Bhagavad Gita Overview Chapter 16

Hare Krishna! Today we begin the 16th Chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, which is often regarded as one of the most relatable and relevant chapters due to its profound depiction of human psychology and nature. This chapter resonates deeply with what we observe in today’s society.

Before delving into the specifics of this chapter, let’s revisit the context of the Bhagavad Gita. The last section, referred to as the Jnana section, begins with the 13th chapter, where Arjuna raises his questions. Krishna responds by emphasizing the importance of the Gunas (qualities) in the 14th chapter, as they are integral to the Jnana worldview. In the 15th chapter, Krishna elaborates on how He is both the shelter and the ultimate goal of the Jnana perspective. Building on this foundation, the 16th chapter explores human nature and the qualities that influence one’s spiritual progress.

In the 15th chapter, Krishna describes the metaphor of an upside-down tree, representing material existence. The 16th chapter extends this idea by examining the extremes of this metaphorical tree: the divine (godly) qualities at the top and the demoniac (ungodly) qualities at the bottom. Krishna explains that those who understand Him and surrender to Him achieve enlightenment and success in their endeavours. This leads to a question: What makes some people more inclined to surrender? Krishna begins addressing this by elaborating on the qualities and nature that influence such inclinations.

Understanding Anger and Harshness

Most people fear their anger, worrying that it may lead them to do terrible things. However, some individuals use their anger as a tool to intimidate and control others, seeing it as a source of power. Similarly, some take pleasure in harshness—deriving satisfaction from insulting and deriding others, often equating sharp insults with cleverness. Such individuals consider these negative traits to be valuable treasures, or “Sampada.”

The term “Sampada” refers to what one values or treasures. However, there is often a mismatch between what people value and what is genuinely valuable. For example, an alcoholic might value drinking but still recognize the importance of safety and choose not to drink and drive. Krishna highlights that the demoniac Sampada involves valuing qualities that are ultimately detrimental, with little alignment between their values and true virtues.

Divine and Demoniac Natures

Krishna explains that our nature—whether divine or demoniac—is influenced by qualities we are born with, which result from our past lives. However, being born with certain tendencies does not mean we are bound by them. These are merely starting points, and with effort, we can cultivate divine qualities. For instance, all babies cry, but some cry so intensely that it seems like they’ll bring the house down. This intensity may stem from anger carried over from past lives. Yet, these traits can be refined over time.

Krishna emphasizes that divine qualities lead to liberation, while demoniac qualities bind individuals further to material existence. Arjuna, concerned about his own nature, asks Krishna whether his anger in battle signifies a demoniac tendency. Krishna reassures him that his anger is righteous and rooted in the cause of dharma, affirming that Arjuna is of divine nature.

Character Portrayal and Relevance

Krishna’s description of demoniac qualities provides a striking portrayal of such individuals. Often, people discuss others’ characteristics without mentioning names, whether out of politeness, political correctness, or to avoid conflict. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna describes the demoniac nature without naming anyone explicitly. However, verses 13–15 seem to closely mirror Duryodhana’s behavior, making the connection evident to the listener.

Knowledge becomes truly relevant when it connects with our prior understanding or experiences. Similarly, Krishna’s teachings resonate with Arjuna because they align with his knowledge and observations. The growth of knowledge depends on this relationship between new insights and prior understanding.

Now, if there is too much new, then it can be overwhelming. Because what happens? Oh, I have to first understand what is being said over here. I have to understand what is being said over here, and then I have to connect both of them. There’s just so much information that we feel overwhelmed by. But in what we learn, if there is too little new, then what happens? It becomes boring.

Heard this also, and I heard that also, and I heard that also. So if there is a healthy balance, that means there is new knowledge being given, but there is enough connection made, or at least pointing done, towards what we know previously. Then what happens is, it becomes illuminating. Illuminating means, “Oh, yeah!” So, it’s not just that new knowledge gives us some new information, but new knowledge also helps us to see our past experience in a new light. New knowledge illuminating means, in two ways, it gives us new vision or new light. But also, it sees, okay, it’s going to say, it gives us just new information: “Oh, I didn’t know this, I didn’t know this.” But it also gives us a new vision toward our old experience, old information, or old experience, previous experience. “Oh, this was how it was, okay,” and that’s how it becomes illuminated.

So Krishna, when he was talking about the demonic nature, outlines the characteristics, and he starts with the behavioral characteristics, and then he will move from outside towards inside. Because we generally can’t see people’s minds. We can only see their actions. Of course, sometimes when people speak, also their thoughts, their ideas, their desires come out. People can try to conceal what they think.

But if we are going to stay with them for a good amount of time, then it’s difficult. That’s why nowadays, podcast interviews are becoming popular. Because in the past, media interviews could be scripted—three minutes, five minutes, ten minutes—you interview a politician or some leader. They can be given the questions in advance, and they can prepare the answers in advance and come. But if you have a one-hour, two-hour podcast, then it’s going to be difficult, isn’t it? How can somebody maintain a façade for that long? So yeah, therefore, it’s a more authentic picture of who the person is.

So, similarly, we look at people’s behavior, but if you are observing consistent patterns of behavior, we observe people consistently. Then their ideas, their thoughts, their desires filter out through their words, through their actions. So, like that. Now, Krishna describes the characteristics. First, he starts with their behavior. There are many, many interesting verses, but we’ll focus on some of them. First, he says about what is the behavior—that they just don’t have a sense of boundaries. That is the defining characteristic of behavior. Explain what it means: pravritti and nivritti.

Now, pravritti means that which is to be done. Nivritti means that which is not to be done. Krishna says, “These people, no. Vidur—they don’t know.” Now, “they don’t know” means it’s not that no one has told them. It is that they choose not to know. They choose to forget, they choose to neglect, they choose to reject. So, na vidur āsurāh—these are the people who have tamasic traits.

In what sense are there no boundaries for them? Na śaucam—they’re not very clean in their behavior, in their functioning. Na api ācāraḥ—even their overall behavior. When they get angry, their words are harsh. Overall, they don’t know boundaries. Na api ācāraḥ—and then, ca ācāraḥ—and now, satyam—that there is truth, teṣhu idṛśī—it is not present in them. It’s interesting. Krishna is not saying that they are not truthful. He’s much stronger. He’s saying truth doesn’t exist in them. It’s a very strong way of critiquing a person.

Somebody asked, you know, one person gets, “Are you questioning my integrity?” No, I’m just saying that it doesn’t exist. So, na api ācāraḥ, na śaucam. So, the key characteristic is when they say pravṛtti and nivṛtti in behavior is that they have no sense of boundaries.

Now, say the male-female attraction, or sexual attraction, is universal. Now, Rāvaṇa was bad. He’s considered demoniac, not just because he was attracted to females. It was rather that he had no sense of boundaries. He violated Rambha, he tried to violate Devī Tāḍakā, and then he abducted Sītā. So it was not just lust but kāma and krodha.

Remember we discussed what is krodha over here? The anger against boundaries: “Why should there be boundaries? I have a desire. I can fulfill the desire whenever I want, however I want. Who are you to stop me? Who is society or culture or religion to impose any boundaries on me?” So there is no sense of boundaries in the sense that there is no respect for boundaries.

Some people don’t have a sense of boundaries—maybe like a child who may be innocent and go to a neighbor’s house, see some food on the table, and just eat it. It is not their home; the child has no sense, but the child is innocent. The child is ignorant. But here, there is no respect for boundaries. And when I say no respect, what that means is they either forget, neglect, or reject.

Somebody has taught them, but they never care to remember it. We all learn things, but they don’t consider them important, and they forget. Then they neglect. Neglect means that even if they know it, they don’t care for it. And then, even if somebody reminds them about it, they reject it. They reject it.

So, this is where samskāras are important. Samskāras mean impressions that are formed. Samskāras can refer to two different things. Samskāras can refer to impressions, and in this sense, often it is used in a negative sense. We all have samskāras that we deal with. We have impressions within us. So, in this sense of samskāras, we all have samskāras.

We all have impressions, both positive and negative, within us. Positive impressions often come from ceremonies that create healthy and lasting memories. For instance, during a wedding (Vibha Samskar), there are elaborate ceremonies with fire sacrifices, mantras, circumambulation, and vows, all designed to leave a profound impression on the participants.

When Western yoga students visit India, they often express interest in experiencing an Indian wedding, which is widely recognized for its grandeur. On one such occasion, a group of American yoga students attended a wedding where 900 people were present, and the event spanned three days. Reflecting on their experience, they remarked, “After attending a wedding like this, you can never forget that you are married.” This stands in stark contrast to simpler ceremonies, such as a court marriage, which may lack the emotional and cultural depth to make the commitment memorable.

However, in India, weddings can sometimes become ostentatious displays of wealth, driven by ego and competition. Despite this, the ceremonies serve an important purpose: instilling a sense of commitment and boundaries. One of the critical responsibilities of parents, society, and culture is to instill and nurture respect for boundaries as children grow up. Raising a child goes beyond feeding and educating; it involves shaping their values and ensuring they develop a healthy respect for boundaries.

Some individuals may still reject boundaries despite a supportive upbringing, which could stem from their personal choices or even karmic influences from previous lives. Nonetheless, society must aim to create impressions that clearly distinguish between right and wrong. Krishna, in the Bhagavad Gita, highlights this lack of respect for boundaries as a characteristic of demonic nature. He elaborates that their behavior stems from a rejection of truth and boundaries, rooted in atheistic beliefs.

Krishna explains this mentality through phrases such as Asatyam apratishtham te—a belief that this world is unreal, lacks foundation, or is devoid of divine control (Anishvaram). This worldview fosters a disregard for societal norms and boundaries, leading to destructive behavior. For instance, individuals with such beliefs see existence as driven purely by desires (kama), dismissing the need for moral or ethical considerations.

Boundaries are essential for societal functioning. While the West may be criticized for a lack of sexual morality, it often excels in economic trustworthiness. In contrast, corruption is more normalized in the East due to historical poverty, which fosters an opportunistic mindset. However, these generalizations are not absolute; each culture has strengths and weaknesses.

Respect for boundaries, whether in personal, professional, or societal contexts, is crucial for progress. Without it, individuals and societies succumb to chaos, driven by unchecked desires and disregard for order. Krishna’s teachings emphasize that boundaries are not constraints but essential elements for harmonious living.

So, a Satyam: these are three different philosophies. As Satyam is nihilus. Nihilum means that this world itself is not here. There’s no meaning to anything at all. A pratishthaan: that is materialism, which means this world is real. Nihilism means nothing is real. Robot is white, ism night. So materialism means only this world is real. That means the world has no foundation.

So, a Satyam, a pratishthaan: this world is there, but there is no foundation to it. There’s no other reality beyond this. Almost all the major traditions of the world, in the East or the West, had an understanding that this world is just a temporary journey place for us. There’s another world which is more enduring, and that is where we are meant to go. But materialism posits that there’s no foundation beyond this world, and atheism asserts there is no God.

So now what happens? While each of these philosophies is different in its own way, all of them, in one sense, are conducive to the rejection of boundaries. I’m not saying they cause it, but they can conditionally lead to it. Why do they condition you to reject boundaries? Because, if there is no regulating principle, no higher purpose, and no accountability, then if I have power and someone has something I want, I can just take it from them. And who is there to stop it? What right does that person have to stop me? When the idea is that there is nothing higher, if I can rise higher than you, I become the highest. This perspective can lead to a rejection of all boundaries.

So, can atheists be good people? Can materialists be good people? Can nihilists be good people? They all can be good people. But if they are good people, it is not because of their philosophical worldview. It is in spite of it—maybe due to their upbringing or their past samskaras. So, Krishna says that these worldviews, as stated in the next verse, are asuram drishtim mohasritah—a very destructive worldview.

Sex has always been a part of human society, but there is a difference between sex as a part of human culture and the sexualization of culture. Sexualization of culture means that sex permeates every aspect of culture. This can be seen in the media and advertising. But beyond the explicit, there is also an intellectual dimension. From the 1920s onward in America and Europe, there was what was called the sexual revolution.

What is the sexual revolution? It was influenced by a thinker called Sigmund Freud. Have you heard of this name, Sigmund Freud? Some people jokingly say that Freud sounds very similar to fraud. He was a brilliant thinker in his own way, but his ideas were monstrously mistaken. He noticed that, as materialism was spreading, more and more people were mentally disturbed and troubled at the level of the mind. He developed his own theories about why this was happening.

Apparently, in his childhood, Freud had some kind of sexual attraction toward his mother. Of course, because of societal and cultural norms, he couldn’t act on it. He wrote about this to some extent in his books. He generalized this experience, asserting that all boys have sexual attraction toward their mothers, and all girls have sexual attraction toward their fathers. He called this the Oedipus complex (for boys) and something similar for girls. He argued that society represses natural urges, and this repression leads to frustration, which, in turn, causes mental disturbance.

Freud concluded that to be free from mental disturbance, all restraints on natural urges should be removed. From that time onward, even in the West, the idea gained ground that any form of sexual restriction is the root of all problems. Being liberated came to mean having the right to act on one’s sexuality without any restrictions.

In the West, society used to be conservative about interactions between men and women. For example, if we watch Western movies from 100 years ago, the interactions were highly regulated. However, after Freud’s ideas gained influence and the sexual revolution picked up momentum (especially in the 1940s and 1950s), societal attitudes began to shift. Respect for marriage as the foundation for sexual engagement began to erode.

Although extramarital affairs have always existed on the fringes of society, the difference lies in whether they are fringe behaviors or mainstream norms. Today, in places like India, live-in relationships are becoming common. Bollywood movies often portray this and criticize those who oppose it as old-fashioned.

The sexual revolution essentially rejected any form of regulation on sex, which led to a cultural catastrophe. Multiple strands of thought and technological developments came together in the 1950s and 1960s. When Prabhupada went to America during this time, the society there was undergoing upheaval. Three major factors contributed to this:

1. Intellectual: Freud’s ideas led to the notion that all sexual restraint is wrong.
2. Technological: Contraception, particularly the birth control pill, became widely available. This removed the biological restraint of pregnancy, which had previously acted as a deterrent for casual sexual relationships. In the past, an unintended pregnancy would often lead to a “shotgun wedding,” where the woman’s father would demand marriage to take responsibility. But with contraception and abortion becoming easier, these natural restraints were removed.
3. Cultural: The normalization of abortion as a woman’s natural right further eroded societal norms around sexuality and responsibility.

The modern ideology argues that nature is unfair to women because men can engage in sex without accountability, while women face pregnancy as a consequence. This ideology claims that pregnancy is “biological slavery” and abortion is “technological liberation.” Can you imagine the perversity of this mentality? On platforms like Instagram and Facebook, people openly share their abortion stories with pride, as though it is something to celebrate.

So there is, there is, there is, and once the intellectual, there’s a technological, and there’s a cultural shift. Cultural shift means what happened was, what was considered in the past something to be ashamed of, something to be hidden, now it is something to be proud of, something to talk about as a matter of rights. And that’s why, in the West, if anybody criticizes abortion, it’s like, “You know abortion should not be there,” the immediate response is, “How can you hate women like this?” So any statement critical of abortion is seen as trampling on women’s reproductive rights. That’s the term used: reproductive rights.

So this threefold thing has created immense sociological devastation, and because of that, the family structure is, as Prabhupada talks about in the 16th chapter purports, almost an imagination. It is hectic. Marriages don’t last, and children grow up without a proper family, which is a horrendous situation to be in. So, when sex is a natural part of human life, it is a natural part of marriage also, but when sex becomes the purpose of life, then marriage just becomes an unnecessary entanglement. If you can have sex without marriage, then why marry? And then what about children? Why have children at all? Children are just obstacles to enjoyment.

So, it’s a sociological disaster. All three of these come together, leading to a sociological disaster. Krishna says, “Keitaan, drishti, mavish, tarman there, prabhavanti, ugra, karman,” and if somebody accepts this, then what happens? First of all, “mas charan,” they are destroying their soul. In all of this, there is no idea of spirituality or spiritual restraint at all. The soul is lost—leave alone the other world, even this world is gone. People misuse their intelligence for rationalizing their own ideas.

“Prabhavanti, UGR karma,” such people flourish in terrible activities—ugra karma. For instance, there was a Journal of Medical Ethics in which two philosophers published an article arguing that a woman should have the right to abort a child even after it is born. When it was published a few years ago, it created a furor. What kind of monster would even suggest such an idea? A newborn baby, even to the hardest of people, softens their hearts. When people see a baby, they smile, cheer, make faces, and fondle the baby. Babies are so innocent and helpless that they naturally bring out the warm, caregiving protector in people. So, who would think of killing a baby after it’s born?

However, these authors argued that all this outrage is just sentimental. From the perspective of science, they claimed, there is no difference between the being when it is inside the womb and when it is outside. If you can terminate it inside the womb, what is to stop you from terminating it outside? But this is not just sentimentality; there are certain sentiments that actually protect our humanity. Outrage means indignation at something terribly wrong happening. If a small kid is being bullied and someone feels angry seeing that, it shows their humanity.

Unfortunately, once you move toward the idea of “rights alone,” you lose this humanity. While this specific proposal hasn’t been accepted in any country yet, what has been legalized in several states in America is the killing of a baby after it is born if an abortion attempt fails. They call it “failed abortion,” and it’s horrifying. In India, abortion is not as big of a social issue as it is in the West, as people are more concerned about population control. However, abortion is still prevalent. For example, at Bhaktivedanta Hospital in Mumbai, which is a devotee-run hospital, doctors do not perform abortions. They are also forbidden from performing abortions at other hospitals, as that would defeat the purpose. One devotee doctor mentioned that his salary dropped to one-third because he chose not to perform abortions. Can you imagine? Those meant to deliver children are earning more from destroying them.

This leads to sociological devastation. Weapons of mass destruction, like nuclear weapons, are overt, but this is a subtle and insidious destruction. In India, we often only see the glamorized side of it—so much enjoyment available—but we don’t realize the cost. Krishna says, “That which tastes like nectar in the beginning will taste like poison in the end.” These demonic ideas and worldviews have dire consequences. In America, one out of every four children is born into a broken family. Among Black families, it’s one out of two. This doesn’t even include the countless children aborted before they are born.

Of course, there is no easy solution to this. Some countries have tried to make abortion illegal, but that only leads to women attempting unsafe, private abortions, which can harm or kill them. The solution isn’t just legal prohibition but a holistic rethinking of societal values and systems. Demonic ideas are inherently destructive.

Krishna continues in the Bhagavad Gita, saying that demonic people live in “immeasurable anxiety till the moment of death.” Anxiety is a natural part of life because of life’s uncertainties, but there is a difference between circumstantial and existential anxiety. Circumstantial anxiety arises from specific situations, like missing a train. Existential anxiety, however, is a deep-rooted fear about one’s very existence. For example, in some Western countries, it’s easier to get a divorce than to cancel a phone contract. No-fault divorces allow couples to separate without assigning blame. This creates a culture where children grow up in constant insecurity, worrying whether their parents will split up. Children often blame themselves, thinking they caused the separation.

This kind of anxiety eats people up from within, even if they appear functional and attractive externally. One of my American friends told me about a person he was cultivating in Krishna consciousness who sent him a message early in the morning: “Please accept my final obeisances.”

I called him, asked him what happened, and tried to pacify him. For many people, ending their life has almost become a casual decision. Of course, nobody takes it lightly, but the gravity of certain situations overwhelms them. Anxiety levels are incredibly high when something goes wrong. What is the point of living with such stress? This is the essence of “Chinta” (worry). The level of anxiety today is enormous, and there are many causes for this, including economic and societal factors. At a foundational level, life needs a strong sense of purpose and stability, which seems to be lacking.

If our worldview or culture erodes the foundation of our values, it leads to disastrous consequences. Krishna says that excessive “Chinta” and unchecked desires (“Karmapa bhoga parama”) dominate people’s lives. For many, the pursuit of sense pleasures becomes the primary goal. This results in “Asha Pasha”—desires becoming shackles that bind people. They are trapped by hundreds of desires, leading to anger and frustration (“Kama” and “Krodha”). Instead of being devoted to Narayana (God), people become devoted to fulfilling their desires at any cost. If someone obstructs their desires, they harbor anger and resentment toward that person.

To fulfill their desires, people often resort to unethical or immoral means (“Anyain artha sanjayaan”). Krishna highlights how wealth (“artha”) becomes a tool for pleasure, gained through illegal or dishonest means. The demoniac characteristic Krishna describes is not merely having desires but having desires without boundaries. Such desires grow stronger and more consuming, leading to a form of slavery—psychological slavery.

In today’s world, physical slavery is largely condemned, although it tragically still exists in forms like human trafficking and sexual slavery. However, psychological slavery has become widespread. Psychological slavery refers to addiction—be it to objects (like alcohol) or activities (like shopping, gambling, or digital distractions). For instance, people buy unnecessary things just because it’s convenient, especially with online shopping. Similarly, gambling now occurs not just with cards or dice but through sports and even online games. Often, it’s not the money people seek but the thrill.

Desires act like invisible chains, binding people in ways that hinder constructive and meaningful activities. Unlike physical chains that restrict movement, desires act like puppeteer strings, driving people to move erratically in pursuit of fleeting pleasures. When bound by desires, people may appear energetic but are driven by destructive impulses. Krishna uses the term “vimudha” (fool) to describe such people. They are empowered, but this empowerment comes from destructive desires, not constructive energy.

Take the example of drug addiction. Initially, it may begin with the intent to feel good or escape reality. However, as cravings intensify, people start lying, stealing, or even resorting to violence to sustain their addiction. Many criminals didn’t start with criminal tendencies; they fell into crime because their addictions spiraled out of control. Recognizing these traps is vital—not only to protect ourselves but to cultivate gratitude for any protection we already have.

Seriousness in Krishna consciousness can arise in two ways: by appreciating the joy of connection with Krishna and by understanding the dreadful consequences of disconnection. While some people live in “Sattva” (goodness), others are dominated by “Rajas” (passion) or “Tamas” (ignorance). Historically, transitioning from Sattva to Tamas required effort, such as going to a theater for entertainment or finding a source for drugs or alcohol. But in today’s world, technology has blurred these boundaries. Within moments, one can go from reading something valuable online (Sattva) to binge-watching Netflix (Rajas) to viewing harmful content (Tamas).

This ease of degradation is a hallmark of Kali Yuga. In the past, the descent from Sattva to Tamas was gradual, but now it is nearly instantaneous. This is why unchecked desires (“Asha”) and their shackles are extremely dangerous. These psychological traps reflect not just contemporary human behavior but are also highlighted in ancient texts like the Mahabharata. Krishna’s teachings remain profoundly relevant, warning us about the consequences of unrestrained desires and guiding us toward a purposeful and disciplined life.

So, this is what I have attained. And, as the text says, “Imam prabhuh say manor thumb,” meaning, “I have this much, and I will get more.” Like someone sitting on the chariot of their mind, they run here and there, scheming and planning to gain more. This can refer to wealth, property, or prestige. “This much I have got; I will get more. In the future, I will have even more.”

This is a typical example of human greed. While it may not be a good thing, it is widespread and understandable to some extent. Everyone wants more money in life, and most people make plans: “I invested here, I might invest there, I can do this, I can do that.” This is normal, though not necessarily desirable or admirable. It is simply common behavior.

However, the characteristic of the demoniac is different: they have no boundaries for their desires. The text continues: “Asao maya shatrugh,” meaning, “This enemy I have killed,” and, “Hani she chaparaanapi,” meaning, “That one I will kill in the future.” The demoniac says, “I am the controller, I am the enjoyer. I am perfect, I am powerful, I am happy.”

In one sense, the first verse might describe a businessman, a software engineer, or a corporate executive—someone saying, “I have this much money, and I’ll get more.” But the next verse describes an underworld don: “This enemy I have killed, and that enemy I will kill in the future.” The problem with the demoniac is that there are no limits to their desires, and they are willing to do anything to fulfill them.

A good example of this is Duryodhana. Some people claim that Duryodhana was a good person and that Shakuni’s bad influence made him evil. But Duryodhana himself initiated plans to kill Bhima, even without Shakuni’s suggestion. Imagine, Duryodhana—at a young age—organizing an entire feast for Bhima, pretending to want reconciliation, while secretly plotting his murder. Bhima, who had lived in the forest among sages, was strong and virtuous. He had fought dangerous animals, which were threatening but straightforward in their attack. On the other hand, Duryodhana was dangerous and deceptive. He plotted a scheme not just to win the kingdom, but to eliminate his enemies in cold blood.

The demoniac’s lack of boundaries is clear in Duryodhana’s actions. He first tried something wrong, and when it failed, he escalated to something even worse. After failing to kill Bhima, Duryodhana tried to burn the Pandavas alive—not just the brothers, but their mother, Kunti, who had done them no harm. This shows that, even in greed or violence, there are certain limits that even the most ruthless individuals would usually respect.

In the past, wars had certain boundaries. Alexander’s historian, Megasthenes, wrote a book called Indica and observed that what struck him about India was the immense care taken to ensure that civilians were not harmed in war. War was fought with respect, in a designated place and time. For instance, the Kurukshetra war was fought at a specific location, with both sides prepared for battle. While war was brutal and people died, the concept of harming civilians was generally avoided.

Duryodhana’s actions, however, show the rejection of all such boundaries. To plot the death of Kunti, the mother of the Pandavas, was an act of unprecedented cruelty. The demoniac’s defining trait is their utter rejection of boundaries. How far will they go to fulfill their desires?

We all experience anger, lust, greed, jealousy, and other negative emotions. But the key question is, how far do we go? Everyone gets angry. Some may raise their voice but stop short of saying hurtful words. Others may not raise their voice but speak cruel words. Some people might not stop there, but may even resort to physical violence. And then there are those who take it even further, seeking weapons to inflict harm. This is the dangerous escalation that the demoniac undergoes.

Some people, when they get angry, they look for a gun. Others may look for a bomb. Anger is present in both cases, but not all anger is the same. Why? Because the difference lies in how far a person is willing to go, and whether they recognize boundaries or not. The presence of anger itself does not make a person demoniac. Rather, it is anger that rejects boundaries that is what makes it demonic.

What is the key point here? The last verse says, “Ishvara aham, aham bhogi, siddho aham, balwan, suki,” which translates to, “I am the controller, I am the enjoyer, I am perfect, I am powerful, I am happy.” This describes a person who harms others without feeling bad about it. When Duryodhana tried to kill Bhima and failed, or when he attempted to burn the Pandavas and failed, do you think he regretted it? Of course, he did—but not because he felt remorse for his actions. He regretted only that his plans had not succeeded. For him, success meant happiness. His happiness came from seeing how clever and powerful he thought he was. Sukhi—this is the most dangerous mindset. It shows a person who harms others and feels no guilt for it.

Now, where do these boundaries come from? Consider five people who all get angry. Their anger may have different boundaries:

1. One person might just raise their voice loudly.
2. Another might shout and use offensive words.
3. A third person might use physical violence, like hitting someone.
4. A fourth might escalate further, using a weapon like a knife.
5. A fifth person might go even further, committing horrific acts like genocide—using their anger to destroy entire communities.

This is the extreme end, but it illustrates how anger, while present in everyone, varies in its expression. The boundaries of anger depend on the individual. So where do these boundaries come from? Broadly, they come from two sources: intelligence and conscience.

Everybody may do something wrong, but just doing something wrong doesn’t make a person inherently bad. What matters is how they respond after committing the wrong. Do they reform? Do they feel remorse and change their behavior? Intelligence is based on reason and logic, while conscience is based on emotion—the feeling of guilt or regret after doing something bad. For the demoniac, the conscience is deadened. That is why they don’t feel bad about their actions. In fact, they feel good. Their conscience is not just dormant; it is actively distorted. And their intelligence, while not destroyed, is misused. Normally, we should use intelligence to restrain our anger, but the demoniac uses it to direct their anger in a cold and calculated way. This is what makes them dangerous.

For those of us practicing bhakti, when we choose to follow the four regulatory principles, we are voluntarily accepting certain boundaries. We may have desires and cravings, but by choosing these boundaries, we ensure that these dark desires don’t take over and control us. Boundaries are necessary to prevent us from crossing the line and becoming consumed by negative emotions.

Can boundaries be restrictive or arbitrary? Yes, that is possible. That’s why boundaries must come from the shastra—the sacred texts. Krishna will go on to explain this, saying that demoniac people are not always the stereotypical scary, horrible figures. Some of them may appear very attractive, gentle, and nice on the outside. Some villains look like villains, but others look like heroes. The demoniac person may surround themselves with an elite group, desiring to belong to the “elite” crowd. This gives them a sense of superiority, and they may think, “Who is as good as me? I am the greatest.” They may develop a god complex, believing themselves to be God. But even so, they desire power and prestige, and they want to appear good in the eyes of others.

Thus, the demoniac performs acts of charity and service, not for genuine goodness, but for prestige, reputation, and recognition. Krishna describes this in the next verse, where he explains that they perform rituals, but not for spiritual growth. They perform rituals (yajnas) with the intention of gaining fame, name, and recognition. This is the essence of the demoniac’s behavior: performing good deeds for the purpose of gaining prestige and admiration from others, rather than out of a genuine desire for self-improvement or helping others.

The stereotypical image of a demon might be someone who looks very scary or horrible, but some demoniac people may appear very attractive, gentle, and nice. In fact, some villains look like villains, while others may look like heroes. The demoniac people we’re talking about don’t want to appear demonic. They surround themselves with elite people, desiring to belong to the “elite club.” By associating with such people, they believe they are good and great. They think, “Who is as good as me? Who is like me? I am the greatest.” This is what we call a “god complex”—they believe they are God. But now, with power, influence, and followers around them, they crave prestige.

They want to look good in others’ eyes, which leads them to do things like charity or yajnas (ritual sacrifices), not out of genuine goodwill, but to enjoy the reputation of being a good person. Krishna explains this in the next verse: they perform rituals, not for spiritual growth, but for the purpose of gaining fame, name, and recognition.

Krishna further elaborates on how these people are bound to live a hellish life, eventually going to hell because of their actions. In these verses, Krishna doesn’t emphasize that they are not devoted (though this is implicit), but instead focuses on the consequences of their behavior. In the Abrahamic religions, hell is often seen as a punishment for non-belief. However, in the Vedic tradition, hell is not about disbelief in God. It’s about wrong behavior.

Even if someone doesn’t believe in God, if they live in a sattvic (pure) way, they can elevate themselves. But those who live in a rajasic or tamasic (passionate or ignorant) way will face consequences. Hell is not a punishment for thinking the wrong things, but for doing the wrong things. This is one difference between the Abrahamic and Vedic views of hell. Another difference is that, in the Vedic tradition, hell is not eternal. It may last for a long time, but it is not forever. Only Krishna’s ecstatic devotional service is eternal. Everything else is temporary, including hell.

Krishna doesn’t want people to go to hell, and He speaks about it out of parental concern. God doesn’t send people to hell; rather, He accompanies them in their journey, even through hell. The Lord, as Paramatma (the Supreme Soul), is always present with everyone, helping them. People experience the consequences of their actions, but God never abandons them.

Later, Krishna will describe the “three gates to hell”—lust, anger, and greed. These are the three primary obstacles that destroy the soul. Krishna warns that these three should be given up. The term nasha here doesn’t refer to the literal destruction of the soul but to the destruction of the soul’s spiritual inclination. The more someone is dominated by lust, anger, or greed, the less they are able to perceive anything spiritual, and they become detached from their higher nature.

These three forces—lust, anger, and greed—are not only obstacles to spiritual progress but also cause most of the world’s problems at a material level. Violence often arises from anger, corruption from greed, and sexual assaults from lust. These three anarthas (undesirable qualities) are obstacles not just in the spiritual path but also in society. That’s why Krishna urges us to give them up.

Krishna further explains that those who reject the scriptures and the guidance of shastra (sacred knowledge) are bound to suffer. In our Vedic tradition, the word shastra refers not just to scripture but to regulation and control—shasana. Krishna advises that one should follow the scriptures, as they offer a clear understanding of boundaries: what is to be done (karya) and what is not to be done (akarya).

When we understand the boundaries set by shastra, we can make proper choices. Krishna emphasizes that studying scripture is not just about reading stories from texts like the Puranas, Ramayana, or Mahabharata. To make a real change in our lives, we must let shastra guide us in understanding boundaries. While the specific boundaries may differ today, the principles of boundaries remain the same, and these principles must be applied to our present circumstances.

By studying scripture, we gain a deeper understanding of our inner nature and how to protect ourselves from lust, anger, and greed—both within ourselves and in society. The more people regulate these qualities within themselves, the more peace we will have in society. As Prabhupada said, “Everyone in the world wants peace, but there is no use crying for world peace unless there is an awakening of divine consciousness within the individual.” Change must begin from within.

There are many terrible things happening in the world, and sometimes we may feel helpless. However, each of us, by purifying ourselves, disciplining our lower nature, and activating our higher nature, can contribute to the solution. How much we contribute depends on our dedication, Krishna’s empowerment, and the efforts of our communities. But every one of us can be part of the solution. If we work to deactivate our demoniac side and activate our divine side, we can make a meaningful difference in the world. We may not know the exact impact we will have, but we can be certain that by aligning with our divine nature, we will be part of the solution.

We all have certain abilities, but often, we don’t fully realize them. In the future, each of us may find ourselves in particular roles, situations, or societies, and we may play an important part in those places. For example, one of you might become a spiritual teacher, or perhaps a respected member of society. We don’t know what roles Krishna will assign to us in the future. The key point is that, if we focus on bringing out our higher nature right now, Krishna can use us more and more in the future. We don’t know the abilities we possess, the roles we will play, or the empowerment we will receive in the future. However, discovering these three things—our abilities, roles, and empowerment—can be one of the greatest adventures of our lives. How big of a part we will play in solving the world’s problems, and how much good we can do, is something we will uncover. Ultimately, Krishna is calling each of us to set a good example, which means striving to bring out our higher nature. In doing so, each one of us can become part of the solution.

To summarize what we discussed today: First, we covered an overview of Chapter 16. I began by explaining why Krishna speaks about the 16th chapter. In the 15th chapter, Krishna discusses surrender, and in Chapter 16, He focuses on the starting point for surrender, noting that some people possess favorable qualities, while others have unfavorable qualities. These qualities come from our previous lives. We are born with them, but just because we are born with these qualities doesn’t mean we are bound by them. We can change them.

Krishna keeps the description of divine qualities brief because they’ve been covered in previous chapters, and he focuses more on the demoniac qualities in this chapter. Among the demoniac qualities, the first characteristic is the lack of boundaries. These people have no respect for boundaries—they reject and forget regular boundaries. This lack of respect for boundaries often comes from underlying ideologies. We discussed three ideologies that can lead to the destruction of boundaries: nihilism, which believes nothing is meaningful and that the world itself is false; materialism, which holds that the world has no foundation; and atheism, which rejects the existence of a higher power. These ideologies can lead to the belief that there is nothing higher, and thus, no reason to follow any boundaries.

In verses 16.7 and 16.8, we discussed how, when lust becomes the driving force in life, it can lead to utter destruction. This type of behavior causes sociological collapse and chaos. We saw this in the 20th century in the West, and in the 21st century, it is beginning to impact India. There are three factors contributing to this:

1. Intellectual: The ideas of people like Freud, who advocated for sexual liberation, believing that mental problems arise from repressed sexual desires. This led to the rejection of boundaries.
2. Technological: Advances such as birth control pills, which remove natural boundaries by allowing sexual acts to occur without the consequences of pregnancy, and abortion, which removes consequences after the act.
3. Cultural: In the past, abortion and other such acts were considered shameful, but now they are viewed with pride, representing a complete distortion of social values, leading to devastating consequences in society.

We also discussed how, as described in 16.11, there is now existential anxiety—people are anxious not just because of their circumstances, but due to a deeper, more pervasive insecurity. This insecurity has led people to commit suicide over trivial matters or end marriages for minor reasons.

Moreover, there is a form of psychological slavery—addiction—which binds people like a puppeteer’s strings. These strings make people feel immobile, even though they are bound by their desires. This is a deadly situation because as desires become addictive, morals are rejected. People start to believe that they will do anything to fulfill their desires, including unethical actions, as we see with Duryodhana’s character in verses 16.13 to 16.15. His greed leads to murder, and he makes a show of piety to gain the prestige that religious people receive, all for personal gain.

Krishna explains that such people go to hell, but we clarified that in our tradition, hell is not eternal. Hell exists temporarily for those who engage in wrong actions, not because they are non-believers. Even in hell, God is present, guiding the soul.

Lastly, we discussed how, on an individual level, if we accept the boundaries set by shastra, we can cultivate our divine nature. By doing so, our divine qualities will grow, while our demoniac tendencies will diminish. Each of us can do good—how much good we will do is uncertain, but discovering that is part of our life’s greatest adventure. Krishna Consciousness calls each one of us to this adventure. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.

Are there any questions or comments? Yes, please.

Prabhu Ji, we know that Krishna has given us free will, allowing us to fulfill our desires, and He is also the ultimate benefactor, loving and caring for us. But isn’t there a limit to how much free will one can have? Isn’t it that, while a father might allow some wrongdoing, he sets limits to it? If the wrongdoing goes beyond a certain point, it becomes harmful. So why doesn’t Krishna stop evil from going too far? Why does He allow so much evil to exist?

Yes, there are natural limits that Krishna has put in place. For instance, in Kali Yuga, the lifespan of humans is reduced. Imagine if someone like Hitler, Lenin, or Stalin had lived for 10,000 years—just think of the destruction they could have caused. There are limits, such as the finite lifespan of individuals, which naturally checks evil. A person can do right, but not for too long.

In history, it is rare for there to be just one tyrant or one powerful person. There may be one who is more powerful, but there will always be others with some level of power. These people may not always be nobly motivated, but their power will act as a check on the one individual’s power. In this sense, conflict among people, though often destructive, can also minimize the rise of one person to absolute power.

Regarding the question of why so much evil is allowed, we will discuss this more in the ninth chapter, which we will cover in the next session. But briefly, the answer is that everyone has accumulated karma from their past actions, and by that karma, they are granted a certain capacity (or chitras) in this life. What they choose to do with that capacity is up to them. It’s like a son who has proven himself trustworthy in the past, and as a result, the parents entrust him with wealth for business purposes. However, the son may choose to squander that wealth on destructive activities.

Similarly, anyone who gains power in this world has accumulated some good karma from their past, which grants them that power. For example, Hitler had the karma to become a powerful leader, but unfortunately, he chose to misuse that power in a dreadful way. When Hanuman first saw Ravana, he was struck by his immense power. Hanuman’s first thought was, “If only this powerful person had been virtuous, he would have been a protector of the gods.”

The tragedy is that when someone with good karma misuses their power, it leads to great harm. However, if Krishna were to intervene every time someone misuses their karma, it would be as if He were disrupting the natural order of the world. That’s why Krishna comes again and again in the form of avatars. And avatars are not limited to Krishna himself; sometimes He sends His representatives as well. So, instead of waiting for Krishna to act directly, we should focus on what we can do to make our own corner of the world better.

Regarding the question about judgments within the devotee community:

Prabhupada says that the standards for devotees are meant for raising ourselves, not for pushing others down. When we talk about spiritual standards, it should not be in a judgmental way where we look down on others, but rather as a way to assess where we are and where we want to go. The purpose is not to criticize others but to guide ourselves.

In any community, including a spiritual one, there will be people who view us differently. Some may value us, while others might devalue us, and this is part of life. What we need to do is to find like-minded people within the community who understand and support us. There will always be a range of devotees—some who will give us strength and others who will challenge us. Both types of association are necessary for growth.

For spiritual growth, we need both acceptance and expectation. If everyone only accepts us as we are, we might become stagnant. But if everyone is only expecting more from us, it can lead to suffocation. Therefore, we need a balance: some people who accept us as we are and others who challenge us to rise. Both forms of association are essential for spiritual development.

In verse 19 of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna mentions that those who are wicked and mischievous, who are the lowest, will be cast into the ocean. At first glance, it may seem like Krishna is referring to eternal hell. However, when we look at the overall context of the Gita, we can understand this differently. For example, in verses 4.36 and 4.37, Krishna says that no matter how sinful a person might be, if they become situated in knowledge, they can be elevated. If eternal damnation existed, how could someone go to hell forever and then be elevated? Krishna also emphasizes that through bhakti, anyone can be elevated.

So, the reference to being cast into the ocean should be viewed more as an expression of anger or frustration rather than a literal statement. In this chapter, Krishna uses non-literal language in several places. For example, in the story of the son of a merchant, it’s not meant to be taken literally. The soul cannot be destroyed, and Krishna uses figurative language throughout the chapter to convey deeper meanings.

This particular verse is a way of conveying Krishna’s anger at those who persist in evil. It’s akin to a parent saying to a child, “If you do this, there will be no place for you in my house.” The point isn’t a literal eviction but a strong expression meant to guide the child’s actions. Similarly, Krishna’s words here express a sense of concern or anger, rather than an eternal condemnation.

Regarding Arjuna’s Anger:

You mentioned how, after hearing Krishna’s teachings about the three gates to hell—lust, anger, and greed—Arjuna was overcome with anger when his son Abhimanyu was killed. Arjuna’s reaction raises a valid question: how could a person who has received spiritual knowledge still be overcome by anger?

The key is that spirituality is meant to enhance our humanity, not diminish it. Human emotions, like grief and anger, are natural responses. When Arjuna lost his son, he experienced the pain of that loss just like anyone else would. Spirituality should not erase these emotions but guide us in how to deal with them.

If we were to suggest that suffering is always due to past karma, where would we stop? For instance, if a doctor told a patient that their suffering was simply due to past actions, it would be insensitive and unhelpful. Similarly, a mother with a crying newborn would not say, “This is just your past karma.” Spirituality should never lead us to ignore human feelings; it should help us navigate them.

Arjuna did get angry, but his anger wasn’t directed in an adharmic (unrighteous) way. His service to Krishna only increased as a result of this anger. Rather than lashing out at those directly involved in his son’s death, Arjuna focused his anger on the forces of adharma. He understood that the Kauravas, who were aligned with evil, were responsible for the tragic events.

Arjuna’s actions were strategic. He did not act out of uncontrolled rage but with purpose. He wanted to retaliate against those who had been supporting the forces of adharma. The Kauravas suffered a devastating defeat that day—not just in terms of the number of soldiers killed, but also in terms of morale. This defeat was symbolic; it showed the Kauravas’ inability to stop a single warrior from the Pandavas. It wasn’t just a loss—it was a crushing blow to their pride and the morale of their entire army.

So what hope is there for us to win? So it was just that the morale was destroyed after that day. So it was a great victory, actually. So we should not, we should not in any way reject the natural occurrence of human emotions. Human emotions are not to be suppressed. It is that we understand that Krishna is there and the soul is eternal, but still, that person whom we had loved and cared for has gone away. And if, even if, we had loved that person with a part of Krishna, but still, that person is not there with us now, and that is going to create a hole in the heart, so that grief needs to be healed.

In the first 10 of the Bhagavatam, it is said that after the war got over, the Pandavas performed the last rites of all those who had died in the war, and then they grieved the loss. So we should, we should not lament. But grieving is a natural part of healing, and grieving is necessary. It’s just as the body is there, it’s a reality. The mind is also a reality. So they said the body can get wounded. I may understand I’m not the body, but if my hand is fractured, I can’t just go about functioning normally. I have to wait for the hand to heal. Similarly, when we lose a loved one, our mind gets wounded. Now, I’m not the mind, even if I know it, but still, the mind is wounded. It will take some time to heal, and that healing process is what grieving is meant to assist in.

But really, so praji, like you told that it is not necessary to suppress human emotions, but earlier, Krishna told us that we should not fight for revenge. It is natural human instinct to fight for revenge in that case, because they have done something wrong. See, just because something is a natural human emotion does not necessarily make it good. The basis of everything natural is not good. The male-female attraction is natural, isn’t it? It has completely come from nature. It is not only a natural instinct necessary for reproduction, but still, that doesn’t mean every occurrence of that attraction and the emotion therein is good. So just even in the natural, we have to use our intelligence and conscience to discern what is taking us toward, and what is taking us away from Krishna. There has to be a defining criteria: will this emotion uplift me? Will it take me toward dharma? Will it take me towards Krishna, or will it take me away from Krishna?

So, thank you very much.