I can understand the sutras, but I cannot understand your explanation. The explanation is like a dark cloud covering the real light of the sutras.
41:25and then he became upset. So think of it in this way. Now you've made an elementary mistake and this elementary mistake that you've made as we go more deeply into your question is very much related to Vishwambar's question. Because Vishwambar raised this point that a devotee is more in the early stages of their spiritual life. If they hear about Krishna's pastimes, then even let's say the pastime is somewhat familiar.
42:00in form similar to amorous pastimes in this world. Then their mind can become agitated because naturally they'll just project their own worldly experience onto Krishna. And so, frankly, it's better that they don't hear those things at all. It's just better that you don't hear. And actually, our Goswamis and all their literature, mainly, they don't describe really in detail the very, the amorous union of Radha and Krishna. That's not the focus of their writing. For example, let's say for now we've been studying Mukta Charita and it's just Krishna and the gopis teasing each other in a conversation. There's almost like no action going on, you know. One person says this, the other person says that. It's just like argument. But the dhwani, that means in the suggestion, there are many allusions to amorous pastimes like that.
43:10And even those allusions, they're also done in a tasteful way. There's no vulgarity at all.
43:22And so, mainly in the writings of Rupa Goswami, if the devotee is not very advanced, if he reads them, there's nothing to see. There's nothing there. There's not even anything to disturb him because he can't understand what they're talking about. But naturally, if advanced devotees who come together and begin to open out or give some explanation of some of the layers of dhwani, the layers of suggestion, then something becomes opened a little bit. And then a neophyte person, they can be disturbed. It's better that they don't participate in such discussions. And advanced devotees also should be responsible not to go into a very confidential thing in the presence of any neophyte.
44:21So, but this is the point that when a person is conditioned, they always try to measure things in terms of their own experience. So if they hear that Radha Krishna have loving pastimes, they just think of their own gross lust in this world. And so as they go and become Madhyam Adhikari, then when the Kanistha Adhikari becomes a Madhyam Adhikari, he still doesn't have any realization of those types of loving pastimes.
45:00But at least his mind is purified of anarthas enough to understand that there's only a semblance of similarity or the loving pastimes of Radha and Krishna, they're only analogously similar to anything which is experienced in this world. And therefore, when a person becomes madhyam adhikari, they'll not be disturbed, even if they don't have realization, and they will understand to a certain degree what the subject matter is by comparison to its reflection in this world, but without the element of rajas.
45:50In other words, by comparison to the form of this world, but not the substance of this world. So what I'm saying, these exact words are described by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura in Jaiva Dharma, how the Madhyam Adhikari, though he doesn't realize the pastimes, but he can understand something about the form of the pastime by comparison to this world, but not a total comparison. He understands which part is similar and also which part is different as well.
46:24whereas the Kanistha adhikari, due to being under the grip of his own anarthas, he'll just mix everything into a kichri and take the transcendental thing as being just like his own experience. So this was the point that was being raised by Vishwa. And now you actually did this yourself in your question. Your question includes this because you gave the example that my Guru Maharaj, my Gurudev has said, And it's there in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and in our Goswami literatures that the gopīs, when they're in separation from Krishna, then Krishna tells them, actually, you are always with me, and you are meeting with me in your heart, always, and you think that it's a sphūrti.
47:20So now you have taken this example that if the gopis in their mind think I'm meeting with Krishna, but they're not, but somehow or other it's still true because Krishna said it's true, and then you try to apply that to us in this world and say, well, is what you think in your mind, is that true because it's in your mind?
47:48But what's the difference?
47:55If Krishna tells the gopis that if you meet with me in your mind, it's real, and if you are imagining that you're Napoleon Bonaparte, and I say, no, you're not Napoleon Bonaparte, it's not real, why is it not the same? If you think you're Napoleon Bonaparte, why is that not real? Because if the gopis think that they're meeting with Krishna, and Krishna said, you really are meeting, why is it different?
48:51So, come back again to what we discussed. All the questions are related, because the truth is indivisible. Every question is related to every other question.
49:05So, Ruhu is asking the question about citta and the elements, right? So, if you think something in your mind, what is the thing that's actually creating the image? Your mind, what is that mind? Is that mind and the gopi's mind similar in any way?
49:25What's the difference between your mind and the gopi's mind?
49:33You know, they have something which is not, it's being transcendent on substance, which is not... Exactly, exactly, this is the point. That you are a soul and you are spiritual and your soul is covered by material elements, the gross elements of the physical and the subtle elements of the mind. So, whatever your mind thinks of is not absolutely true.
50:03We can say that if you see this bottle and then you close your eyes and you think in your mind that on this āsana there is a bottle, okay, it's relatively true. It's a perception, and your mind is correlating with the external world. So that is called a pramāṇa, or yathārtha-jñāna, factual knowledge, or a valid perception.
50:38If you think there's a bottle here, it's a valid perception. If somehow you're hallucinating and think this bottle is whatever, an apple or something, that would not be a valid perception. So there are valid perceptions that you can have, and then you can deliberate them on them in your mind. But these are only related to the relative world, where everything, all physical things, they're called asat, asat, untrue, because they are temporary.
51:10Because sat, true, means true in the past, the present and the future. So because everything in this world is temporary, so we're to speak of this bottle, or this temple, or the planet earth, or this universe, they're all temporary, they just appear and disappear, in one breath, Mahāviṣṇu just breathes out and breathes in and all the universes disappear, so they're all asat, they don't have permanent existence, so they're called avāstava-vastu, vastu means substance, and the truth is called vāstava-vastu, an abiding substance, a substance which will always exist. But then you have avāstava-vastu, a non-abiding substance, a substance which will, a form which will cease to exist. The substance from which everything is made, the material energy is eternal. Yeah, well, no, prakṛti. Prakṛti is eternal, and the mahat-tattva will be manifest or unmanifest.
52:24even actually prakṛti will be unmanifest eventually so but the forms which come from the the energies themselves that from Māyā. Māyā is eternal and the forms that come from Māyā they're temporary so they're called the avāstava-vastu so the the purpose of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is to establish what is the vāstava-vastu, be abiding substance.
53:30understand or experience vāstava-vastu. So when the gopīs in separation have a sphūrti of Krishna, is it vāstava-vastu or avāstava-vastu? Yes, eternal reality. Krishna is the eternal reality and they're perceiving him. So nothing in your mind, there's nothing that your mind can think of which is vāstava-vastu. Your mind even cannot think of the avāstava-vastu which is more subtle than the mind, such as your buddhi intelligence, your ahaṅkāra, your citta, your prāṇa, even. So what to speak of the vāstava-vastu, how is it, how will it be accessible to your mind? However, the gopīs themselves are themselves a manifestation of Krishna's svarūpa-śakti. They're made of his svarūpa-śakti. So when the svarūpa-śakti has an experience of the svarūpa of Krishna, then this is experience of vāstava-vastu, the abiding substance.
54:47So when gopīs are in this world, if they're with Krishna, they experience him. If they're not with him, they experience a sphūrti. So this sphūrti is a manifestation of svarūpa-śakti. It is Krishna himself. So this is also real. But still, the gopīs distinguish between a vision of Krishna in a sphūrti and Krishna actually coming back to Vṛndāvana. They distinguish between this. They know that's a sphūrti and this is Krishna coming back to Vṛndāvana.
55:22coming back to Vṛndāvana. It's still Krishna, but there's still different experiences of Krishna, because in naravat-līlā, in naravat-līlā, the gopīs think that we're village girls and Krishna's a village boy. So if you have a sphūrti of a village boy, it's not the village boy, right? And so because it's a human-like pastime, and for the gopīs, there's a difference between a sphūrti of Krishna and Krishna's actually coming back to Vṛndāvana.
55:55And if they thought it was the same, it would be aiśvarya-jñāna, because only God is non-different from His sphūrti. So it's like they're having a real experience. It is a real experience, but they can't think that it's a real experience, because if they thought it was a real experience, then Krishna wouldn't be a cowherd boy, he'd be God.
56:23And then the gopīs wouldn't be gopīs, because they would have aiśvarya-jñāna, they'd have knowledge of godhood. And then they'd have to be like Uddhava and Brahmā and Indra and go and live somewhere else. See, when they have this sphūrti, they don't have this sphūrti of Nārāyaṇa, they have this sphūrti of the cowherd boy, or not?
56:44Of course.
56:50Well, that's why they make a difference between the purti and Krishna actually coming.
57:00Krishna says, don't worry, I'm always with you, that's me when you see me in a purti. So if they say, yes, we agree, what does that mean? that means, oh, then you're God. So they have to argue, no, no, it's not you. You're just making excuses to not come back to Vrindavan. Understand? If they'll think that this purti really is Krishna, then there's no gopi bhav, because you've become like the Naviyogendras or Bhishmadev or the four kumaras or something who know that Krishna is God. So the argument is caused by prema itself. It's a prema kalaha. Krishna's saying, no, that's me. I'm meeting with you every day. And the gopi is saying, no, you're not, you're living in Dwarka, why don't you come back, you're just making excuses.
57:55So what Krishna is saying is true from the point of view of Aishwarya, but what the gopis are saying is not true from the point of view of Aishwarya, but Aishwarya does not give you the highest tastes, you have to go beyond Aishwarya Gyan to taste reality, the highest reality is rasa, so to taste the rasa, you have to go beyond the tattwa, if you stay on the level of tattwa, you cannot taste the rasa, rasa. And rasa is the essence of reality. The nectar is the essence of reality, not metaphysical analysis of the tattvas. And anyway, Krishna's really, he's trying to tell them that it's even what your experience when you meet with me is not a sporti. But this is prakatlila and what your experience is not even a sporti. It's your experiencing the aprakatlila. And in the aprakatlila, Krishna never leaves. So when he says, I'm always with you, it's literally true. It's literally absolutely true.
59:09true. And even that is different from the interpretation that in the prakatlila the gopis are having a spurti of Krishna, so they're with him. It's another level, it's another layer of nuance. So this is the message of Bhagavatam. Bhagavatam is so deep. And as long as you are in this state of consciousness where you compare everything to one's own experience, there's no hope of understanding anything.
59:45and even if someone gives up that they can understand something but by hearing the Bhagavatam again and again from Rasik Vaishnavas you go deeper and deeper and deeper it will take a long time to actually touch the message of the true message of Srimad Bhagavatam so just because something is in the gopi's mind and it's true doesn't mean that if something is in anyone else's mind that it's true because that it's a false equivalence it's a false to say that this is true so that is true is to make an equivalence between the gopi's minds which are literally mahabhava-swarupa, become one with the mahabhava, which is Krishna's, the highest manifestation of Krishna's internal potency and the mind of a person in this world which is as dead as a rock and is not, is a avastavastu, it's a temporary manifestation.
1:00:52of Prakriti. Yeah. Okay? Yes. So don't become confused. There is absolute truth. It is not a product of anyone's mind. If anything, we can say it's the other way around. That we are not imagining a God according to our mind, but God imagined us according to his mind.
1:01:22This is in anthropology. Anthropology, most academics today, when they study religion, they study through an anthropological lens, and so if they see anyone believes in God, or God's a person, or there are different incarnations of the different incarnations of God, then they just immediately assume, without flinching, they have no doubt, oh, just see, this is anthropomorphism, anthropomorphism, that these primitive, undeveloped, unsophisticated, jungle tribal people have imagined a god just like themselves.
1:02:16So they've imagined a god who has human characteristics because it's just projection of their own experience, anthropomorphism. But the actual truth, the reality is the theomorphism. Theomorphism is that we did not imagine a God who's like us, but God imagined us who's like Him. And so when Maha Vishnu goes into Yoga Nidra, then the world manifests. It's like God's dream.
1:02:45And the forms of this world are, the human forms are actually God-like because God has two hands and two eyes and two ears and hair. So we have forms like that because, as the Bible says, God created man in his own image.
1:03:10So anthropomorphism is a complete inversion of the truth, that the truth is that man was made in the image of God. We have forms like this because God has an eternal spiritual form like that. So, Srila Baptista Ansu Thakur said that to enter into spiritual life is like a Copernican revolution, just as at one point in history, everyone thought the earth is the center of the universe and the sun and all the planets are rotating around the earth, and then later they decided, no, no, the sun is the center of the universe and the earth and all the planets are going around the sun.
1:04:00so in the same way to enter into spiritual life it's the similar type of it's a Copernican revolution in one's life because we start by thinking I am the center of the universe and everything revolves around me and we have to shift to know Krishna is the center of the universe and myself and everything else revolves around him so it's huge radical because part of thinking the world revolves around me is that every thought and every endeavor that I do is focused on
1:05:12So in the Bhagavatam it is said, oh the words of Srimad Bhagavatam make a revolution in your life, the people in this world are sinful, but their whole conception of reality is already upside down, but it becomes turned the right way up by the power of the message of Srimad Bhagavatam.
