Gita key verses course 8 – What is happiness? Why is it so elusive? – Gita 2.55

So grateful to be here among all of you today, and I’ll be speaking on the topic of happiness. What is happiness, and why is it so elusive? We discuss this based on verse 255 in the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna is describing the characteristics of one who is enlightened. Prajayata, Kaman sarvan partamano, ganaan atmanyavadmanan. So prajahati says, “Give up the Kaman”—that is, give up desires. Sarvan parthamano, Parham: what kind of desires? Desires that have arisen from the agitation of the mind. Give up all those desires. This itself seems counterintuitive. We normally define happiness as the fulfillment and satisfaction of desires. But the first thing Krishna is saying is the abandonment, the renunciation of desires. Prajati—give them up. And then atmanya evad Mana Bush—when the mind turns inwards and becomes satisfied in the self, that person is actually enlightened. So essentially, Krishna is saying, give up outer pleasures and find happiness within.

So let’s break this down into three broad parts: what happiness is, what happiness is not, and how happiness can be enduring. There are many myths about happiness that control our lives, and these myths often run like program machines, pushing us to pursue certain things we think are enjoyable. That’s why we first discuss what happiness is not. The first thing is that happiness comes from meaningful engagement, not meaningless enjoyment. Normally, we equate happiness with enjoyment—“I’m enjoying, therefore I’m happy.” But more than enjoyment, what we need is meaning. Let me explain this.

Suppose there is a small child, and one child tickles another. Or, if a small child comes to visit a family and gets tickled, what happens? The child laughs. Now, is that laughter happiness? Okay, maybe it is some kind of happiness, but if it were really happiness, then with today’s technology, we could easily make a perpetual tickling machine, and we could keep tickling ourselves for the rest of eternity. Would we be happy if somebody kept tickling us? We would eventually say, “Please stop.” Biologically, we might be laughing, but psychologically, we would want it to stop. So, laughter alone, when it has no meaning, doesn’t bring any lasting happiness. In fact, there’s a prominent Academy Award-winning comedian who committed suicide. I wrote about him in one of my books, in an article titled “After the Laughter.” We laugh in public, but the quality of our life isn’t determined by the jokes we crack.

So, we don’t want simply enjoyment. We want meaningful enjoyment. The same principle applies to humor—most of us like jokes. But if somebody told us, “From tomorrow, you have no financial obligations, no family obligations, no professional obligations. Just sit and watch comedy shows for the rest of your life,” we might enjoy it for half an hour, an hour, or a few hours. But after that, we would want to do something meaningful. We would get bored. So, often we equate happiness with enjoyment, but if that enjoyment is without meaning—just tickling or comedy—it becomes boring over time. The same principle applies to entertainment. External pleasures are like the tickling of the body and mind. They might give some pleasure, but soon, they become boring. Krishna talks about the nature of external pleasure in 18:38 of the Gita, where he says: “At vi chaitanyasa, yogam, parinami, Visha, meva, tatsukam, Raja, Sam smitham.” Here, Krishna is talking about how pleasures derived from the senses and sense objects, while initially enjoyable like nectar, eventually turn into poison. The same thing which is initially enjoyable—after a while, you don’t want it anymore. So, the very thing that seems enjoyable, if it lacks meaning, soon loses its appeal.

Unfortunately, what happens? Happiness is elusive because we seek the initial nectar. The initial nectar goes away, and then we look for some other object where there’s initial nectar, and then that object goes away, and we look for initial nectar somewhere else. That nectar initially allures us, but the nectar soon disappears, and that’s how we keep chasing. We keep chasing. We keep chasing. One of my friends works in the TV industry; they told me that it’s all about TRPs. An interesting thing is that the maximum attention people have when they are watching TV is not when they are watching a program, it is when they are surfing channels. Because while surfing channels, they are hoping that something will be good, maybe the next channel will be good, the next channel will be good, the next channel will be good. But once they start watching a program, okay, some of it might be interesting, some of it might be boring, some of it might be just okay. So the attention goes down.

We all know this, but we just keep going from one object to another, to another, to another, and it’s elusive, because we are looking for the initial nectar, and that nectar ends. So the very thing we think will give us pleasure, after some time, it stops giving us pleasure. There’s some study done that nowadays, every time a new phone gets launched—what’s the latest iPhone? 11? Okay, iPhone 10 has already been replaced by 11. So now, when a new phone is launched, people stampede in stores to get the phone, but some surveys have found that 90% of the people who buy a new version of the phone don’t use any of the new features. Then why get the phone? It’s just glamor. “Oh, I have a new phone!” But after some time, that glamor just goes away. And then when we are attracted to the glamor, okay, the next phone comes out, and again, the glamor pulls us in. So we keep looking for the initial nectar. And there is that nectar, no doubt, but it is very initial.

An American playwright, Oscar Wilde, said that fashion—everybody wants to be fashionable—so he said fashion is a form of ugliness so unbearable that we have to change it every few months. Somebody who wants to be very fashionable, the worst put-down for them is when somebody calls them old-fashioned. The same dress, the same hairstyle, whatever it is—after six months, it just becomes “old-fashioned.” “No, buy something new.” That’s how happiness is elusive, because what we are looking for is enjoyment which, in itself, does not have any meaning, and that enjoyment doesn’t last for long.

Another way of understanding this is, let’s look at it from a diagrammatic point of view. When we have external pleasures, what is happening is that the senses and the sense objects come into contact. For example, our eyes see something enjoyable, or our tongue tastes something delicious. Now, when the contact happens, there is some pleasure. And that’s what we normally with the world tout as enjoyment. Yes, there is some pleasure. However, the problem is that all three—objects, their capacity to give pleasure, and the contact—are temporary.

The objects that give us pleasure, their capacity to give us pleasure, is temporary. The same food that is irresistibly delicious today, after two or three days, starts spoiling, and we can’t even keep it in our presence. The objects themselves are temporary, then their capacity to give pleasure. How long can we? The contact between them is also temporary. If we eat some delicious food, the taste stays on the tongue for some time, and then it goes in. And most importantly, our senses themselves have a finite, limited capacity to enjoy. Quite often, when we seek pleasure, what we do is think, “I don’t have good enough sense objects to enjoy.” “I don’t have attractive enough objects. If I only had a more attractive object, I would be happy.” And people keep searching for more attractive objects.

But even if we had the most attractive objects in the world to enjoy, what limits our enjoyment is not the unavailability of the objects, but the limitedness of our senses themselves. Even if we owned a five-star hotel with the best food, how much can we eat?

I was at a program in a university in Canada, and there was a student who had a poster on his T-shirt that read, “90% of the world’s women are beautiful. The remaining 10% are in my college.” What that meant is that in today’s world, we, through the media, are presented with the most attractive-looking objects from everywhere. And when we get captivated by that kind of sensory stimulation, the sensory stimulation available in the real world always fails in comparison. So in general, we always keep hoping that there’ll be some better enjoyment out there somewhere, but the sense enjoyment, when we seek pleasure through that, is intrinsically a doomed project—not because we don’t get good enough objects, but because our senses themselves have a finite capacity to enjoy.

That’s why Krishna says that it’s not just about making a separate point. Earlier, I said the pleasure stops being pleasure when it becomes boring. But it doesn’t just become boring; it also becomes distressing, because we get hooked to it. Some spiritual teachers ask, “How does it become distressing?” Well, see, everything in this world is short-lived, except the craving.

The craving stays for a long time. Somebody who is alcoholic may drink and drink and drink enough, and then they may throw up and have a hangover and everything. But at that time, they may say, “I’m never going to drink again.” However, maybe just that very evening, they think, “When can I go and have a drink again?” Krishna says that this craving is nitya-varina—it can become like an eternal enemy. It stays on and on and on and on.

So, actually, the search for pleasure is often the cause of the greatest trouble. The search for pleasure is often the cause of the greatest trouble. If you consider addiction, nobody is born smoking a cigarette from their mother’s womb. But what happens? They think, “I’ll just enjoy a little bit.” They enjoy a little bit, but afterward, they become addicted to it. About drinking, it is said that first the drinker takes a drink, then the drink takes a drink, and then the drink takes the drinker. So people get hooked to it. The craving completely binds.

So, this seems like pleasure in the whole world glamorizes it as pleasure, but actually, it is not pleasure. It disappoints and then it torments. So now, what happiness is not? Let’s look at what happiness is. I started by saying that happiness comes not from meaningless enjoyment. Meaningless enjoyment means just some stimuli, something that stimulates our senses or our mind. But happiness comes from meaningful engagement.

If you look at it broadly, we live in a materialistic society that often defines success and happiness in terms of collecting and consuming—just get more and more and more, enjoy more and more. Alcoholism is a widespread problem, and it is a serious issue, but equally widespread and often not talked about is shopaholism. Shopaholism is when people just shop, shop, shop, till they drop. People keep shopping, shopping, shopping. Why? Because just buying gives some thrill, some pleasure. “Oh, I’m getting something new. I’m getting something new.”

So often in today’s world, collecting and consuming are considered to be sources of pleasure. The more toys you have, the more successful you are, the more famous you are. Sometimes, somebody might have a big house, but all that big house provides them is the privilege to have a lot of space in which to feel lonely and unhappy.

Now, there’s nothing against big houses, nothing against wealth, nothing against having possessions. But the problem is not having possessions. The problem is thinking that possessions will bring happiness. It’s how possessions are used that determines our happiness—not just having the possessions. So the world tells us that collecting and consuming is what gives us pleasure, but actually, if you look at the most deeply satisfying moments of our life, they are centered on something else. It’s on connecting and contributing.

When we had some very deep, meaningful, sweet interaction with someone, if you look back at our own lives, even if we went to some place where there was a lot of enjoyment, it was maybe connected with another human being. And it was not just the drinking at the party, but it was how we connected to the other human being. Even in that, that is much more meaningful than the sensual stimulation. So we want to connect with others.

Contributing means we want our existence to count. We want that by our existence, by our living, by our acting, we can do something worthwhile for someone. This is a deep-rooted need within all of us. In fact, for this sake—connecting and contributing—we are often ready to do the opposite of getting sensual stimulation. Some people make sacrifices. Somebody might decide, if there is a big crisis and people need blood, they might just donate their blood. Actually, they’re getting nothing; their body’s blood is being taken away and fully donated, because they feel they’re contributing something.

So it is actually when we connect with other human beings and contribute to others, contributing our existence, our actions, that’s what brings satisfaction. Let’s look at it a little bit more.

We all know the importance of loving and being loved. In fact, when we want to connect with people, physical attraction is obviously a part of it. But after some time, that loses meaning. What we truly desire is a deeper connection. We long to love and be loved. Harvard Medical School conducted a survey of American teenagers and youth, particularly from the 1960s when the hippie culture began. Around that time, there was what is called the sexual revolution. The sexual revolution was the idea that, in the past, there were many rules and regulations that restricted our enjoyment—and not just enjoyment, but they were seen as restrictions to expressing love. The movement advocated for no rules, just free love.

However, the result was surprising. When they studied young people who attended parties and engaged in casual encounters, they found that most of them felt profoundly lonely and guilty. Although their bodies may have been in contact with many others, they realized in their hearts that they were merely using each other to scratch an itch. One person was using the other, and vice versa. This led to a sense of loneliness and guilt. Too much focus on physical sensations diminishes deeper emotional connections, which is why there is so much loneliness in today’s world.

We want to connect, but we also want to contribute. In today’s world, even among youth, there is an increasing inclination toward activism. Activism means wanting to do something tangible, such as joining environmental, social, or cultural movements. The world feels so complex, and we often feel insignificant and lost within it. I was at a temple with a nice devotee community, but most of the kids weren’t attending the temple. Their parents were anxious, so we had a talk. I suggested an idea of activism, and the parents decided to make the entire temple eco-friendly. They invited the kids to take responsibility for this, and the kids formed a committee. Every week, they came to the temple, not just to hear the class or see the deities, but to ensure all the waste was disposed of in an eco-friendly manner. At that age, they wanted to do something, not just sit idly.

There is a zeal in all of us to contribute in some way. To the extent that these two elements—connection and contribution—are present, happiness can be considered multi-layered. While physical sensations are fine, they are peripheral. A deeper happiness comes when we connect and contribute.

So, who do we connect with? We connect with our family members, friends, and people in society. And what do we contribute? We can contribute in various ways. But what will make this happiness enduring? The happiness that comes from connecting and contributing is of a different nature. It may initially feel like poison but ends up being nectar. Connecting with another human being is not always easy. You may hope to meet someone, and the first moment you meet them, you feel a connection. But love at first sight is just the beginning. The real test is whether the connection endures.

Initially, there may be attraction, but for the connection to endure, there must be commitment. Relationships, especially deep and enduring ones, are like planting a tree. At first, you water the tree, and after a long time, the tree will bear fruit and provide shade. So, connecting with another human being at a deep level requires commitment and effort, much like nurturing a tree. Even contributing meaningfully requires that we have something worthwhile to offer.

For instance, if someone wants to contribute by becoming a doctor and serving underprivileged people, they first need to learn to be a doctor. Developing abilities requires dedication and hard work. This happiness, the deeper kind, may feel like poison in the beginning, but once we endure the challenges, we reach the nectar, and it becomes immensely fulfilling.

However, what happens when we compare these two types of happiness—the poison in the beginning, nectar in the end, versus nectar in the beginning, poison in the end? From an external perspective, the latter seems to promise immediate pleasure. The world presents endless objects with their initial nectar-like appeal. We jump from one to the next, distracted by the promise of instant gratification. Those who are not committed to anything may get distracted by anything. Even the thinnest layer of nectar will look attractive, and we get carried away.

If we want to pursue true happiness, we must recognize that we will have to endure the poison. This requires wisdom. If we let ourselves be swayed by the world’s definition of pleasure, we’ll just keep chasing fleeting sources of happiness that soon stop being pleasurable and eventually turn unpleasant. Happiness will elude us, and unhappiness will overwhelm us.

To make happiness enduring, we need a spiritual connection and understanding. Krishna, in the Bhagavad Gita, advises us not to chase after desires for external pleasure. He says, “Give up these desires, for they will end.” But what should we do instead? “Turn inward,” Krishna tells us. The Gita explains that beyond the body and mind, we are essentially spiritual beings. The soul is part of the whole, the all-attractive Supreme Being—Krishna.

The connection between the soul and Krishna is the source of ultimate happiness. When we connect with Krishna, it is a source of supreme joy. This connection, unlike fleeting sensory experiences, is eternal. The connection with Krishna is not physical; it is a connection of the heart and consciousness. When we connect with Krishna, it brings enduring happiness.

Earlier, I mentioned connecting and contributing as the key to meaningful happiness. But if we seek something eternally meaningful, something enduring, we must connect with Krishna. This connection with Krishna is the essence of bhakti. Bhakti Yoga is not just a set of rituals. It’s not just about visiting temples or performing sacred rites. All these practices have a purpose—to connect us with Krishna.

Sometimes people have a negative attitude toward rituals, but when rituals are infused with spirit, they become spiritual. When we engage in these practices with the right emotional disposition, they connect our consciousness with Krishna. To the extent that our consciousness is connected with Krishna, we experience inner serenity, stability, and satisfaction.

Now, we may ask, “How do we live in this world and function, while also connecting inwardly?” Bhakti has both aspects. There is connection internally, and there is contribution externally. Through our devotion to Krishna, we connect with Him, and through our service to the world, we contribute. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna talks about how we can spiritualize our activities in the world, turning every action into an offering of service.

The work that we do can have different motivations. We might work for remuneration to sustain our lives, but that is not the most inspiring motivation. When we perform our work as an offering to Krishna, we find deeper fulfillment. And through this devotion, we gain perfection and satisfaction.

Let me conclude with an example. There were three teachers in a school, and they were asked, “What are you doing?”

The first teacher said, “Can you see I’m trying to hammer some sense into the stupid case?” So the second teacher said, “Okay, I’m earning my living.” The third teacher said, “I am helping create the future of the world by shaping the minds of those who will be the future of the world.” The activity is the same, but the vision is different. And when the vision is different, the motivation level is different, the inspiration level is different.

So if we just look at every activity that we do, there are going to be problems. And no work in the world is easy, but if we have that vision—okay, this is such a disagreeable kind of work, so many problems over there—then not only are we fighting against the world, but we are fighting against our own mind also to get the work done. We’ll be half-hearted, we’ll be lackadaisical, we’ll not be happy. We’ll just do it, but it’ll be a struggle. If we think, “I’m just doing it for earning a living,” then what happens? The work itself is not meaningful. It is only the result of the work that is meaningful. And then the work becomes something we just have to go through so that we can get the result.

But if we can have this devotional vision—of course, there the vision was not exactly devotional, but it’s a bigger picture—and the teacher is thinking, “I’m contributing to the future of the world,” and that brings much greater motivation. So bhakti gives us this vision: that each one of us has certain abilities, we have certain gifts, and each one of us can contribute to the world. The contribution itself is what we have. Some of us have lots of talent. Some of us have small talents, and some of us can make, from an external perspective, a big contribution. Some of us can make a small contribution, but the biggest contribution that we can make is the consciousness we bring to the world.

The consciousness we bring means that if we are constantly irritable, complaining, and annoying, then we just make our hearts darker. We make the world darker around us. Krishna is present within our hearts. He is the supreme light. And when we become connected with Krishna internally, that connection brings His supreme light, that divine light, into our heart and from our heart into the world. Each one of us can make our world a brighter and better place, not just by the work we do, but by the consciousness with which we do the work.

And when we have this presence of Krishna, we are not so dependent or affected by our situations, because our happiness doesn’t depend primarily on the situation. We are connected with Krishna internally, and that brings us inner satisfaction. And then we work externally. When we work in this way, each of us can make worthwhile contributions. From the world’s measuring standpoint, some of us may be able to make huge contributions. Some of us may not be able to make such huge contributions, but each of us can make a positive difference.

Now, how much of a positive difference that will be? Actually, if we look, we all can think of certain things we are doing that are making the quality of our life somewhat worse. And you can think of certain things, and just think for a few minutes—you’re thinking of two or three things: “If I stopped doing this, small things, my life could be better. Two or three things: if I start doing this, my life will become better.”

We all may resolve to do these things, but it’s not easy to act on our resolutions, because we are distracted by pleasure, or we are distracted by trouble. All this nectar is there—why go through this poison? We get distracted. But if we are connected with Krishna internally, then we will be able to have that inner strength. And with that inner strength, each of us can make a better contribution. It may be to our children as parents, it may be in our work environment, it may be as neighbors, it may be as devotees. How much better a contribution can we make? We all don’t know that yet. Discovering that we all can be better human beings and do better things than what we are doing right now—that is what can make our life an adventure.

If we pull our act together, connect with Krishna, and let Krishna empower us, let Krishna’s love flow through us, how much good Krishna can do through us. That is what can make our life the ultimate adventure. So people think of adventure sports and adventure tours. They are all about getting some sensations—jumping out of a parachute, going to a hill station. All that is fine, but it’s superficial. The meaningful adventure in our life is when we connect with Krishna and become channels to contribute on His behalf.

And that, the Bhagavata says, is the art of happiness. Atmanya evadman, the soul connects with Krishna and then contributes in the world in a mode of service to Krishna. That is what will bring us intimate happiness.

I spoke today on this topic of what happiness is and why it is so elusive. So I started by talking broadly. We talked about 255 in the Gita. So I said there are three parts of what happiness is not: happiness is not just meaningless enjoyment, it is meaningful engagement. Meaningless enjoyment means stimulation. If somebody tickles us physically, or somebody tickles us mentally by humor, for some time it’s fine, but afterwards it becomes boring. Why? Because such pleasures are like nectar in the beginning, but poison in the end.

So we chase the nectar, and when the nectar ends, we immediately start taking a second nectar, a third nectar, a fourth nectar, and it just goes on and on. Fashion is a form of ugliness that soon becomes unbearable. And not only does it not only disappoint us, but it’s also distressing. Why? Because the senses and the sense objects are temporary. The senses are temporary, their connection is temporary, but the craving stays on and on. This craving torments us.

So what is happiness then? Happiness is not in two things. I said it is not in the four C’s. Does anyone remember those 4 C’s? Consuming or collecting? It is not in these things, but it is in connecting and contributing. Yes, thank you. Now, we can collect things, but what are we collecting them for? Is it just for consuming, or are we using those things to contribute, to connect?

Then, at a human level also, if we look, the deepest moments—the most fulfilling, most joyful moments—are when we connected with some other human being in a deeper way, and then when we did something which contributed to the welfare of someone else, which made us feel, “This is my existence. It counts.” So that brings a much deeper and enduring level of happiness.

And then lastly, I talked about how this happiness, through connecting and contributing, can be made enduring. That is, we connect not just with each other, but we connect with Krishna. So we are souls, and the soul is eternal. Krishna is eternal, and the connection between the two is established. And that connection can also be eternal, and it is established through devotion.

So we practice bhakti yoga by coming to the temple and doing various rituals. They become spiritual when we do them in the right spirit, and they establish an inner connection. And with that connection, we go out into the world, and according to our particular positions and dispositions, we make contributions. The biggest contribution we can make in the world is the consciousness we bring. If we are satisfied and cheerful, then the light of Krishna can shine through us and make our world a better and brighter place.

And we all can become better human beings and do better things if we connect with Krishna. All those intentions that we have—all those resolutions—we’ll implement them, and how much good we can do. Discovering that can become our life’s most exciting adventure. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna. Are there any questions or comments?

Yes, please. In the beginning, when you started with the words, “We should not…” like, we should give up desires, yeah? And then later, you mentioned that we have to live in this world, so we have to be doing our work. That’s basically my question: the contradiction between the two.

Okay, yeah. So, initially, I said that we have to give up desires. But then I said we have to work in the world, and we have to contribute. See, see what Krishna specifically says over there: prajati ida kaman sarwan partha manukatan. Since those desires which come from the agitation of the mind—the mind is always chasing whatever looks attractive, whatever looks pleasurable—this looks like nice nectar, that’s nice nectar, that’s nice nectar.

So if we keep chasing that which looks like nectar, we will never get much pleasure. Actually, if we keep doing whatever we like, we will end up disliking ourselves.

If somebody just, you know, if they just stay on their phone or the computer, just clicking on any site that comes up, any YouTube video—watch this now—after a few hours, they think, “I wasted so much time,” and they keep doing it day after day after day. Those people who spend hours and days and weeks on video games and internet surfing, we actually look at them and see they have extremely low self-esteem. They are just unhappy people. They’re trying to forget that, so they don’t really like themselves.

So when Krishna is saying “praja, give up those desires,” He’s saying that the desire to look for some quick nectar—that is the desire you give up. But then we work meaningfully. And at the end of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells Arjuna, “Do your work. Nimitta matram bhava—become an instrument in service.” Do your service, make a contribution. That means we should be willing to go through the poison to get to the nectar.

Thank you. Yes, Krishna. One of the impediments to happiness is comparing our contribution with somebody else’s contribution. We think that our contribution is very small and theirs is so big. Therefore, that minimizes our own sense of satisfaction with what we’re doing. How do we overcome that?

When we make a contribution, sometimes we compare our contribution with others’ contributions and feel that our contribution is so small, which causes dissatisfaction. So what should we do about that?

Yes, the thing is, even when we contribute, the absorption is really critical. If somebody is making a contribution, but afterwards, they want glorification for their contribution, then if they get that glorification, they will be happy. If they don’t get that glorification, they will not be very happy.

So, we want to make a contribution, but actually, the essence of the contribution is that it helps us become more absorbed in Krishna. The contribution is not primarily what Krishna needs from us. Krishna wants our consciousness through that contribution.

There is that well-known verse just quoted in the Bhagavad Gita, 11.32 and 11.33, where Krishna says, “Dasmāt tvam pūrvasūrān māyā vaiṭaiḥ, niha nīvṛtaṁ bhavāśa miṣṭyācī”. He is telling Arjuna, “Fight this war. Rise, fight, attain victory. The enemies are already destroyed by my plan. You just fight, and when you have a flourishing kingdom, become an instrument in the fight.”

Now, this verse is actually saying something significantly deeper. As God had said earlier in 2.47, Krishna says, “Don’t be attached to the fruits of the work, Māyā ānī, and then He says, ‘yad karoshi yad ashnasi, yad juhoshi dadaśi yat’“—offer the fruits to Me. So, He says, “Don’t be attached to the fruits, offer the fruits to Me.” But this verse is telling us that the fruits are already with Krishna.

The war, the enemies are already defeated. So actually, Krishna doesn’t want the fruits from us. Krishna wants us through the fruits. It is in trying to offer the fruits to Krishna that we offer ourselves to Krishna. So if we get that priority right, ultimately, whatever service we do, yes, we want the external results to offer to Krishna. But the essential thing that Krishna wants—if Krishna wants, He can just get the results in one moment. We want to build a big temple. We might go and make endeavors to make various arrangements, but Krishna can, in the heart of the other Paramatma, inspire one person, and that person may just do everything. Also, if Krishna wants, He can do that, but He engages us so that we have some service. That’s why, if we focus on the point that the contribution is so that we can become absorbed in Krishna, then we won’t feel so dissatisfied if our contribution is less.

Another thing with respect to contribution is that a bigger contribution also means bigger distraction. Bigger distraction means, in the world, if somebody is making a bigger contribution, they might be doing it selflessly. But the more visible we become in the world, it is just the nature of the world that if we build a mountain, or if we build a mound, we have to dig a hole somewhere. So if somebody is making a big contribution, they are becoming famous in this world. Fame comes with infamy. And that, in one sense, both fame and infamy are big distractions. Fame can distract us: “I’m so great,” and then infamy comes. What happens? Anybody who becomes successful, somebody or the other will find some reason to criticize them, even if they have impeccable character. Still, people will find some reason. It’s just the nature of the world—people can’t tolerate it. Envy comes out, and then it’s very painful. So, bigger contributions don’t come free; they have their own costs. Of course, if Krishna wants us to do a bigger contribution, we’re happy to do it. But the bigger contribution also has a bigger distraction.

That’s why we can say that, at one level, Krishna knows what is the contribution that we can make best. And Krishna gives us that much empowerment. If we become purer, He may give us more empowerment. But becoming purer means focusing on Him rather than the world. So that’s why it’s not so much the quantity of our contribution, but the quality of our consciousness that matters in the realm of service.

There is a story of the monkeys. They’re all carrying giant boulders to help build the bridge for Rama, and there’s a squirrel who was carrying small dust particles, small pebbles. One of the monkeys said, “Hey, get out of the way! You’re coming in our way.” Rama told them, “She is doing her work according to her capacity, her fullest capacity, and you are doing your fullest capacity. I appreciate her, and I appreciate you.” So in the Lord’s eyes, the quantity of our contribution is not as important as the quality of our consciousness.

Thank you, Hare Krishna. Yes, in respect to connection and contribution, when one is in that position, with respect to commitment to connection and contribution, what my observation has been over time is that when devotees often get to the position of connection and contribution, various obstacles come up to test this. Sometimes the obstacles are so mind-blowing and staggering and derailing that we actually get off the path and call it quits. So my question is, how to identify this, how to relate to it, and what to do about it?

Okay, so when we come to the level of making connections or making contributions, various obstacles come, and they can overwhelm us. So what do we do at that time?

We can look at Srila Prabhupada’s example. I don’t think any human being could have faced as many obstacles as Srila Prabhupada did. He faced almost everything that he did—it just didn’t work. He tried starting a business, running a magazine, running an organization, working with his godbrothers—none of them worked. So what did Prabhupada do to move through it all? It was Ganga Vāgti—the Ganga keeps flowing toward the ocean.

Now, sometimes the Ganga might just be a small trickle flowing. Sometimes it’s a huge river. At times, it has to hit against obstacles again and again and again, maybe sneaking a little bit through, or sneaking left or right. But the Ganga keeps moving toward the ocean. So there is a path, and there is a purpose. The Ganga is not attached to this specific path. The purpose is to reach the ocean. If not by this path, then by some other path; if not by that path, some other path.

So, for us, even when we want to make a connection or contribution, we think, “This is the way I want to do it,” and sometimes things just don’t work. Srila Prabhupada was immensely determined, but he was also immensely resourceful. He wasn’t just forceful. “This is what I’m going to do now!” If this doesn’t work, “Let’s try that.” Prabhupada going to America itself was an example of not just his determination but his flexibility, adaptability, and resourcefulness. Even in America, he tried various things. He was in upstate New York initially, talking to more kind of people who other yoga gurus were going to. But then he went to the Bowery in New York City, and that’s where he got the most reciprocation.

So, there has to be that flexibility, that willingness to adapt. “Okay, this connection is not happening in this way. Maybe it will happen in that way.” “This contribution is not happening in this way. It may happen in that way.” This doesn’t mean we become fickle and give up at the first obstacle, but we need to be reasonable. Sometimes we might be inspired to do a particular thing, but maybe the time is not right, the place is not right, or the circumstances are not right. During that time, we might have to shift. So, we could decide on a reasonable amount of time and energy to put in. Suppose we are preaching at a particular point, doing a program at a particular place. We might do that for a few months, three months, six months, one year. But if we don’t get much reciprocation there, we might decide, “Okay, let me try somewhere else.”

So we need flexibility. In principle, a devotee is determined. As Bhakta Sanatan said, “If you are speaking about Krishna, if no one comes, speak to the walls. The walls will hear it. It is glorification of Krishna.” Now, that was in principle. But Prabhupada wasn’t satisfied speaking to the walls in India. He came to America. So when Bhakta Sanatan said, “Speak to the walls,” it means don’t lose heart if your service doesn’t seem to produce the results, or the connection or contribution is not happening. But that doesn’t mean we keep doing the same thing without change. We have to be resourceful.

That’s one point: like the Ganga, we have to be resourceful about moving forward. And the second thing is that when obstacles come, sometimes we may have to streamline.

There may be one activity with which we can very strongly connect with Krishna. We will be doing many things to connect with Krishna, and we may bring many things to contribute as well. But sometimes, we have to streamline and focus on that one activity through which we can connect very well. We might be doing various activities, but if we say we feel very connected by doing worship, or by doing Kirtan, or by studying the Bhagavatam, then that is what we need to focus on the most. That connection will become the source of our nourishment in general.

To conclude this point, in both our spiritual life and our day-to-day life, there are some activities that give us strength, and there are some activities that take away our strength. As Molibro quoted earlier, “Some people bring happiness wherever they go; some people bring happiness whenever they go.” What does that mean? People who bring happiness, we love to be with them. Being with them brings warmth, energy, and strength. But some people, as soon as they come, we start feeling like we can’t breathe properly, and then when they leave, we feel relief.

Now, in all our lives, both kinds of people exist. Some people, just by being with them, give us strength. Some people, being with them, take away our strength. We may not be able to entirely avoid those people if we are obligated or have committed relationships. But we have to make sure that the things that give us strength are not superseded by the things that take away our strength. We need to ensure that we get adequate strength, so we need to streamline our connection and maybe our contribution, so that we have the strength we need.

When we have adequate strength, then we can make whatever contribution we are making, whether it is less or more. So, be resourceful and vigilant. We need to be resourceful to find ways to contribute, and we also need to be vigilant to make sure that we are nourished ourselves. Only then can we go through the obstacles.

Okay, thank you. Yes, this verse talks about happiness through the self, but you’re talking about happiness with Krishna. So, I wasn’t able to understand—can you relate these two?

Okay, yes. So, here, “atman” refers to happiness through the self. But I brought Krishna into the discussion. Actually, the Bhagavad Gita has its own internal flow, and it leads toward a particular conclusion. At the same time, each verse is at a particular point in its flow. Broadly speaking, the flow of the Bhagavad Gita is this: initially, the Gita shifts Arjuna’s vision from the body to the soul. The first six chapters are primarily about how the body and soul interact and how to stay at the spiritual level while functioning in the body. So, the vision is shifted in the first six chapters from the body to the soul. There are three elements in existence: Jeev, Jagat, and Jagdish. Jeev is the soul, Jagat is the universe (the world), and Jagdish is the Supreme Lord.

In the first six chapters, Krishna shifts the vision from the body to the soul. Then, from the seventh chapter onward, Krishna shifts the vision from the soul to the whole, to Himself, to Jagdish. This is where Krishna introduces bhakti and talks about Himself and His glories—how He is the supremely attractive object and eminently worthy of our devotion. After that, in the last few chapters, Krishna shifts focus to the Jagat and how, with this spiritual knowledge, we should look at and function in the world. So, the Gita has its own thought flow.

What we did was take one verse, but we didn’t focus only on that verse. We used that verse as a launching pad to give the overall message of the Gita. This is also what Srila Prabhupada does. He might take one purport from the second chapter, but he explains it not just in that particular context, but in the context of the whole message of the Gita.

For example, in the second chapter, Krishna talks about Himself. In 2.61, He says, “Control the mind,” and in 2.61, 3.30, and 4.35, Krishna talks about focusing the consciousness on Him. In the second chapter, Krishna is primarily teaching mind control and sense control. But He also gives a hint that He is not just the teacher of mind control—He is also the object of control. The mind controls the mind and what you focus on. This becomes clearer later.

So, here in the first few chapters, verses 2.61, 3.30, and 4.35 give glimpses. But in the middle chapters, it becomes much more explicit. What I have explained is in terms of the entire philosophy of the Gita, and that is what we’ve used as a reference point to explain this verse.

Thank you. Yes, in this day and age, technology is the main thing. Back in the old days, we used to engage our kids in various activities, but now, a lot of the activities involve giving them a phone or some other technological device. And if you see what’s on some of these devices—not all of it is educational or positive—there’s a lot that is highly addictive, particularly to their minds. Then, they have to go out and make sense of the natural world, which is becoming increasingly lost. We seem to live in a screen-dominated world, and outside that screen, the real world is fading away. What is our responsibility to our kids in this environment? Technology is very addictive.

Yes, in the past, we could read books to our kids and connect with them, but now technology often consumes them. It can be quite addictive, and they get disconnected from the real issues of the world. Yes, at one level, spirituality transcends culture. At another level, spirituality permeates culture. Transcendence means putting aside the existing culture and focusing on our activities. For example, what we’re doing now is similar to what has been done in the bhakti tradition for a long time—we come together to discuss Krishna, the Supreme Lord, and glorify Him. So bhakti has activities that transcend culture. However, bhakti is also inclusive and can permeate culture.

I have a seminar on the internet and the three modes of material nature. Sometimes, we might think that the internet is all just distraction, but it’s not that simple. On the internet, there is also a culture of sharing and giving. People share knowledge and expertise. For example, if your computer isn’t working, you can go to a forum like the Apple or Windows forum, ask questions, and get answers. Wikipedia is another example, where knowledge is being widely distributed. So, in some ways, technology has become the language of today’s world. Within technology, just like in normal society, there are people in goodness, passion, and ignorance. Similarly, among netizens—the people who live in the digital world—there are those in goodness, passion, and ignorance.

In that sense, the digital world is more or less a reflection of the physical world, as it is human beings who have created it. The big difference, however, between the digital world and the physical world is that we can go from goodness to ignorance by just clicking one button. For example, if someone is in a library or a temple and they want to go to a bar or a gambling site, they would physically have to travel, which requires time, effort, and may even involve some public disapproval. But on the internet, you can go from a state of goodness to a state of ignorance in one moment, with just a click.

So now, what do we do? Especially considering that many of us are from multiple generations. Some of us have lived without the internet and feel that it’s not necessary—just practice bhakti. But others, who have grown up with the internet and social media, can’t imagine life without it. I was at an interfaith conference in Washington, and one of the Christian pastors mentioned that in the age group of 15 to 40, 40% of people who came to Christianity did so through online outreach—nearly half. So, people are seeking spirituality online as well. We can’t demonize the internet, but at the same time, we can’t be overly utilitarian about it either. There are dangers in it.

So essentially, it’s about what someone is doing on the internet. If we are connecting meaningfully and contributing meaningfully, that can also be a valid way of connecting. It may not be a physical connection, but it is still worthwhile. For example, if someone spends time surfing 100 sites just to stimulate themselves, that’s different from someone visiting a site to learn something, form meaningful connections, and contribute. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. That’s how people operate today, so bhakti can permeate the existing culture as well.

However, one issue is that it’s easy to shift from goodness to ignorance with just one click. The second problem is that digital connections can be good when no physical connection is available, but when digital connections are used to avoid physical ones, we lose the depth of contact that we need. I once saw a cartoon where a man said, “Yesterday evening, my Wi-Fi went down, so I spent some time with my family. They seem like nice people.”

There has to be some time when we connect with people physically as well. Sometimes, this has to start with the adults. For instance, at family meals, the adults should start by putting their phones away, saying to their kids, “Don’t keep your phone with you.” Actions speak louder than words. If kids feel that their parents are listening to them and not just judging them, they’ll be more open. As soon as we feel judged, we close the doors. Many times, people seek the digital world because they feel they can’t connect in the physical world. So we can’t just demonize technology. We also need to provide opportunities for physical connection and contribution.

If we do this, there can be a balanced way of operating. It’s not easy, but eventually, people get bored with the distraction. Initially, when someone gets a phone or discovers a new app or game, they’re infatuated, but over time, they just get bored. So, if meaningful connection and contribution are done both digitally and physically, then it won’t be so distracting.

Thank you very much.