Deepak Chopra and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
“The Bhagavad-Gita declares that there are no outward signs of enlightenment,” Deepak says.
I”ve noticed that impersonalists almost always phrase this kind of statement “Bhagavad-gita declares.” Actually Bhagavad-gita doesn”t declare; Krishna declares. Except that actually He doesn”t say this at all.
It may be that Deepak got confused because Arjuna asks “What are the symptoms…?” in Chapter 2, but Krishna doesn’t say much about the “enlightened” person’s activities (engaging in His loving service) until later chapters, after Krishna reveals His own unique position as the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
Does Deepak really think the following statement (verse 9.14) by Krishna, as just one example of many, does not describe outward signs of enlightenment?
“Always chanting My glories, endeavoring with great determination, bowing down before Me, these great souls perpetually worship Me with devotion.”
From Deepak’s interpretation, we might think one can find “enlightened” people attending strip clubs and cainos. Such nonsense.
Since this article is basically a eulogy, I”m going to refrain from criticising too heavily. However one other point is quite important, which is that in Bhagavad-gita, Krishna recommends against the kind of practice that MMY apparently taught. (I haven”t paid the big bucks to for a TM class, and I”ve heard enough to know there are much better ways to spend my time and money.)
As Krishna says in Bg 12.5, “For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifested, impersonal feature of the Supreme, advancement is very troublesome. To make progrese in that discipline is always difficult for those who are embodied.”
I wonder how MMY translated that verse from Bhagavad-gita. Not that it”s important, since Krishna explains in verse 4.3 that Bhagavad-gita can only be understood by His devotees: “That very ancient science of the relationship with the Supreme is today told by Me to you because you are My devotee as well as My friend; therefore you can understand the transcendental mystery of this science.”
Dear “Pandu”,
It is quite correct what Deepak says, and it is also what Krishna meant. On repeating queries by Arjuna to describe an enlightened person, Sri Krishna goes at length explaining the inner state of such person. Many verses long he describes the universal principles of the state of inner witness and transcendental devotion. Never – how he walks, talks, or behaves.
Your interpretation of Deepaks explanation is malicious – a very low blow to mention casinos, etc.
Or do you mean by bringing the verse 9:14, as a counter argument to Deepak, that when a person is just not bowing (or not continuously bowing) he is not enlightened? “What a non-sense”!
Deepak is right – enlightenment is an inner state irrespective of life style.
See 4:36: Even if you were most sinful of all sinners, you would cross over all evil by the raft of knowledge alone.
9:30 Even if a man of the most sinful conduct worships Me with undeviating devotion, he must be reckoned a righteous…
Nothing about a certain way of speaking or behaving.
With best wishes
Shaas
Shaas,
“Always chanting My glories…”
You don’t consider that an “outward sign?” You bring up always bowing, but Krishna doesn’t say that. He says always chanting His glories. So don’t say no outward signs. That is a ridiculous proposition, and it contradicts Krishna’s clear statement.
Hare Krishna.
It is not at all ridiculous.
Or do you think that when an enlightened person is drinking a cup of water and is therefore unable to “chanting His glories” he falls – during that time – from the state of enlightenment?????????
Shaas
A person is enlightened if he knows himself as Krishna’s servant. Engaging in Krishna’s service counts as glorifying Krishna, which is kirtanam. The devotee offers water to Krishna with love, as Krishna requests. That is kirtan in the broad sense, and when the devotee honors the Lord’s prasadam, that is also kirtan. As much as possible the devotee is vocally chanting Krishna’s names, and when apparently silent, he is remembering Krishna’s names within, even when drinking water. Krishna tells Arjuna to remember Him as the taste of water, and when Arjuna does this, it is also kirtan. It is like kirtan is the light given off by the fire of bhakti. To know Krishna is to love Him, and one cannot help but glorify Him constantly.
This is just one verse I gave as an example of outward signs of enlightenment, but the whole Bhagavad-gita is such an example. In the beginning of the Bhagavad-gita, Arjuna was playing the role of an unenlightened person, and he wanted retreat from the battle despite Krishna’s encouragement. Later, after understanding Bhagavad-gita from Krishna, Arjuna acted according to Krishna’s order. Engaging one’s senses in Krishna’s service is enlightened activity, whereas acting to please one’s own senses is unenlightned activity. Sometimes they can look the same, and sometimes not, although actually they’re quite different.
As described in Srimad Bhagavatam, although Jada Bharata wanted to conceal his enlightenment, he was exposed by his unavoidable compassion for the insects on the road. He was also revealed by his courage in speaking the truth. An enlightened person naturally develops highly virtuous character. It is wrong to say there are no outward signs.
A similar example is the hunter who would half-kill animals, but who later became Narada Muni’s disciple and swept aside the ants to make room to bow when greeting his spiritual master.
The Bhagavad-gita is about serving Krishna, bhakti, and such activity is different than mundane activity. Sometimes it can look the same to an ignorant observer, but that is not how we should judge things. Krishna says that His devotee is always glorifying Him, and that is what the reader of Bhagavad-gita should accept. This glorification is active, involving the mind, the perceptive senses and the organs of action. Bhakti, pure devotional service is both external and internal, and Krishna identifies both when telling of symptoms of enlightenment.
Dear Pandu Das – I thought you would have better things to do that satirise other seekers, in an attitude of gross spiritual pride. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi was a realised soul who was never less than respectful towards Krishna devotees – how could he be otherwise? You admit (boast, in fact) that you have never practiced Maharishi’s Yoga meditation, yet set yourself up as an authority in criticising it.
For your information, Maharishi’s was indeed addressed as ‘Maharshi’ by everyone close to him.
Yours, Adam