Gita Daily

The difference between cleverness and wisdom When we interact with others, we often like to be perceived as lively and witty. Accordingly, we may aspire to come up with clever comments and comebacks during conversations. This aspiration can be healthy if it prompts us to become more attentive to people’s words and moods so that we can better respond to them. But it can be unhealthy if it propels us to stand out in a crowd by speaking sarcastically, and by seeking to excel in such sarcastic speech.  We may even congratulate ourselves for our cleverness whenever we are able to come up with a snarky comment. And it does require intellectual and verbal dexterity to craft biting remarks on the spur of the moment. Such sarcasm can be constructive in those specific contexts where someone is putting on a lot of airs and we put them in their place. However, when our sarcasm evokes laughs and claps, we may get hooked to that applause — and we may start trying to be sarcastic constantly, including at times when it is uncalled for or is even inappropriate or downright offensive.  Sarcastic remarks not only deflate people’s egos but also deflate their spirits. If they are timid, they may become discouraged and depressed. If they are rough, they may hit back at us through words or even actions, thereby creating and escalating unnecessary conflicts. Therefore, if we believe that our sarcasm is a sign of our cleverness, we are being self-destructively short-sighted. We need to expand our understanding of what will make us good communicators: not just cleverness, but also wisdom. In this context, wisdom refers to the foresight to see how our words will affect others and to forgo the pleasure of short-lived applause for the purpose of a long-term good relationship. Essentially, wisdom means coming up with the will to refrain from speaking sarcastic words even when we are smart enough to come up with them in no time. Put another way, our will for verbal restraint needs to rise up as fast, if not faster than, our words of sarcasm. Pertinently, the Bhagavad-gita (17.15) guides us toward such wisdom when it recommends that we refrain from speaking words that are agitating and instead seek to speak words that are pleasing.  Summary: Cleverness is coming up with the words to say something sarcastic; wisdom is coming up with the will to not say those words. Think it over:  When can the aspiration to be witty conversationalists be healthy and when unhealthy? When is sarcasm constructive? How does it tend to be destructive? How can we expand our understanding of what makes us good communicators?  17.15: Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature. Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/the-difference-between-cleverness From: https://gitadaily.com/the-difference-between-cleverness-and-wisdom/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Effective education: what to NOT focus on Education requires a dynamic awareness of the level of those being educated. Suppose a math teacher with a triple PhD in calculus is teaching children at a primary school level. That teacher may delight in doctorate level math and may delight in seeing their students get to that level, but they need to explain simple arithmetic suitable for the primary level, thereby equipping and encouraging students to advance toward the next grade. If instead they teach advanced math concepts that are beyond the cognitive need and capacity of the students, they will end up intimidating and discouraging their students, who may even give up on studying math altogether. We need to cultivate a similar dynamic awareness when we share spiritual truths with others. Even if we are at an elevated level in our philosophical conceptions and ritual practices, our audience may be ready for nothing more than just baby steps toward exploring spiritual consciousness. If that is the case — and that is likely to often be the case, given that most people nowadays grow up in a largely nonspiritual environment — we need to speak spirituality at a level that will encourage them to take incremental steps forward. If we delve into abstruse philosophical or ritual technicalities, especially in terms of aggressively emphasizing differences between different paths, that kind of knowledge may intimidate, alienate, or discourage seekers. Such an emphasis may hinder their spiritual growth or even impel them to give up spiritual exploration entirely. Pertinently, the Bhagavad-gita (03.26) alerts us not to disturb the minds of people who are at a preliminary spiritual level due to their physical attachments and metaphysical unawareness. Rather than berating them for where they are, we need to expertly engage them and guide them towards the next level in their spiritual progression. This is the mood of compassion, this is the key to responsible education, and this is the Gita’s recommendation for effective outreach. Summary: For education to be helpful, focus on where people are and what the next step for them is, not where we are or where we want them to be. Think it over:  For education to be helpful, what awareness do educators need to have? Why? What kind of emphasis in spiritual outreach may harm people’s spiritual exploration? Why? For effective education, what should we focus on and what should we not focus on?  03.26: So as not to disrupt the minds of ignorant men attached to the fruitive results of prescribed duties, a learned person should not induce them to stop work. Rather, by working in the spirit of devotion, he should engage them in all sorts of activities [for the gradual development of Krishna consciousness]. Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/effective-education-what-to-not-focus From: https://gitadaily.com/effective-education-what-to-not-focus-on/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Taking things positively vs taking things nonchalantly Suppose something bad happens, be it due to our own mistakes or due to factors beyond our control, or due to a combination of both, as is most common. Once that event has happened, all that is in our power is how we respond. The quality of our response will determine our future and the overall nature of our responses may even determine our destiny. Amid such reversals, we often categorize responses as healthy or unhealthy based on whether they are positive or negative. It is helpful to look at things positively, seeking opportunities in adversity, and patiently waiting to see how something good can emerge from the current difficulties. Such optimism is far better than pessimism whereby we catastrophize the situation and believe it’s the beginning of the end: we are about to inevitably spiral downward to dysfunctionality, disgrace, and destruction. Pertinently, this despairing dystopian attitude is discouraged in the Bhagavad-gita (18.35), where it’s considered a perverse determination defined by the dark mode of ignorance.  Simultaneously,  having a positive attitude alone doesn’t necessarily make our response healthy. In fact, the positive versus negative is not the only binary through which we can process our responses — another vital binary could be casual versus serious. It’s unhealthy if in the name of being positive, we take the whole problem lightly, living in denial of its magnitude and not contemplating or preparing for the possibility of its future escalation. Taking things nonchalantly can be self-destructive; it is a sign of not optimism, but stupidism. The opposite of foolishness is intelligence, which essentially means seeing things in their proper perspective. By applying our intelligence, we understand which reversals are serious and thereafter approach grave situations with the appropriate gravitas. The same Gita (18.30) indicates that a robust intelligence helps us discern the consequences of our actions, thereby prompting us to moderate our present actions so as to make things better — or at least not make them worse. A nonchalant attitude makes us naively optimistic, wherein we are merely waiting for a brighter future without working for it. Worse still, nonchalance may make us destructively optimistic, wherein our very positivity propels us toward the negativity of self-destruction. In contrast, when we take a situation seriously, we engage in sober soul-searching, evaluate what we did wrong and learn how we can prevent similar mistakes in the future. Thus, we grow toward developing both stronger character and greater competence.  Summary: When things go wrong, see our responses not just through the binary of positive versus negative but also through the binary of casual versus serious; to grow through reversals, take things not just positively but also seriously.   Think it over: In facing reversals, what binary do we frequently use for evaluating our responses? How is that binary helpful? When can using that binary alone be harmful?  How can we ensure that we grow through reversals? 18.30: O son of Prutha, that understanding by which one knows what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, what is to be feared and what is not to be feared, what is binding and what is liberating, is in the mode of goodness. From: https://gitadaily.com/taking-things-positively-vs-taking-things-nonchalantly/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Taking responsibility for the effects of our speech When a doctor gives a medicine to a patient, the doctor’s intent may be good: to help the patient heal. Though the doctor may carefully prescribe the right medicine, it may sometimes have an unexpected side effect. Sometimes, that side effect may be so severe as to overshadow the medicine’s intended good effect. When that happens, the doctor may not be legally culpable, especially if the side effect was not known before. If the side effect was known and the doctor didn’t take it into account, then the doctor could be even legally responsible. Either way, a dedicated doctor would still take moral responsibility and try to help the patient heal.  The same principle holds true when we strive to communicate spiritual wisdom, which is like a medicine meant to cure people of their misconceptions. Sometimes we may speak a particular spiritual truth with the best intention, yet it may trigger excessive agitation among the audience. And if this agitation overshadows the illumination that the speech was supposed to bring, then a dedicated speaker will naturally feel at least morally responsible. Given the audience’s cultural, social or educational background, if the speaker could have inferred that the particular point is likely to provoke them, then the speaker’s responsibility becomes even more. Either way, when a speech affects the audience negatively, a responsible speaker will not seek justification by claiming purity of intent or correctness of content, but will do the necessary refinement to illuminate and elevate the audience.  It is toward such an ethos of holistic responsibility in speaking that the Bhagavad-gita (17.15) calls us when it states that we should not just speak the truth, but also speak it in a way that benefits the audience, while simultaneously at least not agitating them inordinately and at best pleasing them. Summary: Just as a doctor takes responsibility for the side effects caused by a medicine, even if it was the right medicine prescribed with the right intent, a dedicated speaker takes responsibility for the negative impact of their speech, even if that speech was delivered with the right intent and had the right content.  Think it over:  On seeing the side effects of a prescribed medicine, how would a dedicated doctor respond?  How does the Gita encourage an ethos of holistic responsibility in our speaking?   In what areas do you need to take great responsibility for your speech? 17.15: Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature. From: https://gitadaily.com/taking-responsibility-for-the-effects-of-our-speech/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Why sensitivity in speech is especially needed in the internet age The Bhagavad-gita (17.15) urges us to speak the truth sensitively — that is, in a manner which is non-agitating at the very least and pleasing at best so that the communication benefits its hearers. While such sensitivity in speech has been required throughout the ages, it has become all the more essential in today’s internet age. Why more essential? Due to three reasons: speed, fragmentation and longevity.   Speed: The internet has brought unprecedented speed to message transmission: a point spoken at one place can reach people all over the world within moments. In the past, a debatable point would have triggered only a local controversy that might gradually spread at the pace of snail mail. Nowadays, that same point can escalate into a global controversy within hours, maybe even minutes. Fragmentation. Any communication is susceptible to being transmitted fragmentally, as when specific points from a talk are quoted out of context. In the age of the internet, fragmented communication has become much easier; anyone can share a screengrab of a part of a talk. And sharing such fragments is alluring for all those seeking online viewers: shorter fragments are more likely to be watched and thereby more likely to become viral. While some people may unintentionally share a point without its context, others may do so intentionally to entrap speakers in controversies that can jeopardize or even paralyze their speaking careers. Longevity: Unlike in the past, where speakers could revise their speeches before the recording was made public, the internet has brought longevity to even the rawest forms of communication. Given that much content is streamed live nowadays, that content immediately gets stored on the net. Even if the content maker decides to remove a controversial point from their content, someone may already have downloaded that content and republished it elsewhere. The capacity for deleting irrecoverably anything that has made its way onto the internet is vanishingly low. What goes on the internet once stays there for a remarkably long time, ever-available to anyone who searches shrewdly enough.  When we thus contemplate the hazards associated with communication in the internet age, we can take responsibility to infuse greater sensitivity into our speech. Summary: The internet age has brought far greater speed to communication, made speech more vulnerable to fragmented transmission and imparted to online posts an almost unerasable longevity — therefore, we need to be especially sensitive in our speech.  Think it over:  Why does communication in the internet age require heightened sensitivity?  Can you recollect any incident when you personally experienced the hazards of online communication? Which of these hazards impels you the most to cultivate greater sensitivity in your own speech? Why?  17.15: Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature. From: https://gitadaily.com/why-sensitivity-in-speech-is-especially-needed-in-the-internet-age/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/why-sensitivity-in-speech-is-especially To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Sensitivity in communicating superiority Whenever we share a spiritual message with others, we may naturally feel inspired to emphasize the things that inspire us the most. Such an emphasis can be productive if it brings authenticity to our speaking, which happens especially if we have personally benefited from applying those principles and have undergone a positive transformation that others can see. However, that same emphasis can also be counterproductive if it makes us seem narrow-minded and exclusivist, which happens when we start stressing how the teachings and teachers of our path are superior to those of other paths. Will this perception of sectarianism arise even if we try to use objective criteria, such as appropriate scriptural quotes or sound logical points to convey the superiority of our teachers? Yes, even then because most people’s spiritual commitments are not based solely or even largely on such objective criteria. Their commitments arise from their own spiritual experiences, which are deeply subjective and can’t always be countered by any objective criteria. That is why it’s essential to consider the potential consequences of emphasizing in public discourse the superiority of one’s teachers. If every communicator of a tradition’s wisdom constantly emphasizes the specific ways in which their tradition is superior, it can lead to not just controversy, but even animosity. Worse still, some overzealous followers of that tradition may use or abuse such an emphasis of their teachers to become fanatical in their interactions with nonbelievers. When exclusivism in thought degenerates into extremism in action, the results can be catastrophic, given that we already live in an increasingly polarized world with ever-easier access to ever-more destructive weapons.  To avoid such escalation, we need to recognize that not all the truths we cherish are appropriate to be communicated in all forums. Pertinently, the Bhagavad-gita (17.15) doesn’t reduce its guidelines for effective speaking to a mere one-point dictum: speak the truth. Far from it, it urges us to speak the truth in a way that is non-agitating at least and pleasing at best so that the result is beneficial for the audience. Echoing and elaborating this theme, the philosopher-saint Bhaktivinoda Thakura writes: ‘But it is not proper to constantly propagate the controversial superiority of the teachers of one’s own country over those of another country although one may, nay one should, cherish such a belief in order to acquire steadiness in a faith of your own. But no good can be affected to the world by such quarrels.’ (Sri-Caitanya-Siksamritam, page 7) Summary:  To communicate spiritual wisdom effectively, emphasize not how teachers of our tradition are superior to those of other traditions; emphasize how the tradition’s teachings can empower everyone to change for the better.  Think it over:  While communicating spiritual wisdom, when can emphasizing the things that inspire us be productive? And when counterproductive?  Amid such criteria, why may objective criteria not always be persuasive?  How is the Gita’s guideline on effective speech holistic?  17.15: Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature. From: https://gitadaily.com/sensitivity-in-communicating-superiority/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/sensitivity-in-communicating-superiority To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Sensitivity in communicating superiority Whenever we share a spiritual message with others, we may naturally feel inspired to emphasize the things that inspire us the most. Such an emphasis can be productive if it brings authenticity to our speaking, which happens especially if we have personally benefited from applying those principles and have undergone a positive transformation that others can see. However, that same emphasis can also be counterproductive if it makes us seem narrow-minded and exclusivist, which happens when we start stressing how the teachings and teachers of our path are superior to those of other paths. Will this perception of sectarianism arise even if we try to use objective criteria, such as appropriate scriptural quotes or sound logical points to convey the superiority of our teachers? Yes, even then because most people’s spiritual commitments are not based solely or even largely on such objective criteria. Their commitments arise from their own spiritual experiences, which are deeply subjective and can’t always be countered by any objective criteria. That is why it’s essential to consider the potential consequences of emphasizing in public discourse the superiority of one’s teachers. If every communicator of a tradition’s wisdom constantly emphasizes the specific ways in which their tradition is superior, it can lead to not just controversy, but even animosity. Worse still, some overzealous followers of that tradition may use or abuse such an emphasis of their teachers to become fanatical in their interactions with nonbelievers. When exclusivism in thought degenerates into extremism in action, the results can be catastrophic, given that we already live in an increasingly polarized world with ever-easier access to ever-more destructive weapons.  To avoid such escalation, we need to recognize that not all the truths we cherish are appropriate to be communicated in all forums. Pertinently, the Bhagavad-gita (17.15) doesn’t reduce its guidelines for effective speaking to a mere one-point dictum: speak the truth. Far from it, it urges us to speak the truth in a way that is non-agitating at least and pleasing at best so that the result is beneficial for the audience. Echoing and elaborating this theme, the philosopher-saint Bhaktivinoda Thakura writes: ‘But it is not proper to constantly propagate the controversial superiority of the teachers of one’s own country over those of another country although one may, nay one should, cherish such a belief in order to acquire steadiness in a faith of your own. But no good can be affected to the world by such quarrels.’ (Sri-Caitanya-Siksamritam, page 7) Summary:  To communicate spiritual wisdom effectively, emphasize not how teachers of our tradition are superior to those of other traditions; emphasize how the tradition’s teachings can empower everyone to change for the better.  Think it over:  While communicating spiritual wisdom, when can emphasizing the things that inspire us be productive? And when counterproductive?  Amid such criteria, why may objective criteria not always be persuasive?  How is the Gita’s guideline on effective speech holistic?  17.15: Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature. From: https://gitadaily.com/sensitivity-in-communicating-superiority/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/sensitivity-in-communicating-superiority To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

How humility empowers amid difficulties Amid difficulties, our mind tends to propel us between extremes, akin to the extremes of a pendulum. For example, when we are faced with a situation in which we don’t know what to do, the mind may make us oscillate between flawlessness and worthlessness.  Initially, it may demand that we be perfect and come up with an absolutely flawless understanding or solution. Such a demand is veritably impossible to meet, for we are finite and fallible beings. If somehow we make ourselves believe that we have become perfect, then that makes us foolishly inflexible. And we end up racing down the path of self-destruction paved by our own adamant and arrogant certainty of the perfection of our solutions or conceptions. Over time, when we repeatedly confront the sobering reality that we are not perfect, our mind may propel us to the other extreme of the pendulum. It makes us believe that we are good-for-nothing and that we will neither be able to understand anything properly in the complicated world, nor be able to do anything right in life’s complex dilemmas. Such a conception can be inordinately disempowering, even utterly paralyzing.  Humility enables us to find a mean between these two extremes: total omniscience and omnipotence on one hand, and utter ignorance and incompetence on the other hand. How can we progress toward that mean? By encouraging ourselves forward with the confidence that we can always seek to be just a little less wrong. We can seek a little better understanding of the situation and strive for some small course correction in our actions. Such an approach is grounded in reality; despite the fact that we have never been perfect in our life, we have still gotten through many difficult situations and have done some worthwhile things.  If we seek to adopt such a humble approach toward life, Gita wisdom aids us by providing several pertinent insights. It reminds us that we are all parts of a divine reality that is far bigger than ourselves (15.07); and that reality is guiding us through our troubled wanderings in this world (18.61). With an attitude of service and in the mood of devotional contribution, if we seek not to become perfect but to become a little more wise or a little less wrong, then we will be guided to a better understanding and a better choice, as the Bhagavad-gita (10.10) assures. Summary: Humility opens for us a third way between being perfect and being worthless: we can always progress toward becoming a little less wrong.  Think it over: When faced with a difficult situation, how does the mind make an unrealistic demand from us?  How does the mind disempower us by going to the other extreme?   How can we find a mean between these two extremes? 10.10: To those who are constantly devoted to serving Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come to Me. From: https://gitadaily.com/how-humility-empowers-amid-difficulties/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/how-humility-empowers-amid-difficulties

Why measurement matters for improvement When we seek to improve ourselves by developing virtues such as self-control, politeness, or kindness, we often make resolutions that don’t sufficiently translate into transformative actions. We may attribute our failure to our weak willpower, but the problem may lie elsewhere: say, in low clarity about progress. This is especially true when we are seeking improvement in areas that don’t lend themselves readily to measurement. For example, if we decide to control our anger, we don’t have an anger meter that can easily show us how much we succeeded or failed. And when something is not measured, we tend to live in the domain of guesses or, at best, guesstimates — wherein we may think we are improving when we are actually stagnating or even regressing; or vice versa. That’s why anything we seek to improve needs to be measured, at least to the degree it can be measured. Significantly, the Bhagavad-gita (18.30) states that intelligence in the mode of goodness discerns between actions that are constructive and actions that are destructive. That means intelligence comes up with appropriate parameters to differentiate between these actions, even if the differentiation is not self-evidently visible or measurable. For example, we may not be able to quantify our anger, but we can measure how many times we raised our voice above the normal conversational level. Or, we may not be able to measure the quality of our meditation—how much we were absorbed in higher spiritual reality or divinity during our meditation sessions. Yet we can still measure how often we got distracted during our meditation sessions, say by looking at our phone or by talking with someone. And we can also measure the times when we did those sessions, which would indicate how much we prioritize them during our daily schedule and whether we did them during times when we were relatively distraction-free from an external perspective, or we tried to squeeze them in times when we were prone to distraction, especially distractions that were unavoidable due to our other responsibilities. When we thus devise and use a systematic metric for measurement, we get a clearer picture of where we are going and when we are going in the right direction, how fast we are going. Thus, we can both course-correct if we are going off-track and accelerate if we are going on-track, but too slowly. That’s why if we are serious about improving something, we need to become serious about measuring whatever aspects of that activity are measurable.  Summary:  That which is not subject to measurement rarely becomes the object of improvement. Think it over: When we fail in our endeavors for self-improvement, what do we often attribute as the cause? Why might that be wrong? In evaluating such endeavors, why might we live in the domain of guesstimates? List three areas where you would like to improve and list at least one parameter that you can use for measuring your improvement in that area. 18.30: O son of Prutha, that understanding by which one knows what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, what is to be feared and what is not to be feared, what is binding and what is liberating, is in the mode of goodness. From: https://gitadaily.com/why-measurement-matters-for-improvement/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/why-measurement-matters-for-improvement To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Worrying about imaginary problems can be a real problem Uncertainty is an undeniable fact of existence — life often requires us to tackle complex situations, in which many factors are beyond our control. Faced with such uncertainty, our mind often defaults toward an unhealthy tendency: worrying.  When we worry, we fixate on things beyond our control. As we endlessly agonize over all the ways things may turn out negatively, we subject ourselves to far more distress than necessary. We may even sentence ourselves to unwarranted disempowerment and even unbearable discouragement.  How can we combat such unhealthy worrying? By activating our intelligence to implement a three-pronged strategy: 1. the things our mind tends to worry about: By reviewing the things we worried about in the past, we can note: when did one of two things happen? When did the problems we worried about not happen at all? Or even when they did happen, when did they turn out to be not as bad as we had feared?  2. Analyze which battles are necessary to fight: Which problems are realistic probabilities that we need to prepare for? And which problems are far-fetched scenarios that are like bridges we can cross if we come to them?  3. Evaluate which battles are taking how much toll on us: Is worrying about problems harming us more than the problems themselves? Pertinently, the Bhagavad-gita (18.35) underscores that constant fearfulness and moroseness are characteristics of perverted determination, toxically infected by ignorance. Through such strategic use of our intelligence, we can expose the folly and futility of worrying, thereby convincing ourselves to reform our mind’s tendency to worry. For such reforming, Gita wisdom provides us both profound insights and potent practices: insights about our indestructible spiritual identity and practices to connect with the eternally unchanging and endlessly benevolent Divinity, Krishna.  Summary: Are we worrying about imaginary problems while forgetting that the worrying is the real problem?  Think it over:  How may worrying hurt us more than the problem we are worrying about?  To expose the worrying tendency, what are the three strategic uses of our intelligence?  Which of these strategies can you apply for combating some habitual worry of yours? 18.35: And that determination which cannot go beyond dreaming, fearfulness, lamentation, moroseness and illusion – such unintelligent determination, O son of Prutha, is in the mode of darkness. From: https://gitadaily.com/worrying-about-imaginary-problems-can-be-a-real-problem/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/worrying-about-imaginary-problems To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Why all motivators don’t have to be models When we want to change ourselves for the better, we can have two powerful aids: motivators and models. Let’s understand their significant and distinct roles. Motivation refers broadly to the energy, the impetus, the galvanizing force that pushes us to move from where we are to a better place. Motivators inspire us to overcome our lethargy, apathy and complacency — and to thereby strive to become better versions of ourselves. In contrast, models or role models refer to individuals who embody what we would like to become. They demonstrate through their words, actions and lives an example of how an improved version of us would be. If we compare self-transformation to a car ride, motivation provides us the fuel and model provides us the destination.  Sometimes, the same person can be both a motivator and a model. Consider a teacher who is both professionally expert and personally helpful to the students — they may not just motivate us to become better students, but also serve as models who inspire us to become a teacher ourselves. But if teaching is not our calling, they may not be our model, yet they can be our motivator: seeing how dedicated they are to contributing to their students’ growth, we may feel inspired to become dedicated to contributing in the area where God has gifted us with some talents and interests. Pertinently, the Bhagavad-gita underscores the individuality of our nature when it cautions us twice (03.35, 18.47): act according to our nature —  don’t simply imitate another’s nature just because it seems appealing and don’t abandon the work according to our nature just because it seems troubling. If we believe that all our motivators have to be our models, we may put inordinate pressure on ourselves to do things that our psychophysical nature is just not oriented to do. And we will end up becoming not better versions of ourselves, but poorer versions of someone else. Why poorer versions? Because we will never become any other person; and in trying to become their exact replica, we will only become at best their poor imitations. Once we appreciate that motivators can be separate from models, we open ourselves to a whole universe of positive influences, including from individuals in fields different from ours. Even on our spiritual journey, we can be inspired by saints from traditions other than our own without feeling that we have to take on their specific practices or conceptions. The philosopher-saint Bhaktivinoda Thakura asserts that on seeing how hard materialists work for material progress, he feels inspired to strive more for his spiritual progress.  Indeed, such a vision can help us to see Krishna as the ultimate inspirer, acting through diverse ways, drawing us closer to him. krishnam vande jagad guru (Obeisance to Krishna, the spiritual master of the whole universe.  Summary:  When we accept someone as a motivator, but not as a model, we are not disrespecting them; we are simply respecting the nature that God has given us.  Think it over:  How are models and motivators similar and different? How might presuming that all motivators have to be models affect us negatively? All motivators don’t have to be models — how can understanding this empower you? 03.35: It is far better to discharge one’s prescribed duties, even though faultily, than another’s duties perfectly. Destruction in the course of performing one’s own duty is better than engaging in another’s duties, for to follow another’s path is dangerous. From: https://gitadaily.com/why-all-motivators-dont-have-to-be-models/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/why-all-motivators-dont-have-to-be To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Why we are NOT defined by our desires One of the Bhagavad Gita’s most life-transforming insights is its clear, categorical, and consistent emphasis on differentiating between us and our mind. While some of us may consider this difference too philosophical a subject to interest us, the products of that understanding (or misunderstanding) will interest us greatly. Let’s consider just one of those products: desires.  What does saying that we are different from our mind imply, with regard to desires? It implies that we are different from our desires. We are spiritual beings situated in a material machine made of a gross body and a subtle mind. Desires can be seen as our mind’s default reactions to objects that seem attractive. Even if we can’t control the desires that pop up in our mind, we can still control how we as souls respond to those desires. Gita wisdom helps us become detached observers of our desires, wherein we learn to see the rising of the desire for a particular object in the same neutral way as we see the rising of our body temperature when the weather becomes hot. Just as we don’t let the temperature be the sole factor in our decision-making, we don’t let our desires gain monopoly over our decision-making. This is what the Bhagavad-gita recommends in (05.23) when it urges us to see desire as simply a biological reaction to our embodied condition and to thereby live with it without living for it. When we learn to observe our desires objectively, we can respond to them based on our higher purpose. Having a higher purpose means having a strong sustained systematic desire for something higher in our life. What if we don’t experience much desire for that higher purpose or worse still experience an opposite desire? Remembering that we are different from our desires, we can choose to focus our attention on that higher purpose, thereby kindling some small desire for it. When we thus dwell on what we desire to desire, that higher desire will become stronger. Over time, it will overrule and outlaw our lower desire, thereby powerfully propelling us toward our ultimate good. Summary: We are defined not by what we desire, but by what we desire to desire.  Think it over: How does the Bhagavad-gita change our vision of desires? What is the difference between what we desire and what we desire to desire? How can you strengthen your higher purpose? 05.23: Before giving up this present body, if one is able to tolerate the urges of the material senses and check the force of desire and anger, he is well situated and is happy in this world. From: https://gitadaily.com/why-we-are-not-defined-by-our-desires/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/why-we-are-not-defined-by-our-desires To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Fearless = Shameless? When shame is used to deter people from destructive activities, it can be considered constructive and even desirable. For instance, a few decades ago, smoking in public was considered not only acceptable but even fashionable. Movies depicted action heroes flaunting cigarettes — they were glamorized to be fearless. As the dangers of passive smoking became more widely known and the fact that non-smokers were being exposed to those dangers, mainstream opinion shifted, leading to increasing disapproval of public smoking. Nowadays, smoking in public places has stopped almost entirely  — and that’s not just because of the heavy fines imposed but also because of the strong culture of shaming.  Is shaming always beneficial? Certainly not; it can be discouraging and discriminatory when people are shamed for factors beyond their control, such as nationality, religion, ethnicity, skin color, or gender. If individuals possess talent and commitment in a particular area and can make significant contributions through it, inhibiting them with shame is a loss for both them and society. Why should a significant talent pool of fellow humans be deprived of opportunities based on outdated or invalid social or cultural norms? Still, that shaming can be misused doesn’t mean shamelessness is useful. Individuals who engage in shameless activities and parade such activities as evidence of their boldness can negatively influence others, potentially leading them to self-destructive or even destructive activities. While individuals have the right to choose their actions, including actions that may be harmful to themselves, their rights don’t extend to actions which harm others. To believe or argue that they have such a right is headless and heartless — it betrays a lack of both clarity and kindness.  The Bhagavad-gita (03.21) encourages us to carefully ponder our actions and recognize that each one of us, in our own capacity, has the potential to influence others. We are all leaders in some way, and we have a responsibility to set constructive examples rather than destructive ones, thereby helping bring about a positive change within and without.  Summary: To equate the fearless with the shameless is brainless.  Think it over:  When can shaming be beneficial? When can it be harmful?  How can we differentiate between shamelessness and fearlessness? 03.21: Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues. From: https://gitadaily.com/fearless-shameless/ Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/fearless-shameless To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Authentic = Shameless? When we strive to be authentic by aligning with our true nature, we may face the world’s disapproval or even censure. People around us may have become accustomed to expecting certain kinds of behavior from us based on their past interactions with us. However, when we begin comparing our external behavior with our inner nature and start adjusting the first to harmonize with the second, the change can make them uncomfortable. If our new version goes against social expectations or cultural norms, their reactions may range from raised eyebrows to raised voices or worse. During such testing times, we need to set aside any inhibitions that may arise due to the world’s reactions and thereby we remain committed to activities that help us manifest our authentic selves. The Bhagavad-gita (02.69) emphasizes that when we engage in spiritual practices, our driving values will significantly differ from the values of most people who are largely materialistic. The contrast between these values is as stark as day and night. Therefore, to stay true to our spiritual selves, we need to distance ourselves from the opinions and associations of materialistic individuals. Later, the Gita reiterates this point (13.11) while concluding its list of items (13.08-12) that comprise the wisdom that enables us to be our authentic self.  No doubt, being authentic requires fearlessness in the face of negativity from others. However, we need to avoid crossing the line and becoming shameless in the name of authenticity. Shame can serve as a deterrent to prevent us from doing actions that are harmful, either to ourselves or to others or even to both. While shaming can sometimes be used as a cultural tool by those in power to beat others into compliance, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the very idea of shame is a bad thing. And even more emphatically, that doesn’t at all mean that being shameless is a good thing, let alone that being shameless is central to being authentic. If we make a virtue out of being shameless, we may well end up becoming our worst self instead of our best self.  To be authentic, we need to break free from the limits imposed on us by our own fears, be they internally triggered or externally induced — being fearless may sometimes require us to put aside considerations of what people will think of us, but it involves many more things, several of which may be much more important: giving up our own lethargy, apathy and complacency, for example.  Summary: To be authentic, we need to be fearless, not shameless.  Think it over: For being authentic, what do we need to set aside? Why might we make a virtue out of being shameless? What’s wrong with that? How are authenticity, fear and shame related?    13.11 – … Constant and unalloyed devotion to Me; aspiring to live in a solitary place; detachment from the general mass of people; … [ – all these I declare to be knowledge]. Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/authentic-shameless From: https://gitadaily.com/authentic-shameless/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Indian Independence Day Special: The Fulfillment of Freedom The idea of freedom captivates the human mind. Stories of freedom fighters frequently become legends. National independence struggles often become inspirational memories for citizens. Most often, these struggles for freedom center on external freedom, especially in the form of political freedom from excessive or exploitative control by others. While such freedom is undoubtedly necessary for all human beings, is it sufficient? Let’s see. Some people who become free from external control go out of control themselves, whereby they end up making choices that damage or even destroy them, as well as those around them. How can such a tragic trajectory be avoided? How can our longing for freedom be constructively directed? The Bhagavad-gita stands ready with a vision for such holistic freedom, wherein it states both what we need to be free from and what we need to be free for. It focuses more on inner freedom for it asserts that we need to free ourselves from our lower nature, which comprises our own weaknesses such as lust, anger, and greed. To the extent individuals can free themselves from these inner enemies, they can protect themselves from going down the path of self-destruction, be it by their unwitting choices or by their unwilling compliance with their conditionings. Simultaneously, more important than freedom from is freedom for. The Bhagavad-gita emphasizes that we need to be free for our higher nature to manifest: that is, for our spirituality (sat-cit-ananda) to become awakened. Thereby, we can delight in the security that comes from realizing our eternity (sat), in the sagacity that comes from utilizing our curiosity (cit) and the ecstasy that comes by experiencing our joyfulness (ananda). Especially the fullest manifestation of our higher nature happens when we connect with our source, the all-loving, all-attractive divinity, Krishna. Empowered by that connection, we relish our own divinity as pure, potent and precious parts of the divine (Bhagavad-gita 15.07). When our higher nature manifests thus, we all can become powerful agents of positive change in the world. Thus, we illuminate our inner world by our spiritually purified thoughts. And we elevate our outer world, or at least our corner of our outer world, by our spiritually powered words and actions. This indeed is the ultimate purpose of freedom and it is to this freedom that the Bhagavad-gita calls all of us. Summary: The most fulfilling freedom is freedom from our lower nature so that we rejoice in the freedom for our higher nature. Think it over: What does freedom mean for most people? For freedom to be fulfilling, what do we need freedom from? For freedom to be fulfilling, what do we need freedom for? 15.07: The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts. Due to conditioned life, they are struggling very hard with the six senses, which include the mind. Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/indian-independence-day-special-the From: https://gitadaily.com/indian-independence-day-special-the-fulfillment-of-freedom/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Suppressing emotions vs repressing emotions When we are trying to discipline and elevate ourselves, we may resort to two unhealthy approaches toward emotions: suppress them or repress them. Although these two words can sound similar, they point to two distinct ways of dealing with inner negativity. When we suppress an emotion, we prevent it from appearing openly at the physical level for others to see. For example, we may feel enraged due to some provocative behavior by someone, yet we may maintain a composed exterior. Our inner world is like a state ruled by a political leader who silences all dissenters. When we suppress an emotion, we are at least aware of the effect of the emotion — for example, our urge to scream or wave our fist — and its broad cause: for example, the other person’s scornful looks and words.  However, when we repress an emotion, we bury it so deep inside ourselves that we may no longer be aware of its cause. For example, if anger is repressed, it may over time poison our psyche, leading us to be constantly irritable without any apparent reason. Sometimes, abusive behavior we encountered years or decades ago may have been repressed within us and it may surface as our surliness. In these situations, our inner world is like a state ruled by a super-tyrant who terrorizes the subjects so much that they don’t dare think of dissent, even though they sense that something is seriously wrong with the state.  The Bhagavad-gita (18.35) points to negative inner pathology when it outlines the behavior that characterizes determination in the mode of ignorance. Individuals who are thus infected are often morose — sometimes even without any external cause for their mood.  Suppressed emotions can be processed by talking with others and planning how to handle future provocation, as well as by consciously letting go of past hurts. However, deeper inner work is required when emotions are repressed and we are not aware of the specific causes. Thankfully, spiritual wisdom provides us powerful tools for introspection and purification through which we can recover from our inner wounds and rise toward holistic spiritual health. Summary: When an emotion is suppressed, we are aware of its effect and its cause, thereby allowing us to process it appropriately and free ourselves from it; when an emotion is repressed, however, we are unaware of both its effect and its cause, thereby making freedom from it much tougher. Think it over:  What does suppressing emotions mean?  What does repressing emotions mean? How is it different from suppressing emotions?  In what ways are the means for dealing with repressed and suppressed emotions similar and different? 18.35: And that determination which cannot go beyond dreaming, fearfulness, lamentation, moroseness and illusion – such unintelligent determination, O son of Prutha, is in the mode of darkness. Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/suppressing-emotions-vs-repressing From: https://gitadaily.com/suppressing-emotions-vs-repressing-emotions/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

What to pray for amid distress When confronted with a huge problem, especially one that causes acute or unbearable distress, we often desperately turn to God for help. We pray for the cause of our distress to magically disappear or for a miraculous change of heart in the person responsible for the problem. Yet we sometimes find that the problem remains. This may naturally cause us perplexity and discouragement. Amid such disconcerting times, we have two choices. We can either continue to fixate on that problem in our life, letting it pervade our mind, worrying that it will not go away, lamenting that even God is not ready to help us  — and thereby losing our faith in him. Or we can strive to broaden our vision and recognize that God has some plan that is for our good, even though the way he brings about our welfare may differ from the way we would have chosen. To become more receptive to his way, we can shift the focus of our prayers. Rather than seeing prayer as a means to move the problem away from us, we can see it as a means to move ourselves closer to God. By thus redefining our vision of prayer, we will be able to re-evaluate the impact of that problem in our lives. Instead of seeing the problem as a cause of distress alone, we can become open to the possibility that it may be a necessary impetus for us to move closer to God. And in that increased proximity to the supreme divinity, we can find solace, strength and satisfaction so sublime that it can’t be found in the most problem-free worldly situation. The Bhagavad-gita (18.58) inspires us toward such a shift in consciousness when it assures that those who turn to Krishna for absorbing our consciousness in him will be empowered, by his grace, to pass over all obstacles. Summary: Pray not that God moves the cause of our distress away from us; pray that he uses our distress as a cause to move us closer to him. Think it over: When faced with severe distress, what might be our initial response?  Why might such a response lead us to lose faith?  How can we refine our response so that it enhances our faith? 18.58: If you become conscious of Me, you will pass over all the obstacles of conditioned life by My grace. If, however, you do not work in such consciousness but act through false ego, not hearing Me, you will be lost. Audio explanation of the article is here:  https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/what-to-pray-for-amid-distress From: https://gitadaily.com/what-to-pray-for-amid-distress/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP

Unsustainable and sustainable approaches to purification When we try to purify ourselves, we soon become acutely aware that there are two parts within us: one part of us — our higher self — seeks to get rid of impure desires; while another part of us — our lower self — seeks to hold on to those desires, seeing them as pathways to pleasure. Amid the tension between these two selves, how do we pursue purification? One approach is to strive to lift our higher self far up and simultaneously bury our lower self deep down. However, this approach to purification creates immense inner tension — we feel like a rubber band stretched vertically to nearly its breaking point. Eventually, the rubber band snaps back, with the part raised up being pulled down and the part pushed down being pulled up. Similarly, when our buried lower self feels unbearably suffocated, as if it is fighting for life, it resurfaces forcefully. It sometimes emerges at the least expected moments, or even at the most embarrassing moments. Overwhelmed by its sudden appearance, we may end up pandering to its impure urges without respecting any boundaries at all.   Rather than adopting such a tense and tenuous approach to purification, Gita wisdom recommends a more pragmatic and holistic approach: we raise not just our higher self, but also our lower self. Or rather, we raise our lower self with our higher self, as recommended in the Bhagavad-gita (06.05). This means that we acknowledge that our lower self is also a part of us and will remain so for the conceivable future. Instead of trying to annihilate it, we try to accommodate it within reasonable boundaries. We accept that we may occasionally have desires that are not the best for our morality or our spirituality. Though we can’t and shouldn’t pander to all such desires, we can give some leeway for some of those desires. By such regulated accommodation, will the lower self give up its desire for lower pleasures entirely? Not necessarily; but its lower desires will gradually become less immoral, less selfish, less destructive, and less anti-spiritual. Suppose our lower self previously craved food incessantly. Instead of completely suppressing it and strictly subjecting ourselves to a spartan diet, we may allow ourselves to indulge in some delicious foods on designated occasions, such as festival days.  When we thus reduce the inner tension within us, we can shift our energy to nourishing our higher self so that not only does it rise, but it also lifts our lower self.  Summary: Purification doesn’t happen by elevating our higher self and burying our lower self; it happens by raising both our higher self and our lower self.  Think it over:  What are the two broad approaches to pursuing inner purification?  What is the problem with burying the lower self?  How can we elevate our lower self with our higher self? 06.05: One must deliver himself with the help of his mind, and not degrade himself. The mind is the friend of the conditioned soul, and his enemy as well. Audio explanation of the article is here: https://gitadaily.substack.com/p/unsustainable-and-sustainable-approaches From: https://gitadaily.com/unsustainable-and-sustainable-approaches-to-purification/ To get short articles daily on the practical application of the Bhagavad Gita now on telegram, join the channel via this connecting link Gita Daily https://t.me/gitadailyCCP